Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CPA2006-00002
120 DAYS = N/A DATE MAILED: 06/07/20( N . CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE CITY COUNCIL Case Number: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA)2006-00002 DOWNTOWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Case Name: Applicant's Name/Address: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 Owner's Names/Addresses: N/A Address of Property� Citywide Tax Map/Lot Nos.: N/A A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND A DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (ORDINANCE NO. 07-07). THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL HAVE REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON MARCH 19, 2007 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE REQUEST. THE CITY COUNCIL ALSO HELD A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON APRIL 24, 2007 PRIOR TO MAKING A DECISION ON THE REQUEST. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. Subject: > Amend Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Special Areas of Concern: Downtown to update the Goals, Policies and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian oriented mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District, also amend Policy 5.5. AT THE 04/24/07 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING, THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THIS REQUEST (Ordinance No. 2007-07). ZONES: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25 APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380, 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 & 9; Metro Functional Plan Title 6;and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 12. Action: > E Approval as Requested ❑ Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper,posted at City Hall and mailed to: ® Affected Government Agencies ® Interested Parties Final Decision: THIS IS THE FINAL DECISION BY THE CITY AND IS EFFECTIVE ON MAY 24,2007. The adopted findings of fact, decision, and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division,Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. Appeal: A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) within 21 days according to their procedures. Questions: Please call the City of Tigard Planning Division or the City Recorder at (503) 639-4171. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 07- 07 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2006-00002 TO REPLACE THE DOWNTOWN CHAPTER OF VOLUME II OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADD NEW GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES AND AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 5.5 WHEREAS, the findings and recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan were accepted by City Council Resolution 05-62;and WHEREAS, a recommendation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan Implementation Action Plan is to make code and regulatory adjustments to be consistent with the vision of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has proposed an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 adding new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures for the Downtown Urban Renewal District and updating Policy 5.5;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public meeting on March 19, 2007, and recommended approval of the proposed CPA 2006-00002 (with a minor revision) by motion and With unanimous vote;and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2007, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2006-00002, hear public testimony, and apply applicable decision-making criteria. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) is amended to include the text in "EXHIBIT A." SECTION 2: The findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated March 7,2007,the Planning Commission meeting minutes for March 19,2007, and memorandum to Council dated March 29, 2007, are adopted by reference ("EXHIBIT B", "EXHIBIT C", and "EXHIBIT D" respectively). ORDINANCE No.07- C`7 Page 1 SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By (Jf a,i'/MOUS vote of all Council members present after being.read by number and title only, this Q'/"day of--4r ( , 2007. LT3 Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council thisc7 day of A.` , 2007. Craig ksen,Mayor Approved as to form: smif Ci VF ttorney- Date ORDINANCE No.07- 0 Page 2 • III . . • IN MEMORANDUM T I GARD FROM: Sean Farrelly, Long Range Planner RE: Notice of Final Order CPA2006-00002 DATE: 6/7/07 Please note that this "Notice of Final Order" accompanies the final decision that was mailed out to you on June 4`h Jam and Smudge Free Printing ® www.avery.co Use Avery(?)TEMPLATE 5961TM • 1-800-GO-AVER a AVERY®5961TM John Frewing Mike Swanda 7110 SW Lola Lane 13285 SW Village Glenn Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jonae Armstrong Lisa Olson 9585 SW Washington Sq. Road 14720 SW Cabernet Ct. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Mike Stevenson Sue Bielke 9040 SW Burnham St. 11755 SW 114th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 � ).1.96S 5 nAH 1AH 1171 H3AV-09-008-1 ,496S 1pege6 ai zasmin U.S. Postal ServiceTM CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT co (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.come m � Postage firiffsai r , Certified Fee pReturn Redept Fee CC P Hose' (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee �' ru (Endorsement Required) ' J Total Postage&Fees m Cl Sent T- — --- -- Cl ATTENTION:PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST f` trei DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEV. or P, 635 CAPITOL STREET NE.,SUITE 150 CilY.1 SALEM,OREGON 97301-2540 PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions • G SENDER:COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Signatu ' item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse '∎V ��_ _ ❑Addressee so that we can return the card to you. . _. of 7ivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 'Is def ery address different from item 1? ❑Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No ATTENTION:PLAN ADD ENDMENT SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DI?V. 635 CAPITOL STREET NE.,SUITE 150 SALEM,OREGON 97301-2540 _I Service Type Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise • ❑_Insured Mail ❑C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number 7003 2260 0001 6391 7849 (Transfer from service label) 1 PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 Ank ��Tn person❑electronic•❑mailed : Z .DILCD ; Notice of Adoption THIS FORM MUST BE MAILED TO DLCD . ? ' `"- 1; WITHIN 5 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE FINAL DECISION • �: ,' *�,i;, • • • •PER ORS 197.610,OAR CHAPTER 660;DIVISION 18 1p ' 4*-.4 :'ForDLCDUxonty •;:':-r .Y:: - Jurisdiction: City of Tigard Local file number CPA2006-00002 Date of Adoption: April 24, 2007 - :Date Mailed: June 4, 2007 - Was a Notice of Proposed Amendment(Form 1) mailed to DLCD? Date: January 5, 2007 Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment ❑ Comprehensive'Plan Map Amendment ❑ Land Use Regulation Amendment - :❑ Zoning Map Amendment - ❑ .New Land Use Regulation • ❑ Other: - Summarize the adopted amendment. Do not use technical terms. Do not write "See Attached". V Amend Chapter 11 of the Tigard.Comprehensive Plan, Special Areas of Concern:Downtown,to update the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian oriented mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District and update Policy 5.5. Does the Adoption differ from proposal'? ' Minor wording change to Action Measurel I.A.2 "Consider utilizing form-based codes." Plan Map Changed from: n/a to: Zone Map Changed from: n/a to: Location: Downtown Urban Renewal District Acres Involved: 193 Specify Density: Previous: n/a , New: • Applicable statewide planning goals: - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Was an Exception Adopted? ❑ YES ® NO Did DLCD receive a Notice of Proposed Amendment... 45-days prior to first evidentiary hearing? ® Yes El No If no, do the statewide planning goals apply? ❑ Yes ❑ No If no, did Emergency Circumstances require immediate adoption? ❑ Yes ❑ No DLCD file No. • • • Please list all affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts: Metro,Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Cleanwater Services F Local Contact Sean Farrelly Phone:;'. 503 718-2420 Extension: Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd Fax Number. 503-624-3681: F'..s. .._, '4-+ :'R/i•Fp(+Nyy'sa' City: Tigard Zip: 97223 E-mail Address: sean @tigard-or.gov • ADOPTION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS This form must be mailed to DLCD within 5 working days after the final decision = , per ORBS. 197 610,OAR Chapter 660-Division 18. _ 1. Send this Form and TWO Complete Copies(documents and maps)of the Adopted Amendment to: ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 635 CAPITOL STREET NE,SUITE 150 SALEM,OREGON 97301-2540 2. Electronic Submittals: At least one hard copy must be sent by mail or in person,but you may also submit an electronic copy, by either email or FTP. You may connect to this address to VIP proposals and adoptions: webserver.lcd.state.or.us. To obtain our Usemame and password for FTP,call Mara Ulloa at 503-373-0050 extension 238, or by emailing mara.ulloa@state.or.us. 3. Please Note: Adopted materials must be sent to DLCD not later than FIVE(5)working days following the date of the final decision on the amendment. 4. Submittal of this Notice of Adoption must include the text of the amendment plus adopted findings and supplementary information. 5. The deadline to appeal will not be extended if you submit this notice of adoption within five working days of the final decision. Appeals to LUBA may be filed within TWENTY-ONE (21)days of the date, the Notice of Adoption is sent to DLCD. °6. In addition to sending the Notice of Adoption to DLCD, you must notify persons who participated in the local hearing and requested notice of the final decision. 7. Need More Copies? You can now access these forms online at http://www.lcd.state.or.us/. Please print on 8-1/2x11 green paper only. You may also call the DLCD Office at(503) 373-0050; or Fax your request to: (503) 378-5518; or Email your request to mara.ulloa @state.or.us -ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST. http://www.lcd.state.or.us/LCD/forms.shtml Updated November 27,2006 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUN CIL ORDINANCE NO. 07- 07 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2006-00002 TO REPLACE THE DOWNTOWN CHAPTER OF VOLUME II OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADD NEW GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES AND AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 5.5 WHEREAS, the findings and recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan were accepted by City Council Resolution 05-62; and WHEREAS, a recommendation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan Implementation Action Plan is to make code and regulatory adjustments to be consistent with the vision of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has proposed an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 adding new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures for the Downtown Urban Renewal District and updating Policy 5.5;and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public meeting on March 19, 2007, and recommended approval of the proposed CPA 2006-00002 (with a minor revision) by motion and with unanimous vote;and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2007, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2006-00002, hear public testimony, and apply applicable decision-making criteria. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) is amended to include the text in "EXHIBIT A." SECTION 2: The findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated March 7, 2007, the Planning Commission meeting minutes for March 19,2007, and memorandum to Council dated March 29, 2007, are adopted by reference ("EXHIBIT B", "EXHIBIT C", and "EXHIBIT D" respectively). ORDINANCE No. 07- Q7 Page 1 SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By Lin 6 11 d i 0u S vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this o?4/8day of---4r (_. , 2007. % -e -tom 1 Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Ad APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this� a y of .1` ,2007. ,t ...,,,,/4,F Craig ksen, Mayor Approved as to form: f, rt�.. . A f6 Ci lir ttorney Date , ORDINANCE No.07- 0 7 Page 2 EXHIBIT A 5 . E C O N O M Y Commentary:The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan(Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district.The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states that more housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core.Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor,the TDIP does call for medium-density,stand alone housing types,such as townhouses,in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. •Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. •Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in sket-hreugh. POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMUTED ABOVE TIIE FIRST FLOOR IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS. (TILE--DENSI-W--OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R 40 DISTRICTS.) IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIATE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BF, DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.)AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMI LIED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES:; WITHIN THE MUC, MUR 1 AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER,WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMI'1-1'ED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND MUR 2) TO R-50 (MUC,MUE 1 AND MUR 1):AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMT1-1'ED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. 1 1 . S P E C I A L A R E A S O F CONCERN 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a"heart" for their community: a place to live, work.and play.and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center.dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years.The most recent effort dates back to 2002.with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard.This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. A.state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement.including community dialogues,workshops,open house,and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP).The TDIP set forth a vision to create"a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented.accessible by many modes of transportation.recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live.work.play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP.The tools provided by urban renewal,including Tax Increment Financing,are intended to attract private investment And facilitate the area's redevelopment.Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains l93 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street,the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function,but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown In general,downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0-10.0 or more.In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions,D wnt wn is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial.office,residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.)with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general,there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic, Natural Features k'anno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature.The creek.part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District(CBD).While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown.the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form.As a result,the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots_which are zoned R-4.5.R-12 (PD).R-25.C-G (General Commercial) And C-P (Professional/Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W.These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary.Downtown is important to Tigard residents:many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character&Quality of Life section_includes a goal to achieve a future where"the Main Street area is seen as a`focal point' for the community."and"a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown • T e .a .'e •f - . ban Renew— -- _- ' j. ' 2006 b °o •_ oter also s ow strong.community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard, POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning.design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality.attractiveness,and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11,1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants.ente ent and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing c) Civic functions (government offices,community services,public plazas..public transit centers.etc). d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing;auto-dependant uses: industrial manufacturing:and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue,subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design_development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety.accessibility.and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types.including ownership. workforce and affordable housingin a high quality living environment. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown - •• 11,1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a"traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area,adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. .11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park, 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles.Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11,3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet,shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system.especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W.Highway 217 and Interstate 5.the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant.compact,mixed-use area with housing.retail and employment opportunities. Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown 1.1.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials,particularly in the building fronts and streetscape.Also develop appropriate density,ieight,mass.scale,architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Consider utilizing form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events,farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11A7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information.urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines.standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary, 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas. such as park blocks,plazas and mini-parks, 11.B.2 Develop "green connections"linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses,public spaces and transit, 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource, 11.0_Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulationlmprovements for P-desttians, Automobiles,Bicycles and Transit Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from,and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown,such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways,entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot.and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment/ facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public,including members of the development community_with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown Sean Farrelly- Re: Downtown Tigard Plan Amendments age 1 From: Ron Bunch - � L „�J/a te � To: Farrelly, Sean; Frewing, John C.�Jt.t.Yl 10 Date: Re:4/19/2007.1:26:59 Downtown Ti Tigard �� �``� �^ Subject: Re: Downtown Tigard Corn Plan Amendments Gorilla T (X Hello John: We will include the Email in the written testimony and will bring Council attention to it at the 24th hearing. Best wishes and have a wonderful tilme in Hawaii. Ron Ron Bunch Long Range Planning Manager City of Tigard • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 503-718-2427 ron @tigard-or.gov >>> "John Frewing" <jfrewing @teleport.com> 04/19 6:13 AM >>> Ron, Please include this testimony in the record for the April 24 City Council consideration of Comp Plan amendments relating to Downtown Tigard: I repeat my earlier testimony provided to City staff regarding the Comp Plan amendments proposed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Program. The proposal departs grossly from common sense and prior practice of this City Council wherein changes are evaluated against all of the state Land Use Goals and judged to be relevant or not relevant. Thank you, John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CC: Farrelly, Sean • AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: April 24, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 TO ADD NEW DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony Mome part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be .ecluded in the meeting minutes,which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 • This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Proponent (Speaking in Favor) Opponent (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME,ADDRESS &PHONE NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print ame: Name: 1_f_. EV' Name: 11so,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if Y , e p p , will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer 151 ' )Ce. pronounce: Address Address ) I "3s--5- 1.3 I 1 U I'L' City City ° I Address State Zip State & • Zip .. Z City Phone No. Phone No. 6 3 -357, State Zip Phone No. Name: Name: Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if sill help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address City City Address State Zip State Zip City Phone No. Phone No. State Zip Phone No. U.S. Postal ServiceTM n CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT ..D (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided) Ir . For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.come `✓� ul S Postage Gt --- - "O' . . ru ;ilQQ1).4 '' p Certified Fee MIMI it, O � t� p Return Receipt Fee Postmark (Endorsement Required) d H��;� Q O� Restricted Delivery Fee � /� �`a (Endorsement Required) '.��� ".V 0 O Total Postage&Fees EIMIMI -J3 ! — i7 N ATTENTION::ELATION:PLAN AMENDMENT I'SPECIALIST 1 DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DM, 1. OS CAPITOL STREET NE,SUIT I,O _.. i sAmt,OREGON 971001,340 PS Form 3800,June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY i i • Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete % by re 1. _item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent • Print your name and address on the reverse ❑Addressee so that we can return the card to you. (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery i • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, .or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No ATTENT ION:PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST i DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEN'. 635 CAPITOL STREET NE,SUITE 150 SALEM,OREGON 97301-2540 —r-_ 3. Service Type Certified Mail ❑Express Mail N II Registered ❑Return Receipt for Merchandise 1 ❑Insured Mail ❑C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee)• ❑Yes ii 2. Article Number '1 (Transfer from servicelabel)� 7006 0810 0002 4524 9662 PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Retum Receipt• - 102595-02-M-1540 - • ° 1 Notice of Proposed Amendment THIS FORM MUST BE RECEIVED BY DLCD 45 DAYS PRIOR TO THE FIRST EVIDENTIARY HEARING For DLCD Use Only PER ORS 197.610,OAR CHAPTER 660-DIVISION 18 AND SENATE BILL 543, EFFECTIVE JUNE 30, 1999 Jurisdiction: City of Tigard Local file number: CPA2006-00002 Date First Evidentiary hearing: March 19, 2007 Date of Final Hearin : Date this Notice of Proposed Amendment was mailed to DLCD: January 007 Is this a REVISED Proposal previously submitted to DLCD? OYES NO Date Submitted: ® Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment ❑ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ❑ Land Use Regulation Amendment ❑ Zoning Map Amendment ❑ New Land Use Regulation ❑ Other: Briefly Summarize Proposal. Do not use technical terms. Do not write "See Attached". (limit of 500 characters) Amend Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, Special Areas of Concern: ' Downtown to update the Goals, Policies and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian oriented mixed use ' Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. • Plan Map Changed from: to: Zone Map Changed from: to: Location: Downtown Urban Renewal Area Acres Involved: 193 Specify Density: Previous: New: Applicable Statewide Planning Goals: 1, 2, 5, 10, &12 Is an Exception Proposed? ❑ YES ® NO Affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts: Metro Local Contact: Sean Farrelly Phone: (503) 718-2420 Extension: Address: 13125 SW Hall Blvd. City: Tigard Zip: 97223 Fax Number: 503-624-3681 Email Address: sean @tigard-or.gov DLCD File No.: 1 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS This form must be received by DLCD at least 45 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing per ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter 660 - Division 18 and Senate Bill 543 effective on June 30, 1999. 1. This form must be submitted by local jurisdictions only. 2. When submitting, please print this form on green paper. 3. Send this Form and TWO (2) Copies of the Proposed Amendment to: ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 635 CAPITOL STREET NE,SUITE 150 SALEM, OREGON 97301-2540 COPIES TO: Metro Land Use& Planning 600 NE Grand Avenue Portland,OR 97232-2736 ODOT—Region 1,District 2-A Sam Hunaidi,Assistant District Manager 6000 SW Raab Road Portland,OR 97221 4. Unless exempt by ORS 197.610 (2), proposed amendments must be received at the DLCD's SALEM OFFICE at least FORTY-FIVE (45) days before the first evidentiary hearing on the proposal. The first evidentiary hearing is usually the first public hearing held by the jurisdiction's planning commission on the proposal. 5. Submittal of proposed amendments shall include the text of the amendment and any other information the local government believes is necessary to advise DLCD of the proposal. Text means the specific language being added to or deleted from the acknowledged plan or land use regulations. A general description of the proposal is not adequate. 6. Submittal of proposed map amendments must include a map of the affected area showing existing and A proposed plan and zone designations. The map should be on 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper. A legal description, tax account number, address or general description is not adequate. Text of background and/or reason for change request should be included. 7. Submittal of proposed amendments which involve a goal exception must include the proposed language of the exception. 8. Need More Copies? You can copy this form on to 8-1/2x11 green paper only; or call the DLCD Office at (503) 373-0050; or Fax your request to:(503) 378-5518; or email your request to mara.ulloa @state.or.us - ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST. 111.� I • Tigard,.Planning Commission Ti6 . 0 NO"1E: If you would like to speak on this item, please print your name &address on this form. Agenda Item# S. I Page / of Date of Hearing 3 -/q--o 7 Case Number(s) CPS coz 4 -(�DOo()- Case Name /A9?-if /'/d,l-6/&74' 1 C41 t-.7Z tips 4.- jij7 ) yij WA' 476`6/e5; Location J i 7)C% c,/. /4- ` e,fSur,-s Please PRINT your name, address, and zip code Proponent (for the proposal): Opponent (against the proposal): Name:jc---.1.41.4 6 3— sc.sfL5 Name , 24\r1 j Address:7 ) ,) ,Q r-,r Lie5Lyam ' ,,. Address .4,::/r)-) --..--'- City,State, Zip: 0'J`2>4`3 City, State, Zip: .&)Chem, Name: 7///'- e S(,t,of 14 cicti Name: 7/74,4 fl---_e v'i S o Address: /3 2 ..S-- S U'IIaQe 0 .,rAddr•ss: 6ll9 ca 64✓h Li4.H. i . 4 LN City,State, Zip: / /y a,c13 Ore, 3 7 Z.z3 City, State, Zip: ji 1 a,,4 QW 7'7 22? Name:3 A f rns 4(01 Na e: P /t,I< pi i� L. ,i e 1 "1Address: �.� S Poi A..ress: F h `7 fl S, u' 3 V fe N/�-A h 'sr ). q S$S S bJ (nlasl��� � � City, State, Zip: -1-13.a r) Olt. 97 a 2.3 , State, Zip: 7—, (, n i2a 1 a. k Name: / cj,.I/ i b ter L- 0-g same: r-G(LIZehT-To 14,1(4 0/1C/ Address: 1' ( 26" 5_(<0. C1,h?Tp_- sr ,ddress: g9G 5" KA/. /3 �- -N !/114 At City,State, Zip: l 7 6A IW f o R Ct ki L 23 City, State, Zip: /f t() d R. y--7-02,.3 Name: iSk D) Svh Name: SflAptly 1_,e_e_. Address: Address: //?0 C • S'ii✓ • idi c, ■4. / /1..t) City, State, Zip: I iy ,,,, y 3(� C��`y3-4 City, State, Zip: 77 G�1 til hie 5 7 ZL� ' X1(1 Gl�C-1 l�` V r- • • , . ,-. , iti3� • Tigard Planning Commission 1 ARD NO'IE: If you would like to speak on this item, please print your name &address on this form. Agenda Item# 5 ‘I Page of L Date of Hearing 3-/J-a _7 Case Number(s) C PP )o 6 — o o00)-- Case Name Location Please PRINT your name, address, and zip code Proponent (for the proposal): Opponent (against the proposal): Name: /3i/7 / ,477 Name: 41., Address: //221 6/� %,GjVbl�S,'' Address: City, State Zip: 7,10-,-7, g, f7 ' City, State, Zip: (//,,d1 ) Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City;State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MARCH 19, 2007 7:00 p.m. TIGARD TIGARD CIVIC CENTER— TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON. 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. APPROVE MINUTES 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The complete`text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code_amendments LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R- 25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 10, and 12. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT • • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard, but the `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan, such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain . . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail, street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances, setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05), seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems, educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts, invasive species, water pollution,air pollution, noise impacts of development, etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it, an important part of any`green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code, TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a `planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension, east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example, 0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area . . .". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR-0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis . . . ."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District' that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP, multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding), Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? Y• . • • Agenda Item: Hearing Date: March 19,2007 Time: 7:00 PM • STAFF REPORT TO THE III ., ' PLANNING COMMISSION • FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD; OREGON ; IGYARD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) CPA2006-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend Section 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Goals, Policies, and Action Measures as a basis to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. The amendment would also update Section 5 to allow complimentary residential • development throughout the Urban Renewal District. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 LOCATION: Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD, C-G, C-P,R-4.5,R-12 (PD),R-25 COMP PLAN: Commercial,Residential APPLICABLE • REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3 5, 6, 8,9 and 11;Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 12. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION •Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the Tigard City Council to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to replace Section 11.1 and amend Policy 5.5 as determined through the public hearing process. ' STAFF REPORT TO TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 1 OF 10 COMPREI-IENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 410 . 4 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play, and to serve as a community gathering place, in Downtown Tigard. The current planning effort to create a "heart" in Downtown Tigard dates back to 2002. A group of citizens and business owners were inspired to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on the planned Commuter Rail station in Downtown. A more extensive planning process was made possible with a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. Because of the Downtown Improvement Plan citizen involvement process, the City of Tigard was awarded the 2005 Good Governance Award from the League of Oregon Cities. The award recognizes exceptional city programs that unite citizens within a community. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for the Urban Renewal District in the May 2006 election. Proposal Description In order to implement the TDIP, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are necessary. These will establish the "legislative foundation" on which other land use actions and amendments to the Tigard Development Code can be based, including specific zoning map, land use and design standards. The first step is to completely replace Section 11.1 of the Comprehensive Plan, which covers the Downtown Central Business District of Neighborhood Planning Organization #1. The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures would be applicable to the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District (which encompasses a slightly larger area than the Central Business District zone referred to in Section 11.) The City is currently updating the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. Each section of the updated Plan will include Findings, Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. Here is an explanation of these terms: Findii s are the written statements of relevant facts that are the basis for the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 2 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • Goals are the broad-based statement of the community's desires. In this case the proposed Goal is taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Policies are general statements intended to guide the City now and in the future. They provide general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's land use, codes, and standards. Action Measures are more specific short and medium term actions that will implement the Goals and Policies. This term will replace "Implementation Strategies" found in the existing Comprehensive Plan. They can be evaluated on a regular basis- every. two years, to check on their progress. Action Measures are not required to be referenced when new land use codes and standards are proposed for adoption. In addition, Policy 5.5 of the Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated to allow for the opportunity for a variety of housing types called for in the TDIP, throughout the Downtown Urban Renewal District. SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable c, teria,findings and conclusions • Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 =.> • o Chapter 18.390 • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 • Applicable Metro Standards o Title 6 • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 12 City Department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this title and zoning district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures This chapter establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. Section 18.390.060.G states that the recommendation by the Commission, and the decision by the Council, shall be based on consideration of the following factors (reviewed above), including: 1) Statewide Planning Goals, 2) applicable federal or state STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 3 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AM ENDMENT • • ;- statues or regulations, 3) applicable Metro regulations, 4) applicable comprehensive plan policies, and 5) applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff fords that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code and recommends the Planning Commission forward this proposed amendment to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the comprehensive plan identified the following relevant policies for the proposed amendments: Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.1.1: General Policies This policy states that all future legislative changes shall be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Regional Plan adopted by Metro. As indicated under the individual Statewide and Regional Plan goals applicable to this proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goals and the Regional Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.3.: Citizen Involvement These policies state that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program, provide opportunities for citizen involvement appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and that information on land use planning issues shall be available in understandable form for all interested citizens. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad-based public involvement. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. The May 2006 Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. In addition, the City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen committee, has reviewed and suggested changes that were incorporated into the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This policy has also been met by publishing notice of the Planning Commission public hearing that was in the March 1, 2007 edition of the Tigard Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Comprehensive Plan Policy 3:Natural Features and Open Space 3.4 Natural Areas These policies protect natural resources, including wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat. The proposed amendment satisfies Policies 3.4.1-3.4.2 because it strengthens protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. STAFF REPORT TO TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN OWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 4 OF 10 COMPREI-IENSI\rE PLAN AMENDMENT • • 3.5. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Policies 3.5.1 The City shall encourage private enterprise and intergovernmental agreements which will provide for open space, recreation lands, facilities, and preserve natural, scenic and historic areas in a manner consistent with the availability of resources. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2 which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to be a central gathering place for the community and to provide a recreation area for such activities as a farmers market and performances. 3.5.3 The City has designated the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek, its tributaries, and the Tualatin River as greenway,which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.3 which states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Additionally, the TDIP calls for the expansion of the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park, by,_ purchasing additional property in the floodplain. 3.5.4 The City shall provide an interconnected pedestrian/bike path throughout the City. This policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.3.1, which states that the Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. In addition, the TDIP calls for a "rail-to-trail" path to be created in present railroad right-of-way. Comprehensive Plan Policy 5:Economy 5.3 The City shall improve and enhance the portions of the Central Business District as the focal point for commercial, high density residential,business,civic, and professional activity creating a diversified and economically viable core area The TDIP seeks to improve and diversify Downtown Tigard's economic and employment mix. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services;b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing;c) Civic functions (government offices, community services,public plazas,public transit centers, etc); d) Professional employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks." This proposed policy is aimed at facilitating the development of an urban village,promoting the retention of existing businesses, and creating opportunities for new investment. The proposal would also amend Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5 to make it possible to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. More housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 5 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • Comprehensive Plan Policy 6:Housing 6.1.1 The City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This policy is satisfied because the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6, which states that "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." This policy is also satisfied by proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5. which would create the opportunity for complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The change will likely result in increased housing choices at a variety of rent and price levels. Comprehensive Plan Policy 8: Transportation 8.1.2 Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation. This policy is satisfied by the inclusion of these proposed Policies: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system,especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. Collectively these policies aim to develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles and transit. Projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail station, and expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes will further increase transportation options. Comprehensive Plan Policy 9:Energy 9.1.3 The City shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation, design, and construction. The main goal of the TDIP is to create an urban village,which would result in an opportunity to live, shop, recreate, and work in a pedestrian-friendly environment. The envisioned place would allow residents to conserve energy by reducing their dependence on automobiles, as the area is presently well-served by transit. Future projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 6 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • Additionally the TDIP expresses a preference for sustainable practices in construction of new Downtown buildings and infrastructure. These proposed Action Measures would encourage this type of design: 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Metro Functional Plan Title 6: Central City, Regional Centers, Town Centers and Station Communities Requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center. Centers are defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan fulfilled the requirement to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would institute the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's goal of "creating a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian-oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to "live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Policies and Actions Measures would enable the future adoption of code and policies to implement the goal. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable Metro regulations. THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal was met through the extensive public involvement in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, which included a Task Force of. 24 citizens, community dialogues, workshops, an open house, and a public survey. The City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen group, has reviewed and provided input to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This goal has also been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice has been published in the Tigard Times STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMiMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 7 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • i newspaper prior to the public hearing. Two Public Hearings are being held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which public input is welcome. In addition, letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Statewide Planning Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The proposed amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report; therefore, the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal S- Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas and sites. The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal because the proposed changes strengthen protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Existing Goal 5 protections for natural'resources in the Urban Renewal District will remain in place. Statewide Planning Goal 8-Recreational Needs This goal aims to provide for the siting of facilities for the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. This goal is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2, which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to provide a range of recreation activities such as farmers markets and performances. This will become a central gathering place for the community and increase recreational opportunities for residents. Statewide Planning Goal 9-Economic Development This goal aims to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, etc); d) Professional employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks." STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 8 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • This policy is consistent with Goal 9 as it is aimed at facilitating the development of a vibrant and economically sound city core. The TDIP calls for opportunities for new housing, commercial, and employment which would create a thriving urban village. Statewide Planning Goal 10-Housing This goal aims to provide adequate housing for the needs of the community, region and state. One of the recommended catalyst projects in the TDIP is to increase the number of housing units in the Downtown. This could increase the number of potential patrons for Downtown businesses and potential riders of the new Commuter Rail line. The proposed Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6 which states: "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." The proposed amendment is consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning Goal 12-Transportation The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." The proposed Amendment satisfies this goal with the inclusion of several Policies to Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit including: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. These proposed Policies would improve the safety, efficiency and economy of the transportation system in the Downtown Urban Renewal District and expand access to transportation options. • CONCLUSION: Based on the• analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. STAFF REPORT TO TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 9 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Building Division and Police Department, have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. The City of Tigard's Public Works had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and Metro, were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Tualatin Valley Water District, and Cleanwater Services were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of extensive public involvement. In order to implement the Plan, changes are needed to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code including new zoning and design standards. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would provide the 'legislative foundation" to accomplish this. The proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. • March 7, 2007 PREPARED :Y: Sean F. 1-lly DATE Ass Planner • TietAtIdt(r *Ateli March 7 , 2007 APPROVED BY: Ron Bunch DATE Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 10 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • PXHIBIT A 5 . ECONOMY Commentary : The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states that more housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor, the TDIP does call for medium-density, stand alone housing types, such as townhouses, in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. • Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. • Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in atrikcthrough. POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIATE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R- 40 DISTRICTS.) AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMITTED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES..-; WITHIN THE MUC, MUR 1 AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND MUR 2) TO R-50 (MUC, MUE 1 AND MUR 1): AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MLZED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. • • • 11. Special Areas of Concern Commentary: The proposed amendment would replace Section 11.1 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) to incorporate Goals, Policies, and Action Measures as a basis to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented,mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. • Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. • Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in Gtrikcthrough. 11.1 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION hi A. Central Business District Findings many people within the planning arca. - •- . . - . - : - - -- • : .. :. • . also provides entertainment and open space. fully operate as a unified arca, a Central Business District needs to: a. Bc compact; b. Have case of access to all facilities; c. Have a broad cross section of appropriate commercial uses; and • The Tigard downtown area is effectively served by mass transit facilities. POLICY ACCOMPLISHED IN ORDER TO MAKE IT COMPLEMENTARY TO NEWER SHOPPING AREAS. CONVENIENCE,APPEARANCE AND THE NEEDS OF THE SHOPPING PUBLIC SHOULD BE PRIMARY CONSIDERATIONS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEG IES • economic development program. The CBD is a special area of concern for economic development activity. their participation in the revitalization of the Central Business District. • • 1 1 . S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play,and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center, dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002,with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. A state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process.A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues,workshops, open house, and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal,including Tax Increment Financing,are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street, the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function,but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown • • In •eneral downtown properties have low improvement to land I:L ratios. Health I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions,Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial, office, residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general, there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown. A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek, part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown, the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result, the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots,which are zoned R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25, C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary,Downtown is important to Tigard residents; many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character& Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a `focal point' for the community," and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of-Concern 2 Downtown The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset.and features a combination of uses that enable people to live.work.play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning.design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality.attractiveness,and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard.while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices.community services.public plazas.public transit centers.etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing;auto-dependant uses: industrial manufacturing;and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a thTeshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design,development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety,accessibility,and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types.including ownership. workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • • 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a"traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area,adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto.transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City.in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system.especially bus and Commuter Rail.Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5.the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant,compact.mixed-use area with housing.retail and employment opportunities. Special Areas of.Concern 4 Downtown • 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials, particularly in the building fronts and streetscape. Also develop appropriate density,height, mass, scale, architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Utilize form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. , 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events,farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information,urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines, standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks,plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses,public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown • 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from, and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown. such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways, entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot, and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment/ facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public,including members of the development community,with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown _ __ __� \\\4.,.., i :,::?. • I. ii NI:\ X • • • . / • if. ff ' • UI i • • • '''' 5 • >r� s?.r' -._:.fro, ,-.�. .-i!r"�".,a swt r:�d;�:=i,..�G�;.:� N. ���;�-`"��:,x§; ,,:; <- M ,,,0,:;;;_:r,, x::.,r,,.r Comprehensive Plan Amendment �Y� •,k= :Compre`�ensiveFPlan��: fr.....,�:':'_� i°- 4ti:=__,�:n- '}.t• i� •' - .4viy: - �`::_Jf.;yy'r.;�q:,,h'� i..,._;ti:v7tl.ws¢" -`F,,''r. :.}ag',',^;x:'.•,: k02-7:1�C � `r4 ,;.z,_� �x. %. r_.rk,.c�irF.=�:-�•:,. .'ti:.-fc+r.Via,$:=F;;.:�; Ari.endiiiiii 0PA1006-00002 =.•�.f:, °=t �a'fi'w ,,;',,<<"•:,:, •-.; �' -!, ,a:�` ': � ;; ; ;� = i.... ',• • Comprehensive Plan i:'.•'taj ^.iy •f"'ic.9•','Ril, -�o,'.;C'.�_r'T'-�131'•w.'' .r"^*„i.. `:s-a' � rt'.'';�wlir ly,.•?+M�.' :14=!t ;ti' ,' sr.;:, . x4;,r t ,;t- �a�+• r ��n i .. �,�:4 - will be completely k-' ` Pioposed::UpdaterofiDo_drntownC:..ii1'"" : " ~% u dated in the next N `'' '',ti iGoals'•Olig,*s°•iand`AthQnsl 1easutes?-st.. ;�, year. .7: ,�. '1+-.,.14r 51 �.•••r ,F`r.''� x,>4.11.. €.'.'t! � ;r:r, .. .z_: '�.N,"�.j•;M1*.i;✓..1T�s: y,.lu.`s3;L[„Ya„:; ;' iY.-.t:'=a �;r- .61 >"_ �. ,.i.:':. sN- :_...':,3. .... -' kr r r ' :,,+.-, t iipAl..l,n, _;-. This Amendment is a °~- • a• 1 °� a2.� r,�?4 i°'^ till br. ; t•k.�``;;• rr. �i c'. .; ,, ;:;s;. i�.' �_ •°." w _: ,4..4,:v precursor to the ^�M,it t•,i .: Y [4+..','^,t�4,:i,±}; ' jA'•i�'..{. Y .X... -;,k.•.4. eSi�.%1 LM,re iOa^ L% =F.�:•.rs ,,, :ti: ,:,.:',@,;4^.,' '. .; ;,:' _ � y format of the eventual SS^^"" ,'Z'•, _J r�`';5,'.'e 4:1-.e. ,,,,,-.,,?'?".;'.7t:.-"--2....4 -•ti-M :.r:i:J`t: 1'L R.,,,;-fit' wca-r-,n. 'pw i .: rC'�,ti. -,r>' 4"ss. a ;,'317 ., -.r. .:trr''.;>...,} `'A" 4,'' 'S•, {.•'i^s�Te."'fi .,. 7f.Ty ia'•F"r^_i-: ^,':q:::..i',.lr: °: 5,.:.;.0 :Y p '°'°n'giall i."',,:`r$'r t 'tit:r:. =br.- , ,,.•"iL,0`..A: f City oCTigaTd2 `;ri. r,?,,,_F:: updated ��>>�;,...,��,�:,,'�`;:?..'k':::;.1-:,x�;, :91.1',4c}��Lor RangePtwnittgt�•�t''f Comprehensive Plan. .,rq�y Ice 4 ' °}Cat ° ° ""• • , fi Pfauning(ommiselon Public u'. -.,�� 4 .,..4,,'-',/,41,•.,�� Mat(eb 19F�2�117L� e3;�,.�� Ln•91� �r�^ ''``��!��' STIC.tIID 'troARD y. •Y,n T,, �'i5(• tt-710•Sx,��ran„:3i-y'1!-.T,n`i y q. C L1 + y.tiss r '• $ r .rte aY,t. . -, ;1;f_ %..x''.511,'.'`1 r K•. .::i:::p...T -':;5,-i•x.:..e� 4;m oS:•,", 7,r,l,.+.:::.. .. wtc:'�: v-:;e:: L.:.;:- t�,dA.'t7.1..:,,,,,N.:-.:.234f,...7-'44;,1.,,, Comprehensive Plan New Format: Comprehensive Plan New Format: • Action Measures are more specific short • Findings are the written statements of relevant and medium term actions that will facts that are the basis for the Goals,Policies,and implement the Goals and Policies.They Action Measures. can be evaluated on a regular basis,to • • Goals are broad-based statements of the check on their progress. community's desires. f • Policies are general statements intended to guide Cam; f ' ' the City now and in the future.They provide i ® i 1 i general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's land use,codes,and standards. ""■i-�'� E 1 . • III • III r Why is the Comprehensive Plan Why is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Needed? Amendment Needed? • It is necessary to s:f It would rovide the le dative `r, ".�. implement the basis to make future ' : =: P Tigard Downtown ` ,� * ;' amendments to the s;;4'r:: �, .,�f,i�:�, Improvement Plan. V4 �®A'i Development Code(including ;<`-,,t.':; :j 111 • III , , .,. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan TDIP Citizen Involvement A citizen-driven plan with the goal of creating: / { • Downtown Task Force (24 members) held "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of ,. ,::`t1" Community Dialogs, the community that is pedestrian-oriented, t'ar °z,: :4 Neighborhood Meetings, accessible by many modes of transportation, �'�, * .. , Open House,Survey (` P Y !t. , 1.1- 1,, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, a :_ .:! '. •--,. ;, M :i _� , , Over 1300 people reached and.features a combination of uses that enable . )i by citizen volunteers • people to live,work,play and shop in an _ . l' _,.-711 • The City of Tigard was environment that is uniquely Tigard." - awarded the 2005 Good u fr-- i' Governance Award by the fl': -i '"- s, League of Oregon Cities The TDIP is the"resource report"for the {ems =� " Comprehensive Plan Amendment. g', _ . -- - for the TDIP citizen tom planning effort. TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures 11.1 Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village Most amendment language taken directly from the 7 Policies and 8 Action Measures TDIP. • Goal: identical to the TDIP's goal. Policies and Action Measures fall under three ! / r / - h‘., r ' <;� ,6 , categories in Section 11. w �� t - E;: a 3 • • • TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and System and Integrate Natural Features Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, 3 Policies and 4 Action Measures Automobiles, Bicycles,and Transit 6 Policies and 10 Action Measures tgi , :!;.i..491.:', • t/`fir J`�,r f' 71,. z ,.M� ,. '""'t'" _ �n t tit I Wily, Downtown Urban Renewal District Downtown Urban Renewal District . r ?J ''�� • Slightly larger area`'�� '�Y, `�•i� • Slightly larger area r' ;z� �*-,,` than the CBD zone a- Y -0�_�' :,;..:, r \ than the CBD zone 7 %fie k�j -L , ` ? , -ri.--012,.y'i >, and the original = and the original e _' ,• s Downtown Plan Area. . j a 11 1111:' , Downtown Plan Area. ' 9 ''' 1* • CPA would apply to "" � . `% • CPA would apply to it•` f ti this 193 acre area 4,„--1.. 'v � j this 193 acre area 10 °AI ki 1 1 i a:1 I.it. s I .� • _ ..._ " "\ � .: ''.A It II I i' ii =: u 5Ct.``�gaiilm u uZs.awnrm p �""" G ... t yym Mrrso Ga slime 4 11111 • • Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures: Applicable Tigard Criteria: Applicable State and Regional Criteria •Tigard Community Development Code •Applicable Metro Standards -Chapter 18.380 -Title 6(Town Centers) -Chapter 18390 •Statewide Planning Goals •Applicable Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.Citizen Involvement 1.General policies 2.Citizen Involvement 2.Land Use Planning • 3.Natural Features and Open Space 5.Natural Resources 5.Economy 8.Recreational needs 6.Housing 9.Economic Development 8.Transportation 10.Housing 9.Energy 12.Transportation Conclusion Recommendation That the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council to amend the The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Tigard Comprehensive Plan to replace Section measures are consistent with the 11.1 and amend Policy 5.5 as determined • applicable Tigard,Metro, and State through the public hearing process. regulations and goals. 5 • • • Questions? f pil FLT 39 •e ��°"` 7:11".-.. c ' , ' :max "1 ^ " na - a? - , .� r ''" b '. i.,� , c ( '' x3 . 4 • 6 TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION. AGENDA::': q • DECEMBER 11, 2006 7:00 p.m. TIGARD CIVIC CENTER- RED ROCK CREEK CONF. ROOM T I G A RD 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. APPROVE MINUTES 5. DRAFT DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, ACTION MEASURES 6. WORKSHOP WITH TREE BOARD - 8:00 P.M. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT II I • IN MI II MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Planning Commission FROM: Sean Farrelly, Long-Range Planning RE: Update of the Comprehensive Plan -- Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures DATE: November 30, 2006 Long-Range Planning staff has developed draft Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. The Goals, Policies, and Action Measures have been distilled from the relevant Downtown planning documents, the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, City Center Urban Renewal Plan, and Downtown Streetscape Plan. These documents were developed with substantial citizen involvement. This is the first step in amending the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code to implement the vision of an "urban village" in the Downtown. Plan statements like these are needed to provide the legislative basis for eventual adoption of new downtown plan districts and land use regulations. The draft document does not reflect input from the City Center Advisory Commission; this will soon be incorporated. The main purpose of Planning Commission's review of the draft document at this time meeting is to gain feedback on its general content and format. It is very important for the CCAC to be at the table when the Commission commences its formal review. A more refined version of the document will be discussed in a special joint Planning Commission-CCAC session, in January 2007. This session will focus on specific content. The format of the draft is a precursor to the format of the rest of the Comprehensive Plan update. Presently, the Comprehensive Plan is organized into Goals,Findings, Policies and Implementation Strategies. The new format, reflected in the draft document, will replace Implementation Strategies with "Action Measures." This will not be just a change in terminology; an Action Measure is a statement which outlines a specific standard which would implement Goals and Policies. The progress of an Action Measure can be assessed more precisely than an Implementation Strategy. Thank you. Copy: Tom Coffee, Community Development Director Phil Nachbar, Senior Planner— Urban Renewal 'H • " DRAFT I S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play, and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center, dating back to around 1907. A central business district developed around the railway station, serving the then small farming community with businesses such as a bank, hotel, restaurants and a farming supply store. The prevalent urban form of one and two-story buildings is still present on Main Street. In the 1940s and 50s the automobile became the primary mode of transportation. Tigard's population grew steadily, but Downtown Tigard lost its prominence with the Pacific Highway viaduct, which bypassed Main Street, and the construction of Washington Square Mall and other large shopping centers. Today, the existing uses in the Downtown Urban Renewal District include retail, office,residential, auto- dependent businesses, and large-lot light industrial businesses as well as public park, civic, and transit uses. Industrial uses are prominent to the southeast of the plan area. Retail commercial uses are concentrated to the northwest along OR 99W. Within the Urban Renewal District, there is a small amount of residential development,mostly one and two-story apartment buildings. Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002, with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. In 2004 the City received a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant,which facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues,workshops, open house, and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (1'DIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create"a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." To achieve this vision and the Preferred Design Alternative, the TDIP made several policy recommendations. Eight catalyst projects were proposed to help create a more active Downtown: 1. Streetscape Enhancement Program 2. Green Corridor/Urban Creek 3. Hall Blvd. Regional Retail 4. Downtown Housing Development 5. Ash Area Downtown Improvement 6. Performing Arts and Recreation Center 7. Fanno Creek Public Area Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown DRAFT 8. Relocating Post Office The TDIP also made recommendations on Transportation System Improvements, Code and Regulatory Adjustments, Funding Sources, and Follow-Up Actions. The City Council accepted the TDIP in September 2005. Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan The Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan provides specific guidance for Streetscape Enhancement, one of the catalyst projects. It was developed with significant citizen involvement. The Plan includes a Design Framework, Streetscape Design Concepts, and Gateway and Public Spaces, all of which will encourage the development of a pedestrian-friendly Downtown. Statewide Goals and Policies In addition to the Statewide Goals, there are a number of other state policies that are relevant to the Downtown: Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) directs cities and counties to develop balanced transportation systems addressing all modes of travel including motor vehicles, transit,bicycles and pedestrians. The TPR envisions development of local plans that will promote changes in land use patterns and transportation systems that make it more convenient for people to walk, bicycle,use transit, and drive less to meet their daily needs. The TPR also directs cities and counties to plan changes in transportation facilities in tandem with land use and development patterns. Oregon Highway Plan The 1999 Oregon Highway Plan includes a series of policies and actions related to integrating land use and transportation. 99W and Hall Boulevard are two roadways (both under ODOT's jurisdiction) which run through the Downtown, which could conceivably receive these designations to help foster compact development: Special Transportation Area (STA) is a designated district of compact development located on a state highway within a downtown in which the need for appropriate local access outweighs the considerations of highway mobility. Urban Business Area (UBA) is a highway segment designation which may vary in size and which recognizes existing areas of commercial activity or future nodes or various types of centers of commercial activity within a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown DRAFT • Regional Planning Requirements • Metro's 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center, defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." Town Centers are described as the central focus of community life, serving residents living within two or three miles. Some key objectives for developing Metro-designated 2040 Centers include: • Promoting more intensive mixed-use development. • Providing infrastructure to support more intensive development. • Creating effective local and regional transportation connections to and within the center for all travel modes. • Providing public spaces and distinct center identification. • Recognizing the natural environment as a desired amenity. 2. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street, the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function, but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. In general, downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions, Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial, office, residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Traniportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general,there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown. A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek, part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown _a DRAFT • • The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown, the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result, the area has developed without many of the pedestrian-oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots, which are zoned R-4.5, R-12 (PD), C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary, Downtown is important to Tigard residents; many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character & Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a `focal point' for the community," and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning, design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development. (1'DIP p.31) 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks. Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown DRAFT 411 • (TDIP p.30) 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependant uses;industrial manufacturing; and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village (TDIP p. 30) 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. (TDIP Land Use Technical Memo p.6) 11.1.5 Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives. (TDIP p. 23) 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. (1'DIP p.26) 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street" character. (TDIP p. 33) 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. (TDIP p. 23) 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Area shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. (TDIP p.26) 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. (TDIP p. 22) 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. (TDIP p. 24) 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. (TRIP p. 28) 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. (TDIP p.2.5) 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. (1'DIP p. 29) Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown DRAFT • • ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant, compact, mixed-use area with housing,retail and employment opportunities. 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards to encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture through high- quality building design, with particular attention to building fronts and streetscape, as well as appropriate density, height,mass, scale, architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.3 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.4 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.5 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.6 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information, urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.7 Monitor performance of design guidelines, standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks, plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses, public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from, and within the Downtown in Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown • DRAFT • the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT'S Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways, entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot, and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilising the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.9 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment / facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. MAP: ADOPTED URBAN RENEWAL BOUNDARIES MAP Special Areas of Concern 7 Downtown DRAFT • Action Chart: Downtown n---- Action ----i---- --- Who Implements Timeline If p Short I Medium — Long I i (City Departments) Term ( Term Term iI Ongoing] Next 5 6 to 10 11+ Years Years Years FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN URBAN VILLAGE 11.A 1 Develop Design Guidelines for the X CD-LR,CD-CP Downtown Urban Renewal Area 2 Adopt non-conforming use standards X CD-LR,CD-CP 3 Develop code measures to mitigate X CD-LR,CD-CP compatibility issues Provide areas where community events, 4 farmer's markets,or other events can be X X CD-LR,CD-CP held Designate the Downtown area as the 5 X CD LR preferred location for civic land uses 6 Promote an awareness of the --- X CD-LR,CD-CP Downtown's history 7 Monitor performance of design --. X CD-LR,CD-CP guidelines,land use regulations 11.B DEVELOP AND IMPROVE OPEN SPACE AND INTEGRATE NATURAL FEATURES Acquire property and easements to 1 protect natural resources and provide X X CD-LR,PW public open space areas 2 Develop"green connections" X X CD-LR,CD-E,PW 3 Incorporate public art into the design of X _- X CD-LR,CD-E,PW public spaces. 4 Enhance the landscape and habitat of X -■ X CD-LR,CD-E,PW Fanno Creek 11.0 DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE STREET AND CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 1 Develop Access and Circulation Plan X CD-E,CD-LR Address public safety and land use 2 compatibility issues in the design and X CD-E,CD-LR management of the transportation system 3 Investigate assigning different roadway X CD E,CD-LR designations 4 Implement an integrated pedestrian X CD E,CD-LR streetscape and landscape plan Acquire property and easements to 5 implement streetscape and landscape X X X CD-E,CD-LR plans,and new streets Special Areas of Concern 8 Downtown DRAFT • • • Action nib Implements @kgt �iu o o 6tRIV De.. ■ eats) WEN @WO 11e0 V 6 Use the"unifying elements"palette to X CD-E,CD-LR design streetscape improvements 7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street X CD-E,CD-LR design Encourage the formation of a Downtown 8 Parking and Transportation Management X CD-LR Association Incorporate the Downtown's public 9 investments into the City's Public Facility X X CD-E,CD-LR Plan and implementing CIP 11.D OTHER ACTION MEASURES Develop and implement strategies to 1 address concerns with homeless persons X CD-LR and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park Provide public with regular informational 2 updates on Urban Renewal progress X X CD-LR CD-LR=Community Development- Long Range Planning CD-CR=Community Development - Current Planning CD-E= Community Development—Engineering PW= Public Works • Special Areas of Concern 9 Downtown 0 Ionina Classifications urban Penew,--.1 tounaaFy Lliban Zoning (..iiv:1;on REQUEST FOR COMMENTS CITY OF TIGARD REQUEST F. COMMENTS NOTIFICA•li ION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS.: FILE NAME: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS 14-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES OF AREA: ❑Central [Mast ['South ['West • . CITY OFFICES _LONG RANGE PLANNING/Barbara Shields,Planning Mgr. _COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. _POLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer _BUILDING DIVISION/Mark(residential)Brian(commercial) _ENGINEERING DEPTJKim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer _PUBLIC WORKS/Matt Stine,Urban Forester _CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder _PUBLIC WORKS/Rob Murchison,Project Engineer _PLANNING COMMISSION(+11 sets) ./PLANNER—POST PROJECT SITE 10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO A PUBLIC HEARING! _HEARINGS OFFICER(+2 sets) SPECIAL DISTRICTS _ TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.11 TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE* _ TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* _ CLEANWATER SERVICES Planning Manager North Division Administrative Office Lee Walker/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road John K.Dalby,Deputy Fire Marshall PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 Beaverton,OR 97005-1152 ' LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON* _ CITY OF TUALATIN* _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood(WLUN Form Required) _ Steven Sparks,Dev.Svcs.Manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. • METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING* _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE _ CITY OF DURHAM* 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland.OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 17160 SW Upper Boones Fry.Rd. _ Bob Knight,Data Resource Center(ZCA) _US ARMY CORPS.OF ENG. Durham,OR 97224 P ulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator R.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. Kathryn Harris(Maps&cws Leiter Only) el Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPAIZOA) Larry French(Comp.Plan Amendments Only) Routing CENWP-OP-G _CITY OF KING CITY* _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager 4A.D.Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue . • King City,OR 97224 • WASHINGTON COUNTY OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(Powedines in Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopole Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N.First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO* Routing TTRC–Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 _Steve Conway(General Apps.) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Gregg Leion(CPA) _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * . _Brent Curtis(CPA) —CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Grant Robinson,Development Review Coordinator _Doria Mateja(ZCA)Ms 14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section(vacations) _Sr.Cartographer(cPArzcA)MS 14 1900 SW 4th Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,Surveyor Rc)me 15 Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A* _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION _STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin(wccCA)"911-(monopole Towers) Sam Hunaidi,Assistant District Manager (Notify if ODOT R/R.Hwy.Crossing is OdyAccess to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE • PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road • Dave Lanning,sr.crossing Safety Specialist (Notify If Property Has HD Overlay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13d'Street,NE,Suite 3 1115 Commercial Street,NE Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301-1012 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES � _PORTLAND WESTERN RJR,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE R/R,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northem/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Bruce Carswell,President&General Manager • 1200 Howard Drive SE Albany,OR 97322-3336 . _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R _METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations only) Gerald Backhaus(See Map for Area Contact) (If Project is Within'/.Mfe of a Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 —PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC —NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY —VERIZON _QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ken Gutierrez,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. David Bryant,Engineering Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue OR 030533/PO Box 1100 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J _BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. . Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics Alex Silantiev (Sae Map for Afeacontscp Diana Carpenter(Apps Ed Hawr.d 99w) 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg.12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 . Tigard,OR 97223-4203 11f INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 23-May-06) 1 IIIIII . . . • 9 a TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: February 21,2007 TO: Jim Wolf,Tigard Police Department Crime Prevention Officer FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner (x2420) Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 Email: Sean @tigard-or.gov COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA)2006-00002 - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES - REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies,and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5,R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2, 3, 5, 6 and 11,Metro Functional Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5, 10, and 12. Attached are the Code Amendments for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: March 1, 2007. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenting. 3 A* .1,2.90 1 '� ' • • TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: February 21. 2007 TO: PER ATTACHED FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner (x2420) Phone: (503) 639-4171 Fax: (503) 684-7297 Email: Sean(a,tigard-or.gov COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA)2006-00002 - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES - REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies,and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5,R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2, 3, 5, 6 and 11,Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5, 10,and 12. Attached are the Code Amendments for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: March 1, 2007. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments m writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. — Please contact of our office. — Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenting. ITY OF TIGARD REQUEST Fti COMMENTS r NOTIFI IION LIST FOR LAND USE & COMMUNITY OTVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FILE NOS.: FILE NAME: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT TEAMS 14-DAY PENDING APPLICATION NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES OF AREA: DCentral ❑East ❑South ['West CITY OFFICES _LONG RANGE PLANNING/Ron Bunch,Planning Mgr. COMMUNITY DVLPMNT.DEPT./Planning-Engineering Techs. �OLICE DEPT./Jim Wolf,Crime Prevention Officer 7/BUILDING DIVISION/Mark(residential)Brian(commercial) 7/ENGINEERING DEPTJKim McMillan,Dvlpmnt.Review Engineer _PUBLIC WORKS/Matt Stine,Urban Forester /CITY ADMINISTRATION/Cathy Wheatley,City Recorder [PUBLIC WORKS/Rob Murchison,Project Engineer _PLANNING COMMISSION(+11 sets) .1 PLANNER—POST PROJECT SITE 10 BUSINESS DAYS PRIOR TO A PUBLIC HEARING! _HEARINGS OFFICER(+2 sets) SPECIAL DISTRICTS — TUAL.HILLS PARK&REC.DIST.*/TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE* /TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT* LZ CLEANWATER SERVICES* Planning Manager North Division Administrative Office Lee Walker/SWM Program 15707 SW Walker Road John K.Dalby,Deputy Fire Marshall PO Box 745 155 N.First Avenue Beaverton,OR 97006 14480 SW Jenkins Road Beaverton,OR 97075 Hillsboro,OR 97124 Beaverton,OR 97005-1152 LOCAL AND STATE JURISDICTIONS CITY OF BEAVERTON* _ CITY OF TUALATIN* _OR.DEPT.OF FISH&WILDLIFE _OR.DIV.OF STATE LANDS _ Planning Manager Planning Manager Devin Simmons,Habitat Biologist Melinda Wood(WLuN Form Required) _ Steven Sparks,Dev.Svcs.Manager 18880 SW Martinazzi Avenue North Willamette Watershed District 775 Summer Street NE,Suite 100 PO Box 4755 Tualatin,OR 97062 18330 NW Sauvie Island Road Salem,OR 97301-1279 Beaverton,OR 97076 Portland,OR 97231 _ OR.PUB.UTILITIES COMM. METRO-LAND USE&PLANNING* _OR.DEPT.OF GEO.&MINERAL IND. 550 Capitol Street NE _ CITY OF DURHAM* 600 NE Grand Avenue 800 NE Oregon Street,Suite 5 Salem,OR 97310-1380 City Manager Portland,OR 97232-2736 Portland,OR 97232 17160 SW Upper Boones Fry.Rd. _ Joanna Mensher,Data Resource Center(ZCA) _US ARMY CORPS.OF I Durham,OR 97224 _ Paulette Allen,Growth Management Coordinator _OR.DEPT.OF LAND CONSERV.&DVLP. Kathryn Harris(Maps&cws Letter only) _ Mel Huie,Greenspaces Coordinator(CPA/WA) Larry French(Comp.Plan Amendments Only) Routing CENWP-OP-G —CITY OF KING CITY* _ Jennifer Budhabhatti,Regional Planner(Wetlands) 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 PO Box 2946 City Manager _ C.D.Manager,Growth Management Services Salem,OR 97301-2540 Portland,OR 97208-2946 15300 SW 116th Avenue King City,OR 97224 WASHINGTON COUNTY _ OR.DEPT.OF ENERGY(Powedines in Area) _OR.DEPT OF AVIATION(Monopole Towers) Dept.of Land Use&Transp. Bonneville Power Administration Tom Highland,Planning 155 N.First Avenue _CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO* Routing TTRC–Attn: Renae Ferrera 3040 25th Street,SE Suite 350,MS 13 Planning Director PO Box 3621 Salem,OR 97310 Hillsboro,OR 97124 PO Box 369 Portland,OR 97208-3621 _Steve Conway(General Apps.) Lake Oswego,OR 97034 _Gregg Leion(CPA) _ OR.DEPT.OF ENVIRON.QUALITY(DEQ) ODOT,REGION 1 * _Brent Curtis(CPA) _CITY OF PORTLAND (Notify for Wetlands and Potential Environmental Impacts) _Development Review Coordinator _Doria Mateja(ZCA)MS 14 Planning Bureau Director Regional Administrator _Carl Torland, Right-of-Way Section(Vacations) _Sr.Cartographer lcPArzcAIMS,. 1900 SW 4"'Avenue,Suite 4100 2020 SW Fourth Avenue,Suite 400 123 NW Flanders _Jim Nims,Surveyor RCA)MS 15 Portland,OR 97201 Portland,OR 97201-4987 Portland,OR 97209-4037 _OR.PARKS&REC.DEPT. _WA.CO.CONSOL.COMM.AGNCY _ODOT,REGION 1 -DISTRICT 2A 11t _ODOT,RAIL DIVISION STATE HISTORIC Dave Austin(wccCA)"911"(monopole Towers) Sam Hunaidi,Assistant District Manager (Notify If ODOT R/R-Hwy.Crossing is Only Access to Land) PRESERVATION OFFICE PO Box 6375 6000 SW Raab Road Dave Lanning,Sr.Crossing Safety Specialist (Notify if Property Has HD Overlay) Beaverton,OR 97007-0375 Portland,OR 97221 555-13'"Street,NE,Suite 3 725 Sumner Street NE,Suite C Salem,OR 97301-4179 Salem,OR 97301 UTILITY PROVIDERS AND SPECIAL AGENCIES —PORTLAND WESTERN R/R,BURLINGTON NORTHERN/SANTA FE RJR,OREGON ELECTRIC R/R(Burlington Northem/Santa Fe R/R Predecessor) Bruce Carswell,President&General Manager 1200 Howard Drive SE Albany,OR 97322-3336 _SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANS.CO.R/R METRO AREA COMMUNICATIONS _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _TRI-MET TRANSIT DVLPMT. Clifford C.Cabe,Construction Engineer Debra Palmer(Annexations Only) Gerald Backhaus Ilan Map for Area Cont.* (If Project is Within%Mile of a Transit Route) 5424 SE McLoughlin Boulevard Twin Oaks Technology Center 14200 SW Brigadoon Court Ben Baldwin,Project Planner Portland,OR 97232 1815 NW 169th Place,S-6020 Beaverton,OR 97005 710 NE Holladay Street Beaverton,OR 97006-4886 Portland,OR 97232 —PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC —NW NATURAL GAS COMPANY —VERIZON (MCOaos33) _QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Ken Gutierrez,Svc.Design Consultant Scott Palmer,Engineering Coord. Brandon Kahler,Engineering Lynn Smith,Eng.ROW Mgr. 9480 SW Boeckman Road 220 NW Second Avenue 20575 Vonnewmann Dr.,Suite 150 8021 SW Capitol Hill Rd,Rm 110 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Portland,OR 97209-3991 Beaverton,OR 97075-1100 Portland,OR 97219 _TIGARD/TUALATIN SCHOOL DIST.#23J _BEAVERTON SCHOOL DIST.#48 _COMCAST CABLE CORP. _COMCAST CABLE COMMUNIC. Teri Brady,Administrative Offices Jan Youngquist,Demographics Alex Silantiev (see Map for Nee Contact) Diana Carpenter(Apps Eel se w,otssw) 6960 SW Sandburg Street 16550 SW Merlo Road 9605 SW Nimbus Avenue,Bldg.12 10831 SW Cascade Avenue Tigard,OR 97223-8039 Beaverton,OR 97006-5152 Beaverton,OR 97008 Tigard,OR 97223-4203 * INDICATES AUTOMATIC NOTIFICATION IN COMPLIANCE WITH INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT IF WITHIN 500'OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR ANY/ALL CITY PROJECTS(Project Planner Is Responsible For Indicating Parties To Notify). h:\patty\masters\Request For Comments Notification List.doc (UPDATED: 7-Feb-07) • . DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live,work, and play, and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center, dating back to around 1907.A central business district developed around the-railway station, serving the then small farming community with businesses such as a bank,hotel,restaurants and a farming supply store. The prevalent urban form of one and two-story buildings is still present on Main Street. In the 1940s and 50s the automobile became the primary mode of transportation. Tigard's population grew steadily, but Downtown Tigard lost its prominence with the Pacific Highway viaduct,which bypassed Main Street,and the construction of Washington Square Mall and other large shopping centers. Today, the existing uses in the Downtown Urban Renewal District include retail, office,residential,auto- dependent businesses, and large-lot light industrial businesses as well as public park, civic, and transit uses. Industrial uses are prominent to the southeast of the plan area. Retail commercial uses are concentrated to the northwest along OR 99W.Within the Urban Renewal District, there is a small amount of residential development, including a mobile home park and one and two-story apartment buildings. Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002,with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. In 2004 the City received a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant,which facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues,workshops, open house, and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (I DIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." To achieve this vision and the Preferred Design Alternative, the"DIP made several policy recommendations. Eight catalyst projects were proposed to help create a more active Downtown: 1. Streetscape Enhancement Program 2. Green Corridor/Urban Creek 3. Hall Blvd. Regional Retail 4. Downtown Housing Development 5.Ash Area Downtown Improvement 6. Performing Arts and Recreation Center 7. Fanno Creek Public Area Special Areas-of Concern - 1- - Downtown • • t. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT 8. Relocating Post Office The'''DIP also made recommendations on Transportation System Improvements, Code and Regulatory Adjustments,Funding Sources, and Follow-Up Actions. The City Council accepted the'1'DIP in September 2005. Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan The Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan provides specific guidance for Streetscape Enhancement, one of the catalyst projects. It was developed with significant citizen involvement. The Plan includes a Design Framework, Streetscape Design Concepts, and Gateway and Public Spaces, all of which will encourage the development of a pedestrian-friendly Downtown. Statewide Goals and Policies In addition to the Statewide Goals, there are a number of other state policies that are relevant to the Downtown: Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (l'PR) directs cities and counties to develop balanced transportation systems addressing all modes of travel including motor vehicles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians. The I'PR envisions development of local plans that will promote changes in land use patterns and transportation systems that make it more convenient for people to walk,bicycle,use transit, and drive less to meet their daily needs. The TPR also directs cities and counties to plan changes in transportation facilities in tandem with land use and development patterns. Oregon Highway Plan The 1999 Oregon Highway Plan includes a series of policies and actions related to integrating land use and transportation. 99W and Hall Boulevard are two roadways (both under ODOT's jurisdiction) which run through the Downtown,which could conceivably receive these designations to help foster compact development: Special Transportation Area (STA)is a designated district of compact development located on a state highway within a downtown in which the need for appropriate local access outweighs the considerations of highway mobility. Urban Business Area (UBA)is a highway segment designation which may vary in size and which recognizes existing areas of commercial activity or future nodes or various types of centers of commercial activity within a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown ,J • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Regional Planning Requirements Metro's 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center, defined as "compact,mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." Town Centers are described as the central focus of community life, serving residents living within two or three miles. Some key objectives for developing Metro-designated 2040 Centers include: • Promoting more intensive mixed-use development. • Providing infrastructure to support more intensive development • Creating effective local and regional transportation connections to and within the center for all travel modes. • Providing public spaces and distinct center identification. • Recognizing the natural environment as a desired amenity. 2. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street, the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function, but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. In general, downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios.Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L . averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions,Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial, office,residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general, there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek, part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown, the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result,the area has developed without many of the pedestrian-oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots, which are zoned R-4.5,R-12 (PD),R-25, C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary,Downtown is important to Tigard residents; many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character& Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a`focal point' for the community," and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning, design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas,public transit centers, Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown 3 • - • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks • 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing;auto-dependant uses;industrial, manufacturing;and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design,development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety,accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types,including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a"traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its • Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant, compact, mixed-use area with housing,retail and employment opportunities. 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials,particularly in the building fronts and streetscape.Also develop appropriate density, height,mass, scale, architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Utilize form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information, urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines, standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks, plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses, public spaces and transit. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown } • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity.to, from,and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system,including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown, such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT'S Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways,entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot,and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" . palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. • 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment/ facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. • 11.D.2 Provide public,including members of the development community,with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 7 Downtown. • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Action Chart: Downtown Action Timeline Who Implements Short Medium Long (City Departments) _Term Term Term Ongoing Next 5 6 to 10 � 11+ Years Years I_Years 11.A FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN URBAN VILLAGE 1 Develop Design Guidelines for the X ■. CD-LR,CD-CP Downtown Urban Renewal Area 2 Utilize form based code principles that X _-- CD-LR,CD-CP are consistent with state law 3 Adopt non-conforming use standards X CD-LR,CD-CP 4 Develop code measures to mitigate X CD LR,CD-CP compatibility issues Provide areas where community events, 5 farmer's markets,or other events can be X X CD-LR,CD-CP held 6 Designate the Downtown area as the X --- CD-LR preferred location for civic land uses Promote an awareness of the 7 X CD-LR,CD-CP Downtown's histo 8 Monitor performance of design --- X CD-LR,CD-CP guidelines,land use regulations 11.B DEVELOP AND IMPROVE OPEN SPACE AND INTEGRATE NATURAL FEATURES Acquire property and easements to 1 protect natural resources and provide X X CD-LR,PW .ublic o•en s•ace areas 2 Develop"green connections" X X CD-LR,CD-E,PW Incorporate public art into the design of 3 •ublic s•aces. X X CD-LR,CD-E,PW 4 Enhance the landscape and habitat of X -■ X CD-LR,CD-E,PW Fanno Creek 11.0 DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE STREET AND CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 1 Develop Access and Circulation Plan X _-_ CD-E,CD-LR Address public safety and land use 2 compatibility issues in the design and X CD-E,CD-LR mana•ement of the trans•ortation s stem 3 Investigate assigning different roadway X -■. CD-E,CD-LR designations 4 Implement an integrated pedestrian X -■. CD-E,CD-LR streetscape and landscape plan Special Areas of Concern 8 Downtown • • DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT l i Action - '7 f Who implements. Medium t o . �.• '; . ` .f ftpePedments) ,� `tai. tno • • Acquire property and easements to 5 implement streetscape and landscape X X X CD-E,CD-LR plans,and new streets 6 Use the"unifying elements"palette to ■ X CD-E,CD-LR design streetscape improvements Emphasize sustainable practices in street .-■ X CD-E,CD-LR design Encourage the formation of a Downtown 8 Parking and Transportation Management X CD-LR Association 9 Encourage ow tain n buildings features in the X -■ X CD-LR design of Downtown buildings Incorporate the Downtown's public 10 investments into the City's Public Facility X X CD-E,CD•LR Plan and im•lementin• CIP 11.D OTHER ACTION MEASURES Develop and implement strategies to 1 address concerns with homeless persons X CD-LR and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park 2 Provide public with regular informational X -■ X CD-LR updates on Urban Renewal progress CD-LR=Community Development-Long Range Planning CD-CP=Community Development- Current Planning CD-E= Community Development—Engineering PW= Public Works Special Areas of Concern 9 Downtown Q • • • TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: February 21, 2007 TO: Mark Vandomelen, Residential Plans Examiner FROM: City of Tigard Planning Division STAFF CONTACT: Sean Family.Associate Planner (x2420) Phone: (503) 639-4171 • Fax: (503) 684-7297 Email: Seannn,tigard-or.gov COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA)2006-00002 • - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES - REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies,and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5,R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2, 3, 5, 6 and 11,Metro Functional Plan Tide 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5, 10, and 12. Attached are the Code Amendments for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: March 1, 2007. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Planning Division, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: • Name&Number of Person Commenting film/ .)7 PLEASE PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD LOGO IN THE LEGAL NOTICE SECTION OF TIGARD TIMES, THE FOLLOWING: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on Monday March 19, 2007 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center-Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon. Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060E. The Planning Commission's review is for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council on the request. The Council will then hold a public hearing on the request prior to making a decision. Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division (Staff contact: Sean Family) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-639-4171, or by email to sean@tigard-or.gov. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES - REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District.The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code_amendments LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2,5, 10, and 12. (THERE IS NO MAP TO BE PUBLISHED WITH THIS LEGAL PUBLICATION. THANK YOU) TT PUBLISH DATE: March 1, 2007 MAILING / NOTIFICATION RECORDS • • Agenda Item # • Meeting Date April 24,2007 • COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY • City Of Tigard, Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2006-00002 to Add New Downtown Goals,Policies,and Action Measures Prepared By: Sean Farrelly Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: CR4 • ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall Council approve the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA 2006-00002) to add new Goals,Policies, and Action Measures applicable to the Downtown Urban Renewal District to enable implementation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Council is requested to approve the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add new Downtown Goals,Policies,and Action Measures. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The findings and recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) were accepted by Council on September 27, 2005. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad- based public involvement, incorporating high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. In May 2006,Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. The proposed amendment would replace the Downtown chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and add new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. It would provide the legislative foundation to make future changes in the Downtown Land Use program, such as new zoning and design regulations. Separate and joint work sessions were held with the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission to review the proposed language. On March 19, 2007, a public hearing on the proposed code amendment was held before the Planning Commission. Public testimony was given. (Staff has responded to this testimony in the attached memo dated March 29, 2007.) The Planning Commission recommended making a minor change in the wording of one Action Measure and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. • 1:\LRPLN\Council t\laterials\2007\4-24-07 A1S Public Hearing-CPA 2006-00002.doc 1 • • • CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal 2: "Continue to Support Implementation of the Downtown Plan." ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: An Ordinance approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2006-00002 to update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Attachment 2: Memo to Council dated March 26, 2007, summarizing proposed Comprehensive Plan changes.- Attachment 3: Map of Urban Renewal District Exhibit A: Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) Amendments Exhibit B: Staff Report to the Planning Commission Exhibit C: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - March 19, 2007 Exhibit D: Council Memo dated March 29, 2007 (Response to March 19th Public Hearing Issues and Comments) FISCAL NOTES Not Applicable 1:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2007\4-24-07 AIS Public Hearing-CPA 2006-00002.doc 2 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ID TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 07- AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 2006-00002 TO REPLACE THE DOWNTOWN CHAPTER OF VOLUME II OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADD NEW GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES AND AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 5.5 WHEREAS, the findings and recommendations of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan were accepted by City Council Resolution 05-62; and WHEREAS, a recommendation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan Implementation Action Plan is to make code and regulatory adjustments to be consistent with the vision of the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has proposed an amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 adding new Goals, Policies, and Action Measures for the Downtown Urban Renewal District and updating Policy 5.5; and WHEREAS, the Tigard Planning Commission held a public meeting on March 19, 2007, and recommended approval of the proposed CPA 2006-00002 (with a minor revision) by motion and with unanimous vote; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2007, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2006-00002, hear public testimony, and apply applicable decision-making criteria. NOW, THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) is amended to include the text in "EXHIBIT A." SECTION 2: The findings and conclusions contained in the Staff Report dated March 7, 2007, the Planning Commission meeting minutes for March 19, 2007, and memorandum to Council dated March 29, 2007, are adopted by reference ("EXHIBIT B", "EXHIBIT C", and "EXHIBIT D" respectively). • ORDINANCE No.07- Page 1 • 0 SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of , 2007. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of , 2007. Craig Dirksen, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 07- Page 2 • ATTACHMENT 2 V MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner RE: Proposed Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) DATE: March 26, 2007 The purpose of this memo is to inform the City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) which updates the Downtown Goals,Policies, and Action Measures prior to the Council's April 17111 work session and April 24th public hearing. At the public hearing on March 19th, 2007, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed amendment (with one minor modification.) Background: Relationship to Comprehensive Plan Update City staff is currently engaged in updating Tigard's Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures is a precursor to the format of the rest of the Comprehensive Plan update. Although it will be amending the current code, this amendment will reflect the format of the updated code,which will be made up of Findings, Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of an extensive citizen involvement process. It was accepted by the Council in September,2005. Its goal is to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." • • What Does the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Propose? The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures will be the legislative foundation for future changes in the Downtown Land Use program, such as new zoning and design regulations. Most of the content of the Amendment was taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Public Hearing Comments and Responses At the public hearing, a number of individuals testified. Please refer to the attached response to the issues of Mike Stevenson and John Frewing. Planning Commission's Recommended Change The Planning Commission recommended modifying the wording of Action Measure 11.A.2. Its recommendation was to say "consider utilizing form based code principles," rather than "utilize form based code principles." Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. The proposal is consistent with all applicable State Goals, Metro Functional Plan, and Comprehensive Plan policies. Next Steps If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved, staff will continue the process of developing specific language to amend the Development Code and craft design regulations for the Downtown. Stakeholder involvement and review will be necessary prior to proposing Development Code Amendments. NV 1 1 1 , , L , , ,____J . 1 prImpi-\11,, ' ri„.°1191, mil LE.„,,,s ,, ur 1 _____ ,to LW • / it L, 1 MINN , .40'A,wimpqns i Ilia"R.7 , Nc,Lifili. 1 !L [,1 4%HD) .ita,„ 10 , ... ., 411.4.11.=unri 1 ,:111 111 " 6 tc)-i-wr • 4 t> ÷0,s -0 g -1,-, , / / 't■*III w.4 1.46%e4 k sK\ 0 eitifr:,.- t. IOU_ e''''' 0/4 lik #0,..,. . 1111,..., %.tit* -4-eP*4.#4.14. jr!n'''' rr------/TO le 45,1.44,11,':06')spa, --.::,,:t'"'''' .las,,,5° 1 LAI --------- ...-- 4 / I .10 '14,'Ile M ,.., ,, (11,., -„ - , N., . - , . Mir.- 111111 '''''c'c' MI <,-;:,40.4,... . .<1/2,1, 464, Akv, ../... allies, 02 la -.Iwo 44i)s 1 'Al„tr .44,-% 140.7tiP.-.::s°":0;pe' L.:4 ' ' /„ / , // ■ 4 ,44t7:3,-.-.4 * ',4kp 4o- v ,. .' ''*'.,* .'"a1,4,0 g ,/ • „of - 't v- — 6' l' '''.'it,. '' 4,--' iir *I—p .:‘,,,,,, 44o m ,• / - 9 • / ii CBS . �. .��frI I—L A i/ r;, 6 1 11! 4•.. ,,,,r il \\/ \kSt-411 , ,4\:t__6/.6 / /'6-'''S/41,9',t v■A h, 72\ Q\ ''4 ,:. ii "' WO 1 ♦ , I\ \ �\ ♦♦ , .. ' \' i -y T� - \ 1 c2 ii I i \\\\I! f 5- Zoning Classifications i ..-. { - Urban.Renewal Boundary _.Urban Renewal'District - - — __ - r w Zoning Districts ATTACHMENT 3 :Y,-y, - =t' City:of,Tigard: 4 - - -- - 1•d r i s g,a p l n:.:C o®u u i i y p:.-!,i umt.,.r..::•:=::;:-:- - - .. ytit:;:? - - - - ` _ Fee? - --- • EXHIBIT A 5 . E C O N O M Y Commentary : The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states that more housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core.Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor,the"1'DIP does call for medium-density, stand alone housing types, such as townhouses,in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. • Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. • Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in strikcthrough. POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED ABOVE TIIE FIRST FLOOR IN TI 1E CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE TIIE SECOND FLOOR IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS. (THE—DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SI LALL BE—DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WI I TIIE R 40 DISTRICTS.) IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIA FE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.)AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMI"TIED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES-; WITHIN THE MUC, MUR 1 AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER,WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMUTED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND MUR 2) TO R-50 (MUC,MUE 1 AND MUR 1):AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMI 1"I'ED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. • • 1 1 . S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work,and play.and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center,dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002,with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. A state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process.A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement,including community dialogues,workshops.open house,and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP).The TDIP set forth a vision to create"a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented.accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely. Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal.including Tax Increment Financing.are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area.It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street,the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function,but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown In general. downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions.Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial,office, residential and.public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general,there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature.The creek,part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD).While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown,the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result, the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots,which are zoned R-4.5.R-12 (PD).R-25.C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary.Downtown is important to Tigard residents;many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character& Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a`focal point' for the community." and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented.accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset.and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work.play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning.design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality.attractiveness,and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard.while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices,community services.public plazas,public transit centers.etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependant uses: industrial manufacturing;and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue.subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design.development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety.accessibility,and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types.including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area. adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet. shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system.especially bus and Commuter Rail.Highway 99W.Highway 217 and Interstate 5. the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant.compact.mixed-use area with housing.retail and employment opportunities. Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown 410 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials.particularly in the building fronts and streetscape. Also develop appropriate density,height,mass,scale,architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Consider utilizing form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events. farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic Iand uses. • 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information.urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines,standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks,plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses.public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from,and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown.such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways.entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot. and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment / facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public.including members of the development community.with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown Exhibit B Agenda Item: Hearing Date: March 19,2007 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THEY,: • 9 PLANNING COMMISSION F- • FOR�THE;.CITY R N OF TIGAD OREGO T[GA RD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA) CPA2006-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend Section 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Goals, Policies, and Action Measures as a basis to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. The amendment would also update Section 5 to allow complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal District. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 LOCATION: Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD,C-G,C-P,R-4.5,R-12(PD),R-25 COMP PLAN: Commercial,Residential APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2,3 5,6,8,9 and 11;Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5,8,9, 10 and 12. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that.the'PlanningCominission recommend approval to the Tigard City Council to amend the Tigard Comprehensive.Plan to replace,Section'11:1 and:amend Policy 5.5 as determined through the:publis.hearing.process ' = STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 1 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play,and to serve as a community gathering place,in Downtown Tigard. The current planning effort to create a "heart" in Downtown Tigard dates back to 2002. A group of citizens and business owners were inspired to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on the planned Commuter Rail station in Downtown. A more extensive planning process was made possible with a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. Because of the Downtown Improvement Plan citizen involvement process, the City of Tigard was awarded the 2005 Good Governance Award from the League of Oregon Cities. The award recognizes exceptional city programs that unite citizens within a community. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (I'DIP) The planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for the Urban Renewal District in the May 2006 election. Proposal Description In order to implement the "I'DIP, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are necessary. These will establish the "legislative foundation" on which other land use actions and amendments to the Tigard Development Code can be based, including specific zoning map, land use and design standards. The first step is to completely replace Section 11.1 of the Comprehensive Plan, which covers the Downtown Central Business District of Neighborhood Planning Organization #1. The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures would be applicable to the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District (which encompasses a slightly larger area than the Central Business District zone referred to in Section 11.) The City is currently updating the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. Each section of the updated Plan will include Findings, Goals,Policies, and Action Measures. Here is an explanation of these terms: Findings are the written statements of relevant facts that are the basis for the Goals,Policies, and Action Measures. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 2 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • Goals are the broad-based statement of the community's desires. In this case the proposed Goal is taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Policies are general statements intended to guide the City now and in the future. They provide general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's land use, codes, and standards. Action Measures are more specific short and medium term actions that will implement the Goals and Policies. This term will replace "Implementation Strategies" found in the existing Comprehensive Plan.They can be evaluated on a regular basis-every two years,to check on their progress. Action Measures are not required to be referenced when new land use codes and standards are proposed for adoption. In addition, Policy 5.5 of the Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated to allow for the opportunity for a variety of housing types called for in the TDIP, throughout the Downtown Urban Renewal District. SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria,findings and conclusions •Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 o Chapter 18.390 • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Policies 1, 2, 3,5, 6, 8,and 9 •Applicable Metro Standards o Title 6 • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1,2, 5, 8,9, 10 and 12 City Department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this title and zoning district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures This chapter establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. Section 18.390.060.G states that the recommendation by the Commission, and the decision by the Council, shall be based on consideration of the following STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 3 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • • factors (reviewed above), including: 1) Statewide Planning Goals, 2) applicable federal or state statues or regulations, 3) applicable Metro regulations, 4) applicable comprehensive plan policies, and 5) applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above,staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code and recommends the Planning Commission forward this proposed amendment to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the comprehensive plan identified the following relevant policies for the proposed amendments: Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.1.1: General Policies This policy states that all future legislative changes shall be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Regional Plan adopted by Metro. As indicated under the individual Statewide and Regional Plan goals applicable to this proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goals and the Regional Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.13.: Citizen Involvement These policies state that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program, provide opportunities for citizen involvement appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and that information on land use planning issues shall be available in understandable form for all interested citizens. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad-based public involvement. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement,including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. The May 2006 Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. In addition, the City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen committee, has reviewed and suggested changes that were incorporated into the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This policy has also been met by publishing notice of the Planning Commission public hearing that was in the March 1, 2007 edition of the Tigard Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Comprehensive Plan Policy 3:Natural Features and Open Space 3.4 Natural Areas These policies protect natural resources, including wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat. The proposed amendment satisfies Policies 3.4.1-3.4.2 because it strengthens protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 4 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • 3.5. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Policies 3.5.1 The City shall encourage private enterprise and intergovernmental agreements which will provide for open space, recreation lands, facilities, and preserve natural, scenic and historic areas in a manner consistent with the availability of resources. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2 which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to be a central gathering place for the.community and to provide a recreation area for such activities as a farmers market and performances. 3.5.3 The City has designated the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek, its tributaries, and the Tualatin River as greenway,which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.3 which states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Additionally, the I'DIP calls for the expansion of the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park, by purchasing additional property in the floodplain. 3.5.4 The City shall provide an interconnected pedestrian/bike path throughout the City. This policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.3.1, which states that the Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. In addition, the TDIP calls for a "rail-to-trail" path to be created in present railroad right-of-way. Comprehensive Plan Policy 5:Economy 5.3 The City shall improve and enhance the portions of the Central Business District as the focal point for commercial, high density residential, business, civic, and professional activity creating a diversified and economically viable core area The TDIP seeks to improve and diversify Downtown Tigard's economic and employment mix. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants, entertainment and personal services;b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing;c) Civic functions (government offices,community services,public plazas,public transit centers, etc); d) Professional employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks." This proposed policy is aimed at facilitating the development of an urban village,promoting the retention of existing businesses,and creating opportunities for new investment. The proposal would also amend Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5 to make it possible to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. More housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DO\VNTO\CAN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 5 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • Comprehensive Plan Policy 6:Housing 6.1.1 The City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This policy is satisfied because the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6, which states that "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." This policy is also satisfied by proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5. which would create the opportunity for complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The change will likely result in increased housing choices at a variety of rent and price levels. Comprehensive Plan Policy 8: Transportation 8.1.2 Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation. This policy is satisfied by the inclusion of these proposed Policies: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. Collectively these policies aim to develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles and transit. Projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail station, and expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes will further increase transportation options. Comprehensive Plan Policy 9:Energy 9.1.3 The City shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation, design, and construction. The main goal of the TDIP is to create an urban village,which would result in an opportunity to live, shop, recreate, and work in a pedestrian-friendly environment. The envisioned place would allow residents to conserve energy by reducing their dependence on automobiles, as the area is presently well-served by transit. Future projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 6 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • station, expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes could further decrease reliance on the automobile. Additionally the TDIP expresses a preference for sustainable practices in construction of new Downtown buildings and infrastructure. These proposed Action Measures would encourage this type of design: 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Metro Functional Plan Title 6: Central City, Regional Centers, Town Centers and Station Communities Requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center. Centers are defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan fulfilled the requirement to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would institute the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's goal of "creating a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the • community that is pedestrian-oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to "live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Policies and Actions Measures would enable the future adoption of code and policies to implement the goal. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable Metro regulations. THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1 — Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal was met through the extensive public involvement in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, which included a Task Force of 24 citizens, community dialogues, workshops, an open house, and a public survey. The City Center Advisory Commission,a citizen group,has reviewed and provided input to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 7 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • This goal has also been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice has been published in the Tigard Times newspaper prior to the public hearing. Two Public Hearings are being held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which public input is welcome. In addition, letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Statewide Planning Goal 2 —Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The proposed amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report; therefore,the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal S—Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas and sites. The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal because the proposed changes strengthen protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Existing Goal 5 protections for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District will remain in place. Statewide Planning Goal 8-Recreational Needs This goal aims to provide for the siting of facilities for the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. This goal is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2,which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to provide a range of recreation activities such as farmers markets and performances. This will become a. central gathering place for the community and increase recreational opportunities for residents. Statewide Planning Goal 9-Economic Development This goal aims to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services;b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing;c) Civic functions (government offices, community services,public plazas,public transit centers,etc);d) Professional STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND AU!ION MEASURES PAGE 8 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks." This policy is consistent with Goal 9 as it is aimed at facilitating the development of a vibrant and economically sound city core.The'''DIP calls for opportunities for new housing,commercial, and employment which would create a thriving urban village. Statewide Planning Goal 10-Housing This goal aims to provide adequate housing for the needs of the community, region and state. One of the recommended catalyst projects in the ''DIP is to increase the number of housing units in the Downtown. This could increase the number of potential patrons for Downtown businesses and potential riders of the new Commuter Rail line. The proposed Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6 which states: "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." The proposed amendment is consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning Goal 12-Transportation The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." The proposed Amendment satisfies this goal with the inclusion of several Policies to Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and • Transit including: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting Iand uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride"activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system,especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. These proposed Policies would improve the safety, efficiency and economy of the transportation system in the Downtown Urban Renewal District and expand access to transportation options. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. • STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 9 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Building Division and Police Department, have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. The City of Tigard's Public Works had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and Metro, were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue,Tualatin Valley Water District,and Cleanwater Services were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of extensive public involvement. In order to implement the Plan, changes are needed to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code including new zoning and design standards. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would provide the "legislative foundation" to accomplish this. The proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. March 7_2007 PREPARED BY: Sean Farrelly DA'Z'E Associate Planner March 7 _2007 APPROVED BY: Ron Bunch DATE Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DO\VNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 10 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • Exhibit C CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes March 19, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, and Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Vermilyea Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Long Range Planning Manager; Sean Fancily, Associate Planner; Jerree Lewis,Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Planning Manager Ron Bunch reported that the Tree Board met on March 7th to discuss its proposed charge statement to develop a tree protection program. The program is intended to look at trees in a larger context rather than as street trees or trees in development property. The Tree Board also reviewed the Costco tree planting plan. Costco had been conditioned to have 35% tree coverage in their parking lot. They came back with a tree planting plan that they would like to try to meet the standards. The secretary reported that the new Commissioners will be appointed by Council on March 27th. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the February 26, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 3-0. Commissioners Caffall and Walsh abstained. It was moved and seconded to approve the March 5, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. President Inman abstained. 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 1 • • REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals,Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code amendments. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P,R-4.5, R-12 (PD),R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 10, and 12. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A) for the proposed amendment for an update of Downtown goals,policies, and action measures to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). He advised that the amendment would not change the Development Code. It lays the groundwork for future changes; any specific development code changes will be subject to further public hearings. Farrelly noted that with the new format, action measures will replace the current implementation strategies in the Comprehensive Plan. This particular amendment is needed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The current land use in the Comp Plan that deals with the Downtown is inadequate. Section 11, Special Areas of Concern that deals with the Downtown, treats it primarily as a shopping area. This amendment will reflect the multi-functional role of the Downtown. Another part of the Comp Plan that needs to be changed is Economy Policy 5.5 which restricts residential development above the first floor. Farrelly reviewed the goals of the TDIP. He advised that most of the language for this proposed amendment was taken from the TDIP. The policies and action measures are organized into 3 categories: Facilitate the development of an urban village;Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features; and Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles, and transit. This amendment would apply only to the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. Staff reviewed the proposed amendment against the applicable criteria and found it to be consistent with present Comp Plan policies and Development Code policies. The amendment is also consistent with applicable Metro requirements and all applicable Statewide Goals. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to City Council. President Inman asked about the new action measure 11A.2. She asked if Tigard was actually pursuing form based code (FBC). Farrelly advised that this action measure would only pursue 1-'13C in ways that are consistent with Oregon Land Use Law. We might not PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 2 • • adopt FBC, but we may use some of the principles in the eventual new development code. This action measure allows us the opportunity, but does not require that we use FBC. Vice-President Walsh asked for clarification that the Commission was being asked to approve only a change to the Comprehensive Plan adopting the format and structure of the proposed Comp Plan that the Commission will see later. This one section is being approved ahead of time;it will be put in place of the existing section of the Comp Plan and nothing more. Farrelly concurred, saying that this starts the process to allow for further changes and gets the process moving along. It does not change existing Development Code regulations or land use laws. Before changes to the Development Code happen, there will be more outreach to property owners and stakeholders. PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN FAVOR John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane,Tigard 97223 commended staff and the Downtown Task Force for developing this portion of the Comprehensive Plan. He is concerned about the explanation for form based code, saying that the language states, "The City will utilize form based design where consistent with the State regulations." It doesn't say may use it. He would like to endorse the language as written. He disagrees that this section is outside the Comp Plan. It is Section 11 of the Comp Plan;it is the Comp Plan. This is the first piece of the Comp Plan to come before the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption. He wants to get it right the first time. In that effort, he has a list of issues that he brought up (Exhibit B). He asked that the Commission to continue the hearing so that these matters can be addressed. Mike Swanda, 13285 SW Village Glenn Drive,Tigard 97223, testified that he owns and operates My Time Beads at 12200 SW Main Street. He thinks the TDIP is a wonderful goal. He had one comment about Section 11.1.3 which states, "The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependent uses;industrial manufacturing; and industrial services uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village." He would like to see more clarification for the term "auto-dependent"uses. He asked what the term meant. Jonae Armstrong, 16333 SW Stahl Dr.,Tigard 97223,Tigard testified that she works at Washington Square. She has been watching this process and urged the Commission to continue the approval process to go on to City Council. She believes it is important to focus on the Downtown and offered her encouragement. Lisa Olson, 14720 SW Cabernet Ct.,Tigard 97224, advised that she was a member of the Downtown Tigard Task Force,was the chair for the Streetscape work group, and will be on the steering committee for the Fanno Creek Master Plan. She encouraged the Commission to continue to look at keeping the community involved in this process and to encourage City staff to involve community members. There is a large number of people who have been working on this and understand what's going on. She would like the City to utilize the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 3 • • resources available in community members to continue to have the community involved in the process every step of the way. Phil Yount, 11222 SW Cottonwood Lane,Tigard 97223, stated that he was undecided about the amendment. He has been an interested observer and an occasional participant in some of the surveys and task force hearings, so he is aware of what's going on. He supports the TDIP proposal in general. He was impressed with John Frewing's testimony. While he encourages the Commission to proceed with the process, he urged them to look carefully at Mr. Frewing's critique. What we do needs to be done right. Mike Stevenson testified that he owns a business at 9040 SW Burnham Street,Tigard 97223. He has been involved with the Downtown Task Force since the beginning and is happy with the progression. The TDIP affects him personally because he owns a large piece of property in the Downtown. He has concerns about Section 11.1.3 to not permit any new land uses, such as warehousing, auto-dependent uses, etc. If this process is going to take 20-25 years, he will be put in a "no-man's position" as far as expanding his business is concerned. Section 11.1.4 states that existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. He wonders what this means and.he is concerned about what we will do with existing businesses. Mr. Stevenson has another thought about the staff report,under 3.5.3 — "The City has designated the 100-year floodplain ... Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain." Does that mean he will be required to give open land to the City? He asked for clarification on this. Staff answered that this code section is an existing policy. If he wanted to do some development, would he be required to donate some land? Staff advised that currently in the Tigard Development Code, there are specific standards that require protection and preservation of the floodplain. This was quoted in the staff report to show how the proposal is consistent with the existing Plan. The City cannot essentially exact property for dedication. Since this existing this policy is probably 23 years old,it may be out of date. However,it is the criteria we have to use now to judge the current proposal to make sure it's consistent with existing policy. The entire Comprehensive Plan will be updated, including the Natural Resources section. We have to work with the Comp.Plan we have now. Mr.Stevenson will be subject to the policy as it exists currently. It may very well be amended in the future,but the existing policies had to be used as a tool to judge whether the new proposal meet the requirements of the existing Plan. President Inman noted that this is in a different chapter which will be reviewed at a later time. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN OPPOSITION None PLANNING.COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 4 • • • REBUTTAL Planning Manager Ron Bunch responded to Mr. Frewing's concerns. He noted that what Mr. Frewing spoke to, to a great deal,was the entire Comprehensive Plan, e.g., Goal 9 Economic Development; Goal 10 Housing; Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services; Goal 6 Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. This proposal is just one small part of the Comprehensive Plan. For example, in the Goal 9 Economic Development Rule that was quoted,in the Comprehensive Plan, there's a separate chapter that addresses Goal 9. The Industrial Lands Inventory,Analysis of Available Lands,Buildable Lands Inventory, etc., take place in the context of that particular section of the Comp Plan. This proposal is looking at a specific district—the Downtown. These tools (goals,policies, action measures) are needed to start having the broad community dialog to begin to implement the Urban Renewal District. The sections of ORS 197 that Mr. Frewing spoke to are out of context for this particular hearing. Regarding the process, the TDIP is a study that was accepted, but not adopted. Mr. Frewing referenced the need to have facts that are relevant and recent. This application was coordinated with the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). DLCD found the proposal to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Administrative Rules. Regarding the facts,Bunch advised that this is a legislative hearing;we are obligated to look at the facts according to specific criteria in the Comp Plan and other criteria. Staff reviewed the criteria and found that the proposal complies with all the applicable criteria. As a legislative amendment, essentially the City Council can determine what facts it wishes to rely upon. The facts that we consider relevant are the ones we have on hand—we can't constantly go back and get new facts and refer to them. We have to begin the process and stop it at some time. Regarding zoning classifications and mapping, this hearing is about creating the tools — goals,policies,and action measures. In referencing the maps, there are discrepancies in the TDIP and in the Community Development Code and in the Urban Renewal District. This proposal is just to establish the goals, policies, and action measures. This proposal only applies to the Urban Renewal District. Regarding the moving target of the floodplain,where the landuse designation should be, etc., those are refinements that will be built from the goals, policies, and action measures. The public amenities associated with the Plan are part of the development regulations that will come later. We need to have the tools first before we can build development regulations. When we amend the Development Code,we will use the tools to judge the Development Code Amendment—does it or does it not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding comments about the interrelated use of land, ORS 197, these comments apply to the whole Comprehensive Plan. Each element does not have to be judged against that, but when we have the whole Comp Plan put together in one document, we'll have the whole range of issues within which to judge. We have to look at whole plan, not just one part. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 5 • • These goals, policies, and action measures will provide the legislative basis by which we can develop a Transportation System Plan refinement that can be adopted as part of the TSP. We will get there using these tools. A pre-application was done. The papers are in the file. A key item for staff was coordinating this with DLCD, Metro, ODOT,Trimet, and LCDC. We have not received any comments against the proposal. The Planning Commissioners asked the following questions: • Section 11.1.3 says it shall not permit new land uses,such as warehousing, etc. What is an example of an auto-dependent use business? Staff responded that new drive-thru businesses would be an example. The proposal does not prohibit people from driving Downtown. Will this affect current businesses? Existing drive-thru businesses would be grandfathered in as non-conforming uses. It would protect the current business, but would not allow for expansion of the non-conforming business. The current non-conforming use standards that apply to the whole City allow 20% expansion. Specific code language for Downtown non-conforming businesses will need to be discussed. • Staff explained that the current non-conforming use standard allows existing non- conforming businesses to be grandfathered in and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. If the non-conforming use is discontinued for more than 6 months,it would not be permitted to come back. The new business would have to conform to current applicable zoning standards. Staff believes that in the CBD zone, there are several properties that have been exempted from that requirement. Business owners were encouraged to work with staff on these issues. Staff noted that the current CBD zoning does not allow industrial uses. All existing industrial businesses in the Downtown are considered non-conforming and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. When we begin to develop the Code,we will determine the specifics on how to deal with non-conforming uses in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested doing an outreach to business owners that own non- conforming businesses in the Downtown. Staff answered that the Code development phase will include that type of outreach. • Under 11.1.3,would the Fanno Creek Microbrewery be allowed or not allowed? Staff answered that this is considered an eating establishment and would be an allowed use. Producing the microbrew would be considered auxiliary to the eating and drinking function. • Staff advised that industrial services provide services to manufacturing,warehousing, construction, etc., that are necessary to keep those services going. Some examples are janitorial services; machinery repair and refurbishing, and repair of lumber equipment. In some codes, it includes fleet operations to maintain trucking fleets and equipment. It varies by region. • Has staff talked to people involved in a performing arts center or a farmers' market? Broadway Rose Theatre is now beginning a capital improvement project to have their own performing arts center. Staff noted that farmers'market people are aware of the plans. The performing arts center is a catalyst project that is more long range projects, maybe 10-15years PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 6 . • out. Commissioner Dougherty suggested involving more than just the Downtown boundaries in the discussion. Ron Bunch noted that these specific activities are considered action measures, which fall into placeholder categories for implementation. The statements which have real legislative intent are the goals and policies;action measures are things that we would like to implement and that we could use as a gauge or measurement to see how we're doing. For example, if Broadway Rose finds another place,perhaps we should consider another kind of performing arts in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested adding a definitions section. Staffanswered that the Plan will have a definitions section that will also include a list of acronyms. • President Inman said she thinks the language on the form based code principles reads fairly strong. She would like the language to state that it gives us the opportunity to utilize form based code,but not state that we will utilize it. The Commission likes the wording, "Consider utilizing form based codes." PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED President Inman feels good with the modification of 11.A.2 to say"consider" rather than "utilize" form based code. She hopes that the Commission gets the same participation when these issues come back so nothing will be dropped when we get to the implementation phase. Commissioner Walsh thinks it's a great start, the structure works, the language is supported. Commissioner Anderson noted that these tools can help with other committees and community involvement. He likes the language and the definition sheets. He supports the proposal. Commissioner Dougherty would like staff to seriously consider the comments that Mr. Frewing made. She thinks there should be definitions to prevent confusion and misunderstandings down the road. She agrees with President Inman on the dealing with the verbiage of form based code. Commissioner Walsh moved to recommend approval to City Council of Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2006-00002,Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update Downtown Goals,Policies and Action Measures,with the change to 11.A.2 to change the language to add "consider utilizing form based codes"in place of what is there,based on the staff report as presented and testimony given. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. OTHER BUSINESS Staff advised that the there will be a meeting with Council on April 17th to discuss Planning Commission liaison duties. It was suggested that maybe Planning Commissioners and members of other committees could alternate attending each other's meetings. It was also suggested that staff might take a bigger role in information sharing. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 7 • The Commissioners discussed the Form Based Code subcommittee. It was noted that form based code may be beneficial to the City and that having a subcommittee to review examples from other cities and make a recommendation is a good idea,however the committee needs parameters and a set timeline. Members of the CCAC and the Planning Commission feel they need more information before they can make a decision about form based code. Ron Bunch stated that the important thing for staff is that we're burning time;we need to move this along. Council would like to have a worksession in May about urban design in the Downtown. There will be a yes-no decision by Council soon. Bunch advised that staff has been directed to get a clear representation of what the future Downtown will look like in architectural form,block size, transportation,etc. Once we have that,we can then work backward to determine the kind of code we need to achieve that model. There are some codes and standards that can be done no matter what method we use. Staff can begin now to get an idea of what the Downtown will look like. Staff will take the leadership to put together information and work with the City Manager and Council to educate them so they can help make a decision. The subcommittee can provide an endorsement. It was decided that the subcommittee could meet before regularly scheduled Planning Commission meetings beginning on April 2nd. Commissioners Inman and Anderson agreed to serve on the committee. Commissioner Walsh suggested having a short meeting prior to the public hearing on April 2nd to meet the new Commissioners and talk about the meeting process. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. Jerree wis,Planning ommission Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 8 • • _ + Jxi; o J,. sa , t ,tee • 4K. . , ' :. : :,A yL'fm v;.• ' fi .1 J" .:Y- Y Comprehensive Plan Amendment �t:.Fc�' e A v .r'° p ��� ' y�:', y�'`+ r `��� � c+'�L�f Y •s,,,Ctlx0 -+�1K ' '� '1.71 i• k A-v .� 14-, g e r' , .. x, . 109 • • Comprehensive 1 "n S,, U27q, ` A"+{Se ra v`. J. -:;--.1-•"-- SS'',� �4 At..e�.'r,M.?,1.+^v.+r r t'. �',2^' . will be completely .e �yi a� r Si', l Gkl C ` �` 1.4 ,.b " 1 t '� �f ' I.. A( updated in the next 4 :m.., ;k.�•v ;;:. . tF- ,it., f . , t t> r ( 41 t C , lr4• x ' ` `•:i3;1:9� Ei. ,..�4t r.-, .e r, year. i �� . PPS ,1 .y ', ."fir. ,,r ,t$S. vS.4# . 'i•;:,,:..7.:.:'c t.7 ae 'O.il.4k-' .:I • This Amendment is a. ,; = k., J z *4 1= . i ,£? �t precursor to the •--- i4,.. .. .ti}.R-jz Y.�lS I:,2-§ v�,.. . `R�'s f yZ .>1,,.'r w s„f �. 7?�yy"�,,, . ,, } a format of the eventual w"'.• ,� a, r,y� 4 �. pi oe`:� =�yr�1�" w l4,t•-...i.'-'11-0°bf ' t!tle Up(lat d Comp Plan. F. l`� vac , J4' FF N q 1 `2'�'�4V-',,i ;904,L • \ r.lw ,,.;< �+r ct �Q. hs$�aj�iir� �.."+ ,?µsyJ " .. =ice .I;IY}6�p 4ya-�. .:t ..d 47 s ' ^."? x „_F'"a N` u�'ib •••'�'s1. - ,t,+54?i.�,i ra. r.k.� 'itM. ., t'yV-wi'.c: S• 4 {, ,'sr�L.,..0 -.• • • • • 1 • • Comprehensive Plan New Format: Comprehensive Plan New Format: • Action Measures are more specific short • Findings are the written statements of relevant and medium term actions that will facts;that are the basis for the Goals, Policies, and implement the Goals and Policies. They Action Measures. can be evaluated on a regular basis, to • Goals'are the broad-based statement of the check on their progress. community desires. • Policies are general statements intended to guide l the City now and the future They.provide eneral legislath a direction and are the foundation I ; i� for the City's land use,codes, and standards. "`a'• '""' • 2 P Why• Wh y is the Com >tehensive Plan Wh is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Needed? Amendment Needed? : • sIn order to implement Cry . ,, g, the'I"ig t !f11 d •,; It basis to mar aiuendmcn; 1j: Developmeding; y � r `�.�� new land use and design , q/ • Section 11.1 (Central ' s; 1 \ r.J regulations.) a �� '�� , . , ._~'Business District) and — �e'o'� 4.,, A.-2=_1-__-_- "Economy Policy 5.5. -/�` C\ E , `�' "a: l I ■w 1 �� € r ::10,--= • 3 • • • • Tigard Downtown..Improvemcnt Plan.:' Gui rent Comprehensive Plan c ��:r .,? ��+'�j`�;� •Sept: 2005. .Down wll ) l Lill, i1CiO1JtCCl • Current language.is ittsufficieni. • • • • #.'., � ' ' • Special.nreas of Concern Section 11.1 outdated- r A� D t y ,7` r •Lt.(. 2005: �'Lt)'ill j�riniarily focuses on Downtown n as a shopping • t Krnewal Plan (I ri ilnplelr,�nr • area: . • • y k ® 1171P) approved I CO11Qlny Policy 5;5.recommends residential 1 , i ? ,; �> , I • Incic n,e.i,f do vclopuient only above a the first floor. ;4,. ? 1 1 ,n May 2006:'Fax _ i rs 1 tl,�l l,(_li,�l�all��r�1(c1.0•e • ® ,>.pprovec 1)\'voters Ram • • 4 • • lTi ard Downtown Improvement Plan TDIP Citizen Involvement ► ;� Z Force A eitaren dai en plan with the go l of creating: • `'", (24 members) held 'c t vibrant and active urban villal;i at the heat t of the 4 .yt Community Dialogs, ■ calm ununit that i5 pedestrian-oracaucd,accessible by man Y 1 } Y � Neighl)orhood Meetings, modes of ti ttttirrnt itiun,tees nue5 and uses natural z, ,4 Open lionse,Survey resources as an :iSSea,and features a combination of uses that l . � I l ' f'-J�:t • Over 1300.people reached enable people to Ike, work,play and shop in an environment 1,..., .r.',-,,y >. ,y / ,�,, t p 1 �' citizen volunteers. that n unayucly'1'ihiud, b y • The City of Tigard was: I he I DIP is the"resource tc ort" for the.Comprehensive awarded the 2005 Good s ft P uj :_ i ;Plan Atnendment 'l*r_ Governance Award le League ofOe ouCttes � �� for the T:.IP citizen v planning effort 5 TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals� Policies, and • p Action Measures Action Measures 0 11.1, Facilitate the Development of an Most aineiidinenic t language taken directly from the Urban Village TDI1'; 7 Policies and 8 Action 111easures Goal: identical to the.T1)IP's goal. Policies .till Ac dull Measures fall under three e=4 t r�t� -categories to Section 11. n + ' .�—_...�gipFk.-v 'fin �i9 y� r z • • 6 • .. . .. . ..•.•,....,...•:.:. ...,..„,.......,,- , • TDiP. and .Pro osed Goals, Policies, and TDTP and Proposed. Goals, Policies, and. Action Measures 'Action Measures• t- _I1 2 Develop and Improve tlu Open Space .' o' 11..3 Develop Comprehensive Street and" . T System-find Inte'grate•Nltnral I eatiures: Circulation Improvements for Pedestria ts, 3 -oLctes 11'1(1 4 Action Me isures AutofIobiles,'Bicycles, and Transit G Policies and!O Action Measures • ms& 3 r T� :,79 1' -:`, O;.- .. c z m w�.lY I i`l ^ I apt 1,,,,1.4.;,:t 1:., `�{., • r ....,,...„... .,,,,,..__.... . ....... .,..! .:..,,,..,.:•„.. t, - - _ - .......-:,..,...:-...,..::::„.-,-,-..,..-,1:-, :- ., .. . , , . . . .: .. , . . , , . . . _ . .... ..... ,_„,... ,. . ... • • . . Downtown.Urban Renewal District Downtown Urban Renewal District • e ,ek• • �;�• KI�!-i'�' 1 I• Slightly larger area ' rr; 'l'.t__rsk1► Slightly i<irgel.area 17,,,,'i; � •f!:�\I 1, I than the. CBD zone • * a ' ` ��i���':� ;:T, t than die CBI) zone ' * 1;.: • Pro osed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Proposed Goals,Policies, and Action Measures P Applicable Tigard .Criteria Applicable State and Regional Criteria } • 1,g Ird Conlnlunity Development Code •Applicable Metro Standards • - Chapter P -Title 6 (Town Centers) ( liapter 18.390 •Statewide Planning Goals •Applicable Tigard Conlprchensive Plan Policies 1. Citizen Involvement .1.General policies 2. Land Use Planning 2.Citizen Involvement 3: Natural Feature~ Ind Open Space S. Natural Kesinlrccs • .re(lIlonly 8. Recreational needs L COn o I is D evl t Op 11. Cit 6:llquiilg • 10. HOlslllu S.Transportation: '9.I Berg} 12. 'Transportation • • 9 • Conclusion Recommendation 'Thxt the Planning;C:omnt.issiuu rcconunend The proposed Goals, Policies and Action -approval to the Tigard city c,onnc it t'i amend treasure are"consistent with the. the Tigard Cmnprchensn e Ilan to replace ' Section 11.1 and antent Policy 5.5 as determined ap)hcable Tigard,`?Zetro, and State through the public hearing process. regulations and goals. • .. ... -• `fir .. O "40, ,� a 4 ' k 1 • 10 • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and`Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the`Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan, such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP,its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek I00-year floodplain . . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail,street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances, setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts, invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • •• Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any `green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a`planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area . . .". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis. . . ."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District' that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP, multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding),Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? • • n MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments DATE: March 29, 2007 At the March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing a number of citizens gave public testimony in favor of the Amendment. Two of the speakers, Mike Stevenson and John Frewing, raised issues that will be addressed in this memo. Nonconforming Uses Mike Stevenson,a downtown property owner, raised a concern about the future of nonconforming uses under the new zoning that will be adopted. Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment contains Policy 11.1.4 which states "Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion." How to specifically treat nonconforming uses will be a major issue in the Development Code amendment process. Staff will work with stakeholders to develop acceptable regulations. An important point to consider is that many of the existing industrial and automotive repair uses in the Downtown are presently nonconforming uses. They became nonconforming when the zoning was last changed (to CBD) in 1983. Process and Procedural Issues John Frewing raised thirteen points (included as Exhibit B) regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff rebutted many of these points at the public hearing. Most of the points refer to processes set up to update entire Comprehensive Plans, rather than a "Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment"which amends a portion of an existing plan (as this one does). The City provided the required 45-day notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development,and received no 1 • • comment from them. If the agency had concerns with the proposed amendment, they would have provided comment to the City. Here is a rebuttal of each of Mr. Frewing's points. Mr. Frewing's comments are numbered and staff response follows: I Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. Response: All of the reports in the appendices of Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan are dated 2004 and 2005 and relied on contemporaneous data. It is unlikely that conditions in Downtown Tigard have changed to any significant degree in the past two to three years. The only data that appears to be six years old is the Census data (the latest data is from 2000) and Metro's Regional Transportation Plan completed in 2000 (currently being updated). 2 The`Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the 'Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment_ Response: The intention of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to change the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to implement the TDIP It will provide the legislative foundation to adopt the specific zoning and other land use regulations that are called for in the TDIP. After this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is adopted, the next stage will be to amend the Development Code to define and map specific new zoning districts. Comprehensive Plan Amendments do not,in and of themselves, change the zoning of properties. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to he included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. Response: The'I'DIP,in its entirety, contains extensive factual information that is the result of extensive research and technical analysis. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment takes its language directly from the TDIP. The TDIP will serve as the Volume 1 Resource document. In addition, as a legislative amendment, the City Council can determine what the relevant facts are to base its decision on. The Planning Commission has recommended adoption based on the findings (facts) and the conclusions in the staff report. 2 • • • 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP,its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP, Figure I and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TD1P Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TD1P,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain . . .". Response: The cover page of the staff report and elsewhere in the application identifies the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District as the location of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Included in this application is the map of the Urban Renewal District,which has been legally and specifically defined in the Urban Renewal Plan. As for the floodplain issue,Tigard relies on the most current FEMA floodplains to administer its code. Any previous maps referred to in the'TDIP are not pertinent. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 19 7.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any'green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being adopted under the "post- acknowledgement plan amendment process" outlined in ORS 197.610. DLCD was sent a copy of the proposed amendment 45 days in advance of the hearing and has not indicated any problems. Under 197.610,it is not necessary to "interrelate all functional and natural systems and activities." The update of the entire Comprehensive Plan will follow this requirement. The Green/Corridor Urban Creek as described in TDIP would be a man-made feature. The feasibility and scope of this proposed project will be determined as part 3 • • of the Downtown Urban Design Plan. A comprehensive plan would not be the appropriate forum to describe the details of this potential project. 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure I of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a 'planned sidewalk' for a non-existent Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. Response: City Council resolution 05-62 accepted the findings and recommendations of the '1'DIP, as well as the associated "I'DIP documents. Council directed staff to use the Plan's goals, objectives, and recommended actions as a guide for future programming of Downtown improvements. However if an appendix document within the TDIP is contradicted by another adopted Plan, the adopted Plan would take precedence. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 111/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area. . .". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR-0020(I Xb)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis. . .."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. Response: The regulations regarding economic development refer to Comprehensive Plans covering an entire jurisdiction, not a post-acknowledgement plan amendment such as this. The Comprehensive Plan, currently being updated,will address the entire City- wide Economic Development issues. The Economy chapter will include supply and demand of industrial and employment land, and related issues. 4 • S • HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus,it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP_ This reference to MUG 1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MIJC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. Response: Policy 5.5 provides policy specifying where complementary residential development shall be allowed in some commercial zones all around the city. It does not only apply to the Downtown. Policy 5.5 needed to be amended to allow complementary housing in all zones of the Urban Renewal District, (not only above the second floor as the Policy currently states). The zoning matters referred to by Mr. Frewing as "inconsistencies" actually are not related to the Downtown. The zones referred to are existing mixed used zones throughout the City. At any rate, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not instituting new zoning designations, but setting the legislative ground work to make future changes. I I A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. Response: A Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) is available on the City's website and up to date as of January 1, 2007. It is not necessary to include the BLI with this post- acknowledgement Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 13 Note to review: Dots the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? Response: All applicable procedures for City-initiated Type IV Amendments have been followed and meet the requirements of 18.380 and 18.390. 5 • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and`Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain. . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail, street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances,setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems, educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information,including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any`green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a `planned sidewalk'for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in_ this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the:.:;::; plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that couldSonabIy' ie` expected to locate or expand in the planning area. . .". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis . . . ."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding), Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? • • Exhibit D . on - . MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Family,Associate Planner RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments DATE: March 29, 2007 At the March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing a number of citizens gave public testimony in favor of the Amendment. Two of the speakers, Mike Stevenson and John Frewing, raised issues that will be addressed in this memo. Nonconforming Uses Mike Stevenson, a downtown property owner, raised a concern about the future of nonconforming uses under the new zoning that will be adopted. Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment contains Policy 11.1.4 which states "Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion." How to specifically treat nonconforming uses will be a major issue in the Development Code amendment process. Staff will work with stakeholders to develop acceptable regulations. An important point to consider is that many of the existing industrial and automotive repair uses in the Downtown are presently nonconforming uses. They became nonconforming when the zoning was last changed (to CBD) in 1983. Process and Procedural Issues John Frewing raised thirteen points (included as Exhibit B) regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff rebutted many of these points at the public hearing. Most of the points refer to processes set up to update entire Comprehensive Plans, rather than a "Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment"which amends a portion of an existing plan (as this one does). The City provided the required 45-day notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, and received no 1 • comment from them. If the agency had concerns with the proposed amendment, they would have provided comment to the City. Here is a rebuttal of each of Mr. Frewing's points. Mr. Frewing's comments are numbered and staff response follows: I Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. Response: All of the reports in the appendices of Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan are dated 2004 and 2005 and relied on contemporaneous data. It is unlikely that conditions in Downtown Tigard have changed to any significant degree in the past two to three years. The only data that appears to be six years old is the Census data (the latest data is from 2000) and Metro's Regional Transportation Plan completed in 2000 (currently being updated). 2 The`Background'and`Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the `Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the'TIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. Response: The intention of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to change the Goals, • Policies, and Action Measures to implement the TDIP It will provide the legislative foundation to adopt the specific zoning and other land use regulations that are called for in the TDIP. After this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is adopted, the next stage will be to amend the Development Code to define and map specific new zoning districts. Comprehensive Plan Amendments do not, in and of themselves, change the zoning of properties. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to he included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. Response: The TDIP,in its entirety, contains extensive factual information that is the result of extensive research and technical analysis. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment takes its language directly from the 'I'DIP. The TDIP will serve as the Volume 1 Resource document. In addition, as a legislative amendment, the City Council can determine what the relevant facts are to base its decision on. The Planning Commission has recommended adoption based on the findings (facts) and the conclusions in the staff report. 2 • • 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure I shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TRIP, Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure I,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP, page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain . . .". Response: The cover page of the staff report and elsewhere in the application identifies the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District as the location of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Included in this application is the map of the Urban Renewal District, which has been legally and specifically defined in the Urban Renewal Plan. As for the floodplain issue,Tigard relies on the most current FEMA floodplains to administer its code. Any previous maps referred to in the TDIP are not pertinent. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 19 7.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all fur..ctional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(le it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any`green'development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costeo parking acreage). Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being adopted under the "post- acknowledgement plan amendment process" outlined in ORS 197.610. DLCD was sent a copy of the proposed amendment 45 days in advance of the hearing and has not indicated any problems. Under 197.610,it is not necessary to "interrelate all functional and natural systems and activities." The update of the entire Comprehensive Plan will follow this requirement. The Green/Corridor Urban Creek as described in TDIP would be a man-made feature. The feasibility and scope of this proposed project will be determined as part 3 • • of the Downtown Urban Design Plan. A comprehensive plan would not be the appropriate forum to describe the details of this potential project. 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure I of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a'planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library--not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. Response: City Council resolution 05-62 accepted the findings and recommendations of the 'I'DIP, as well as the associated TDIP documents. Council directed staff to use the Plan's goals, objectives, and recommended actions as a guide for future programming of Downtown improvements. However if an appendix document within the TDIP is -- contradicted by another adopted Plan, the adopted Plan would take precedence. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area. ..". En the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis. ..."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. Response: The regulations regarding economic development refer to Comprehensive Plans covering an entire jurisdiction,not a post-acknowledgement plan amendment such as this. The Comprehensive Plan, currently being updated,will address the entire City- wide Economic Development issues. The Economy chapter will include supply and demand of industrial and employment land, and related issues. 4 • • HOUSING I 0 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a 'Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus,it is impossible to determine the camp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. Response: Policy 5.5 provides policy specifying where complementary residential development shall be allowed in some commercial zones all around the city. It does not only apply to the Downtown. Policy 5.5 needed to be amended to allow complementary housing in all zones of the Urban Renewal District, (not only above the second floor as the Policy currently states). The zoning matters referred to by Mr. Frewing as "inconsistencies" actually are not related to the Downtown. The zones referred to are existing mixed used zones throughout the City. At any rate, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not instituting new zoning designations, but setting the legislative ground work to make future changes. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. Response: A Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) is available on the City's website and up to date as of January 1, 2007. It is not necessary to include the BLI with this post- acknowledgement Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? Response: All applicable procedures for City-initiated Type IV Amendments have been followed and meet the requirements of 18.380 and 18.390. 5 • • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background'and`Findings'of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the `Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP,its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain . . ". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail,street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances, setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information,including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it, an important part of any`green'development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a`planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any defmition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example, 0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area . . .". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment, eg by SIC code. 9 OAR--0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis . . . ."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus,it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding),Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? 0 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL •, MEETING i_ r APRIL 24, 2007 6:30 p.m.* 4 v= I TIGARD CITY HALL Altif c) 13125 SW HALL BLVD TIGARD, OR 97223r:_t PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD -Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (MD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA *Volunteer Appreciation Event will commence at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Lobby COUNCIL AGENDA— APRIL 24, 2007 page 1 • AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 24, 2007 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations under ORS 192.660(2)(d). All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order- City Council&Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications &Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 7:35 PM 2. PROCLAMATIONS 2.1 Be Kind to Animals Week Proclamation • Mayor Dirksen 7:40 PM 3. CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (Two Minutes or Less,Please) • Citizen Communication—Sign-In Sheet • Follow-up to Previous Citizen Communication • Chamber of Commerce Representative 7:45 PM 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes for March 13 and 20,2007. • Consent Agenda - Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. COUNCIL AGENDA — APRIL 24, 2007 page 2 • • • 7:50 PM 5. ANNUAL VOLUN PEER PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS PRESENTATION a. Staff Report: Administration 8:15 P,M1 I 6. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING — COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 TO ADD NEW DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES a. Open Public Hearing b. Declarations or Challenges: Does any Council member wish to declare or discuss a conflict of interest or abstention. c. Staff Report: Community Development Department d. Public Testimony Proponents Opponents e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Questions g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration—Ordinance No. 07- 9:00 PM 7. MEASURE 37 CLAIM HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) — E & V DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (M372006-00007) A request for compensation or waiver of Tigard wetland regulations for property located along Greenburg Road. a. Open Public Hearing—Mayor b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure c. Declarations or Challenges - Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing,including any site visits? - Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? - Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony - Proponents Applicant Other Proponents - Opponents - Rebuttal/Final argument by applicant f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 07- COUNCIL AGENDA— APRIL 24,2007 page 3 • • • . 9:30 PM 8. MEASURE 37 CLAIM HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) — ROBERT E. RUEDY (M372006-00006) A request for compensation or waiver of development regulations for property located at 14185 SW 100th Avenue (1.14-acres). a. Open Public Hearing—Mayor b. Statement by City Attorney Regarding Procedure c. Declarations or Challenges Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing,including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? d. Staff Report: Community Development Staff e. Public Testimony - Proponents Applicant Other Proponents - Opponents - Rebuttal/Final argument by applicant f. Staff Recommendation g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Discussion and Consideration: Ordinance No. 07- 10:00 PM 9. FIRST QUARTER GOAL UPDATE a. Administration Department 10:15 PM 10. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 11. NON AGENDA ITEMS 12. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute.All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision.Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 10:20 PM 13. ADJOURNMENT i:\adm\cathy\cca\2007\070424.doc COUNCIL AGENDA— APRIL 24,2007 page 4 AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: April 24, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: • LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 TO ADD NEW DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony ali'' come part of the public record. The names and addresses of persons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes,which is a public record. Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 This is a City of Tigard public meeting, subject to the State of Oregon's public meeting and records laws. All written and oral testimony become part of the public record. The names and addresses ofpersons who attend or participate in City of Tigard public meetings will be included in the meeting minutes, which is a public record. Proponent (Speaking in Favor) Opponent (Speaking Against) Neutral NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE NAME,ADDRESS & PHONE Please Print Please Print Please Print *Name: Name: 5IA.A._ 1 ))c 4, Name: Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds,if will help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer 51 1 )Cam. pronounce: Address Address I V //0L-- City City '� Address State Zip State Zipri Z.Z-? City Phone No. Phone No. 6 3 V -357, State Zip Phone No. Name: Name: Name: lso,please spell your name as it sounds,if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if it Also, please spell your name as it sounds, if ill help the presiding officer pronounce: will help the presiding officer pronounce: it will help the presiding officer pronounce: Address Address City City Address State Zip State Zip City Phone No. Phone No. State Zip • Phone No. Sean Farrelly- Re: Downtown Tigard Com Ian Amendments Page 1 bir) i fPd From: _ Ron Bunch To: Farrelly, Sean; Frewing, John �i�l'l G �( L�fJ� Date: 4/19/2007 g Subject: Re: D ownt own Tigard Corn Plan Amendments l- o7 L/G T O- (X Hello John: We will include the Email in the written testimony and will bring Council attention to it at the 24th hearing. Best wishes and have a wonderful tilme in Hawaii. Ron Ron Bunch Long Range Planning Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 503-718-2427 ron @tigard-or.gov >>> "John Frewing" <jfrewing @teleport.com> 04/19 6:13 AM >>> Ron, ' Please include this testimony in the record for the April 24 City Council consideration of Comp Plan amendments relating to Downtown Tigard: I repeat my earlier testimony provided to City staff regarding the Comp Plan amendments proposed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Program. The proposal departs grossly from common sense and prior practice of this City Council wherein changes are evaluated against all of the state Land Use Goals and judged to be relevant or not relevant. Thank you, John Frewing 7110 SW Lola Lane Tigard, OR 97223 CC: Farrelly, Sean i.14`,, J a . '.per• s yk;., rv;s.yt ;•;. `r t.• $N,Cf; 4.'1:- i a.a, -4..a`: to £ •,-r_.•, �:?; . 0 '' -','.7,- ;`.10. ' F' Tr •' A�' � r°' Comprehensive Plan Amendment■ .,;. •µtiCom e'.iensive;Plan'= r: :tip:-:. ._.�.f , :', a'> ` r 1. _,...•-:fi•z.4-:-+...vo,:e 2 .hµ;"- `` °, s _ ;,,7;•,.-).,,,,....„.,,- ,., ��F h�`i3i'�i'�y...',,�c;�'..7'' s i�« -,,.,^+rC`r%��� •,,�� � 4: ePA44206=0042• g:-.1�: ::i: ;k,- r.,-.Ame'ndri en,`. ..':•- 4. : r):; '1: 2027 �;` :, ,.., f�„ '.:tw4r. ,.aK-,`.,r;:F '''',11,','"'-^::-..j..%',..'.: M ';' Comprehensive Plan ix-,\ � Ji, , -fix j '- ,: •;;' ,..-?..;.k °: �ri,r, r$;., will be completely `�.�:Proposed:Update oa owntowna=a`.1': a'•,;' updated in the next \ �; rte= :?.�«b°� ir'; f-.�',^ �'».. i1 .;�,J tt �-:k-.'"'`J�"'ti: g`s-_''it -a:� r..:4„:7,-.,r: =t Goals•=Policre n $Asti• nre,asures ' ^` ' S=`a d"' O �' ..�:•� year. .}f s.i'alr`.• t l'- ,� ' ��7 'W.'S G'-*.-'^ywr",�h.*,t s. _.:s;? '�t`r -�l' - y ;w�• a.ww.�.-. fl„ :'` M;x' ' �5�r ;Lw?: � -`Ka <�'` This Amendment is a .: • �,4:4 9,U t ,re'•. .� r t �;.+.• ,` 4;: precursor to the ' , • .r.3 ;''','h::;i' ' a•• ,,o: ,- "9`'1,E�jr`�r«t ,',i:;w. . -' ;, .� .j4 >s1 ^ r. 4 format of the eventual ' rit.am. �'�. ,, :::- : '-�.T. A',=� ,� i'.,,rv?,, P . , updated c- .''" : ` c 't, i,:''� Lo • •P anet ; ,,.x<, Comprehensive Plan. / •. • z t ��4 ^: ,. Why is the Comprehensive Plan Why is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Needed? Amendment Needed? • It is necessary to t,, • :.;%.;0013 F .. • It would provide the legislative p l implement the \�� basis to make future :, =, Tigard Downtown �r � d amendments to the `2",- ry yIm rovement Plan. ��,� ' � Development Code (including -, y"3.1,4,-- ��,. • ` new land use and design , �'"', �, (-` • �`'� regulations.) ;ys•� 'tt o_ trzgg: Current Comprehensive Plan Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan `:, I -Sept. 2005: Downtown • Current language is inadequate. , ,� . . Plan adopted • Special Areas of Concern Section 11.1 is outdated- S c "<l! ,:, • Downtown is treated as primarily a shopping area. `. {{ t �r f�, �; � �3 Dec.• 2005: Urban Amendment reflects the new multi functional : : k :, . %` ,, Renewal Plan(to implement role. .\ .8.1" ,%. „ - TDIP) approved • Economy Policy 5.5 recommends Downtown residential . �, development only above the first floor. �" N. :. Amendment allows Downtown"stand-alone housing." , _` May 2006:Tax Increment ▪ ,, Financing Ballot Measure _.• ._.._.........._......._...._.......l`_.._._...-.-- approved by voters 10 --v.a.rr••r-Lt;�n•,.uw 2 Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan TDIP Citizen Involvement A citizen-driven plan with the goal of creating: • Downtown Task Force ,,,.z. _' (24 members) held "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of >?.G ' ;� _ Community Dialogs, the community that is pedestrian-oriented, t"� e a Neighborhood Meetings, accessible by many modes of transportation, " "`{'t� Y Y P 'i .11' i Z• Iv Open House,Survey recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, a ' { ' .:- • Over 1300 people reached and features a combination of uses that enable .dr., by citizen volunteers people to live,work,play and shop in an ,„,. -' ;-t `l` • The City of Tigard was • r �; environment that is uniquely Tigard." ___-_$;t' awarded the 2005 Good I0 a' Governance Award by the ti The TDIP is the"resource report"for the b r League of Oregon Cities �'� F ," for the TDIP citizen Comprehensive Plan Amendment. p, ` ` �` planning effort. TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures 11_1 Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village Most amendment language taken directly from the 7 Policies and 8 Action Measures TDIP. • Goal: identical to the TDIP's goal. Policies and Action Measures fall under three 1 ,� ` .-� '++L t" categories in Section 11. ` v °` k' ,L- , - `' ,, millall 3 TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and System and Integrate Natural Features Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, 3 Policies and 4 Action Measures Automobiles, Bicycles, and Transit 3� 6 Policies and 10 Action Measures �� ors ti :, , �.p, 2 �z' 1 utR4 2 l "' r►7 I 111 Pr .—.� —: .t��'r�fj .r", 4� , 4 Nk ' .? i• of r � .Lid ? ..„.,,,.,.. 1 f�� '�' :� . ir„, v Downtown Urban Renewal District Downtown Urban Renewal District ITA tt - Aire,..w.-111 S lightly larger area — �� • Slightly larger area � ``R , than the CBD zone .4t, MIi� than the CBD zone 11 `� ,-jri � .I. .�\ and the original 71 ,� `, ,i ;\"\ and the original • r ,�vt� •1, % ti•'. J Downtown Plan Area. \,-,"%` ,' Downtown Plan Area. 1, ti .r�i?4° )9�,,: -KO%'�- • CPA would apply to • '., '�',,, , . -.1 • CPA would apply to t!;' y • �',f this 193 acre area ••4`; 1 y 'j','v y•"•fi this 193 acre area t. )! ;`_,\\,\>�. 4,ice"^ > // 3`\, A.. Zm,mg c7ac i5caoms „�., Z02101C6Marlf2 113 �v..,,,,.,Wan Itereall7=br �dr� C)m.ww.o C.9.. C°., 4 Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures: Applicable Tigard Criteria: Applicable State and Regional Criteria •Tigard Community Development Code •Applicable Metro Standards -Chapter 18.380 -Title 6(Town Centers) -Chapter 18.390 •Statewide Planning Goals •Applicable Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies 1.Citizen Involvement 1.General policies 2.Citizen Involvement 2.Land Use Planning 3.Natural Features and Open Space 5.Natural Resources • 5.Economy 8.Recreational needs 6.Housing 9. Economic Development 8.Transportation 10.Housing 9.Energy 12.Transportation Conclusion Recommendation That the Planning Commission recommend The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action approval to the City Council to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to replace Section measures are consistent with the 11.1 and amend Policy 5.5 as determined • applicable Tigard, Metro, and State through the public hearing process regulations and goals 7t-�f�' y '�',?�'.` tai • 5 J Questions? , y a rte • x �� a,k� � $T.1 • .it:' Y.b'L'{.�A"`f 1, . -s ue' 6 • • Agenda Item # Meeting Date April 17, 2007 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY City Of Tigard,Oregon Issue/Agenda Title Workshop Prior to Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Prepared By: Sean Farrelly Dept Head Approval: City Mgr Approval: ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL • Review Planning Commission's recommendation of Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. STAFF RECOMMENDATION • Receive a briefing on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures prior to the public hearing on April 24, 2007. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would update the Downtown chapter's Goals,Policies, and Action Measures. It would provide the legislative foundation to make future changes in the Downtown Land Use program, such as new zoning and design regulations. Most of the content of the Amendment was taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. On March 19, 2007 a public hearing on the proposed code amendment was held before the Planning Commission: Public testimony was given by a number of citizens. (Staff has responded to this testimony in the attached memo dated March 29, 2007.) The Planning Commission recommended making a minor change in the wording of one Action Measure and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Development Code Amendment. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. CITY COUNCIL GOALS Goal 2: "Continue to Support Implementation of the Downtown Plan." ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Memo to Council dated March 26, 2007, summarizing proposed Comprehensive Plan changes. Attachment 2: Memo to Council dated March 29, 2007, responding to comments made at the Planning Commission public hearing. 1:\LRPLN\Council Materials\2007\4-17-07 AIS_Dovntown Goals_\Fkshop.doc • c Attachment 3: Staff Report to the Planning Commission Attachment 4: Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes (with strike-throughs) FISCAL NOTES Not Applicable • l:\LRPLN\Council Materials\21)07\4-1 7-07 AlS_Downtown Goals_\\kshop.doc 0 • ATTACHMENT 1 Ili i IN MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrel ly,Associate Planner RE: Proposed Downtown Goals,Policies, and Action Measures Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) DATE: March 26, 2007 The purpose of this memo is to inform the City Council of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) which updates the Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures prior to the Council's April 17th work session and April 24th public hearing. At the public hearing on March 19th, 2007, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed amendment(with one minor modification.) Background: Relationship to Comprehensive Plan Update City staff is currently engaged in updating Tigard's Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Update Downtown Goals, Policies, and Action Measures is a precursor to the format of the rest of the Comprehensive Plan update. Although it will be amending the current code, this amendment will reflect the format of the updated code,which will be made up of Findings, Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of an extensive citizen involvement process. It was accepted by the Council in September,2005. Its goal is to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." • • What Does the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Propose? The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures will be the legislative foundation for future changes in the Downtown Land Use program, such as new zoning and design regulations. Most of the content of the Amendment was taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Public Hearing Comments and Responses At the public hearing, a number of individuals testified. Please refer to the attached response to the issues of Mike Stevenson and John Frewing. Planning Commission's Recommended Change The Planning Commission recommended modifying the wording of Action Measure 11.A.2. Its recommendation was to say "consider utilizing form based code principles," rather than "utilize form based code principles." Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. The proposal is consistent with all applicable State Goals, Metro Functional Plan, and Comprehensive Plan policies. Next Steps If the Comprehensive Plan Amendment is approved, staff will continue the process of developing specific language to amend the Development Code and craft design regulations for the Downtown. Stakeholder involvement and review will be necessary prior to proposing Development Code Amendments. 0 • ATTACHMENT 2 1q MEMORANDUM T I GARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA-2006-00002) March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments DATE: March 29, 2007 At the March 19, 2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing a number of citizens gave public testimony in favor of the Amendment. Two of the speakers, Mike Stevenson and John Frewing, raised issues that will be addressed in this memo. Nonconforming Uses Mike Stevenson, a downtown property owner, raised a concern about the future of nonconforming uses under the new zoning that will be adopted. Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment contains Policy 11.1.4 which states "Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion." How to specifically treat nonconforming uses will be a major issue in the Development Code amendment process. Staff will work with stakeholders to develop acceptable regulations. An important point to consider is that many of the existing industrial and automotive repair uses in the Downtown are presently nonconforming uses. They became nonconforming when the zoning was last changed (to CBD) in 1983. Process and Procedural Issues John Frewing raised thirteen points (included as Exhibit B) regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff rebutted many of these points at the public hearing. Most of the points refer to processes set up to update entire Comprehensive Plans, rather than a "Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment" which amends a portion of an existing plan (as this one does). The City provided the required 45-day notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development,and received no 1 w • t comment from them. If the agency had concerns with the proposed amendment, they would have provided comment to the City. Here is a rebuttal of each of Mr. Frewing's points. Mr. Frewing's comments are numbered and staff response follows: 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. Response: All of the reports in the appendices of Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan are dated 2004 and 2005 and relied on contemporaneous data. It is unlikely that conditions in Downtown Tigard have changed to any significant degree in the past two to three years. The only data that appears to be six years old is the Census data (the latest data is from 2000) and Metro's Regional.Transportation Plan completed in 2000 (currently being updated). 2 The `Background'and`Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Ti.'rd,but the `Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. Response: The intention of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to change the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to implement the TDIP It will provide the legislative foundation to adopt the specific zoning and other land use regulations that are called for in the TDIP. After this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is adopted, the next stage will be to amend the Development Code to define and map specific new zoning districts. Comprehensive Plan Amendments do not,in and of themselves, change the zoning of properties. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to l e included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan, but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume I, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. Response: The TDIP,in its entirety, contains extensive factual information that is the result of extensive research and technical analysis. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment takes its language directly from the TDIP. The TDIP will serve as the Volume 1 Resource document. In addition, as a legislative amendment, the City Council can determine what the relevant facts are to base its decision on. The Planning Commission has recommended adoption based on the findings (facts) and the conclusions in the staff report. 2 • • 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP, Figure 1 and the Pararnatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure I,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP, page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain . . .". Response: The cover page of the staff report and elsewhere in the application identifies the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District as the location of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Included in this application is the map of the Urban Renewal District, which has been legally and specifically defined in the Urban Renewal Plan. As for the floodplain issue, Tigard relies on the most current FEMA floodplains to administer its code. Any previous maps referred to in the TDIP are not pertinent. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 191.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion ofthe natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(le it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any`green'development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being adopted under the"post- acknowledgement plan amendment process" outlined in ORS 197.610. DLCD was sent a copy of the proposed amendment 45 days in advance of the hearing and has not indicated any problems. Under 197.610,it is not necessary to "interrelate all functional and natural systems and activities." The update of the entire Comprehensive Plan will follow this requirement. The Green/Corridor Urban Creek as described in TDIP would be a man-made feature. The feasibility and scope of this proposed project will be determined as part 3 • of the Downtown Urban Design Plan. A comprehensive plan would not be the appropriate forum to describe the details of this potential project. 7 To the extent that the IMP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a`planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. Response: City Council resolution 05-62 accepted the findings and recommendations of the TDIP, as well as the associated TDIP documents. Council directed staff to use the Plan's goals, objectives, and recommended actions as a guide for future programming of Downtown improvements. However if an appendix document within the TDIP is contradicted by another adopted Plan, the adopted Plan would take precedence. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference.OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area. ..". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis. ..."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. Response: The regulations regarding economic development refer to Comprehensive Plans covering an entire jurisdiction, not a post-acknowledgement plan amendment such as this. The Comprehensive Plan, currently being updated, will address the entire City- wide Economic Development issues. The Economy chapter will include supply and demand of industrial and employment land, and related issues. 4 • • HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a 'Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Parantatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impassible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#I: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities, while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-I district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses_ In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. Response: Policy 5.5 provides policy specifying where complementary residential development shall be allowed in some commercial zones all around the city. It does not only apply to the Downtown. Policy 5.5 needed to be amended to allow complementary housing in all zones of the Urban Renewal District, (not only above the second floor as the Policy currently states). The zoning matters referred to by Mr. Frewing as "inconsistencies" actually are not related to the Downtown. The zones referred to are existing mixed used zones throughout the City. At any rate, this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not instituting new zoning designations, but setting the legislative ground work to make future changes. I I A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(I). This should be provided to comply with state rules. Response: A Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) is available on the City's website and up to date as of January 1, 2007. It is not necessary to include the BLI with this post- acknowledgement Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? Response: All applicable procedures for City-initiated Type IV Amendments have been followed and meet the requirements of 18.380 and 18.390. 5 • • F J COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain. . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail, street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances,setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any`green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a `planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any defmition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area. . .". In the present comp plan proposal, only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR-0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis . . . ."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding),Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. • 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? • • ATTACHMENT 3 Agenda Item: Hearing Date: March 19,2007 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO.THE r. a - PLANNING.COMMISSIONS . FOR'THE.;CITY OF T'IGARD� OREGON 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) CPA2006-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend Section 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Goals, Policies, and Action Measures as a basis to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. The amendment would also update Section 5 to allow complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal District. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 LOCATION: Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District ZONING DESIGNATION: CBD,C-G,C-P,R-4.5,R-12 (PD),R-25 COMP PLAN: Commercial,Residential APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2,3 5,6,8,9 and 11;Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5,8,9, 10 and 12. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the Tigard City Council to .'amend,the;Tigard Comprehensive.Plan to replace Section 11.1 and amend Policy 5.5 as determined through=ttie public hearing process. . STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 1 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live, work, and play,and to serve as a community gathering place,in Downtown Tigard. The current planning effort to create a "heart" in Downtown Tigard dates back to 2002. A group of citizens and business owners were inspired to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on the planned Commuter Rail station in Downtown. A more extensive planning process was made possible with a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. Because of the Downtown Improvement Plan citizen involvement process, the City of Tigard was awarded the 2005 Good Governance Award from the League of Oregon Cities. The award recognizes exceptional city programs that unite citizens within a community. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for the Urban Renewal District in the May 2006 election. Proposal Description In order to implement the TDIP, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are necessary. These will establish the "legislative foundation" on which other land use actions and amendments to the Tigard Development Code can be based, including specific zoning map, land use and design standards. • The first step is to completely replace Section 11.1 of the Comprehensive Plan,which covers the Downtown Central Business District of Neighborhood Planning Organization #1. The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures would be applicable to the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District (which encompasses a slightly larger area than the Central Business District zone referred to in Section 11.) The City is currently updating the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. Each section of the updated Plan will include Findings, Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. Here is an explanation of these terms: Findings are the written statements of relevant facts that are the basis for the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 2 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • Goals are the broad-based statement of the community's desires. In this case the proposed Goal is taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Policies are general statements intended to guide the City now and in the future. They provide general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's land use, codes, and standards. Action Measures are more specific short and medium term actions that will implement the Goals and Policies. This term will replace "Implementation Strategies" found in the existing Comprehensive Plan. They can be evaluated on a regular basis- every two years, to check on their progress. Action Measures are not required to be referenced when new land use codes and standards are proposed for adoption. In addition, Policy 5.5 of the Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated to allow for the opportunity for a variety of housing types called for in the TDIP, throughout the Downtown Urban Renewal District. SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria,findings and conclusions • Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 o Chapter 18.390 • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Policies 1,2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 •Applicable Metro Standards o Title 6 • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1,2, 5, 8,9, 10 and 12 City Department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this title and zoning district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures. This chapter establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. Section 18.390.060.G states that the recommendation by the Commission, and the decision by the Council, shall be based on consideration of the following STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 3 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • factors (reviewed above), including: 1) Statewide Planning Goals, 2) applicable federal or state statues or regulations, 3) applicable Metro regulations, 4) applicable comprehensive plan policies, and 5) applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code and recommends the Planning Commission forward this proposed amendment to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the comprehensive plan identified the following relevant policies for the proposed amendments: Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.1.1: General Policies This policy states that all future legislative changes shall be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Regional Plan adopted by Metro. As indicated under the individual Statewide and Regional Plan goals applicable to this proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goals and the Regional Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.13.: Citizen Involvement These policies state that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program, provide opportunities for citizen involvement appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and that information on land use planning issues shall be available in understandable form for all interested citizens. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad-based public involvement. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. The May 2006 Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. In addition, the City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen committee, has reviewed and suggested changes that were incorporated into the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This policy has also been met by publishing notice of the Planning Commission public hearing that was in the March 1, 2007 edition of the Tigard Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Comprehensive Plan Policy 3:Natural Features and Open Space 3.4 Natural Areas These policies protect natural resources, including wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat. The proposed amendment satisfies Policies 3.4.1-3.4.2 because it strengthens protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 4 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • • 3.5. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Policies 3.5.1 The City shall encourage private enterprise and intergovernmental agreements which will provide for open space, recreation lands, facilities, and preserve natural, scenic and historic areas in a manner consistent with the availability of resources. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2 which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to be a central gathering place for the community and to provide a recreation area for such activities as a farmers market and performances. 3.5.3 The City has designated the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek, its tributaries, and the Tualatin River as greenway,which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.3 which states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Additionally, the TDIP calls for the expansion of the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park, by purchasing additional property in the floodplain. 3.5.4 The City shall provide an interconnected pedestrian/bike path throughout the City. This policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.3.1, which states that the Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. In addition, the 1'DIP calls for a "rail-to-trail" path to be created in present railroad right-of-way. Comprehensive Plan Policy 5:Economy 5.3 The City shall improve and enhance the portions of the Central Business District as the focal point for commercial, high density residential, business, civic, and professional activity creating a diversified and economically viable core area The TDIP seeks to improve and diversify Downtown Tigard's economic and employment mix. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services;b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas,public transit centers, etc);d) Professional employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks." This proposed policy is aimed at facilitating the development of an urban village,promoting the retention of existing businesses, and creating opportunities for new investment. The proposal would also amend Comprehensive PIan Policy 5.5 to make it possible to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. More housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 5 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • Comprehensive Plan Policy 6:Housing 6.1.1 The City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This policy is satisfied because the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6, which states that "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." This policy is also satisfied by proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5. which would create the opportunity for complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The change will likely result in increased housing choices at a variety of rent and price levels. Comprehensive Plan Policy 8: Transportation 8.1.2 Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation. This policy is satisfied by the inclusion of these proposed Policies: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system,especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. Collectively these policies aim to develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles and transit. Projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail station, and expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes will further increase transportation options. Comprehensive Plan Policy 9:Energy 9.1.3 The City shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation, design, and construction. The main goal of the TDIP is to create an urban village,which would result in an opportunity to live, shop, recreate, and work in a pedestrian-friendly environment. The envisioned place would allow residents to conserve energy by reducing their dependence on automobiles, as the area is presently well-served by transit. Future projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 6 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • station, expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes could further decrease reliance on the automobile. Additionally the TDIP expresses a preference for sustainable practices in construction of new Downtown buildings and infrastructure. These proposed Action Measures would encourage this type of design: 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Metro Functional Plan Title 6: Central City, Regional Centers, Town Centers and Station Communities Requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center. Centers are defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan fulfilled the requirement to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would institute the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's goal of "creating a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian-oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to"live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Policies and Actions Measures would enable the future adoption of code and policies to implement the goal. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable Metro regulations. THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1 — Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal was met through the extensive public involvement in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, which included a Task Force of 24 citizens, community dialogues, workshops, an open house, and a public survey. The City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen group, has reviewed and provided input to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 7 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • . This goal has also been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice has been published in the Tigard Times newspaper prior to the public hearing. Two Public Hearings are being held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) in which public input is welcome. In addition, letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Statewide Planning Goal 2 -Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The proposed amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report; therefore, the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal 5-Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas and sites. The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal because the proposed changes strengthen protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Existing Goal 5 protections for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District will remain in place. Statewide Planning Goal 8-Recreational Needs This goal aims to provide for the siting of facilities for the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. This goal is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2,which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to provide a range of recreation activities such as farmers markets and performances. This will become a central gathering place for the community and increase recreational opportunities for residents. Statewide Planning Goal 9-Economic Development This goal aims to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing;c) Civic functions (government offices, community services,public plazas,public transit centers, etc); d) Professional STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DO\VNTO\VN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 8 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT . . employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks." This policy is consistent with Goal 9 as it is aimed at facilitating the development of a vibrant and economically sound city core. The'[DIP calls for opportunities for new housing, commercial, and employment which would create a thriving urban village. . Statewide Planning Goal 10-Housing This goal aims to provide adequate housing for the needs of the community, region and state. One of the recommended catalyst projects in the '[DIP is to increase the number of housing units in the Downtown. This could increase the number of potential patrons for Downtown businesses and potential riders of the new Commuter Rail line. The proposed Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6 which states: "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." The proposed amendment is consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning Goal 12-Transportation The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." The proposed Amendment satisfies this goal with the inclusion of several Policies to Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit including: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. These proposed Policies would improve the safety, efficiency and economy of the transportation system in the Downtown Urban Renewal District and expand access to transportation options. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 9 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Building Division and Police Department, have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. The City of Tigard's Public Works had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and Metro, were notified of the proposed amendments and-did not respond. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue,Tualatin Valley Water District,and Cleanwater Services were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of extensive public involvement. In order to implement the Plan, changes are needed to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code including new zoning and design standards. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would provide the "legislative foundation" to accomplish this. The proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. March 7.2007 PREPARED BY: Sean Farrelly DA l'E Associate Planner March 7 ,2007 APPROVED BY: Ron Bunch DATE • Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 10 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • ATTACHMENT 4 5 . E C O N O M Y Commentary : The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states that more housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor, the 1'DIP does call for medium-density, stand alone housing types, such as townhouses,in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. • Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. • Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in st-fiket-itreugh. POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR IN THE CENTRAL . . . ! . - - - - A .. 11k _ .. COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS. (THE DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R 40 DISTRICTS.) IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIAIE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.) AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMITTED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES..-; WITHIN THE MUC, MUR 1 AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER,WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND MUR 2) TO R-50 (MUC,MUE 1 AND MUR 1):AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERI'.TI FEED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL. USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. • • 1 1 . S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community:a place to live, work,and play,and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center,dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002,with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. A state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement.including community dialogues,workshops,open house,and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live.work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal,including Tax Increment Financing,are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment.Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street.the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function,but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown • • • In general.downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions,Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial,office,residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.)with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general. there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek,part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD).While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown.the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result. the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots,which are zoned R-4.5.R-12 (PD),R-25. C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary.Downtown is important to Tigard residents;many use it on a weekly basis.Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character&Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a`focal point' for the community." and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown • The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live_work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning, design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness,and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices,community services,public plazas,public transit centers,etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection. open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing;auto-dependant uses; industrial manufacturing;and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue.subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design,development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety,accessibility.and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types,including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • • 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a"traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area,adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet.shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by "park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system.especially bus and Commuter Rail.Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5,the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant.compact,mixed-use area with housing,retail and employment opportunities. Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown • • ti 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials,particularly in the building fronts and streetscape. Also develop appropriate density,height,mass,scale,architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Consider utilizing form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information,urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines, standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas,such as park blocks,plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses,public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles,Bicycles and Transit Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from,and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown.such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways.entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot.and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment / facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public.including members of the development community.with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown . .x . x ..k .:�. is fix., ..k.... d: K x::x. k:. M: r„S : xvw X #4,• • r i i .r Y. f .! .rxxd ,4r '.... S 3 x.x...: .4 v ,yy Q:r isr ''^x:p:xxu..'sxxx:: ..r xr..x. .. p� Fr r x.^ s,.. • • i .. x yy . 9 r S ... x:... �, j. • • • , Urban Renewal Boundary' .••• i 3.. 'six, i..£i 1 I:^:lL TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ma MEETING i e ; April 17, 2007 6:30 p.m. ; TIGARD CITY HALL .� 13125 SW HALL BLVD ` -° TIGARD, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Citizen Communication items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Manager. Times noted are estimated; it is recommended that persons interested in testifying be present by 7:15 p.m. to sign in on the testimony sign-in sheet. Business agenda items can be heard in any order after 7:30 p.m. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (I DD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request,the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments;and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers,it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. -Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (IDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA—APRIL 17,2007 page 1 AGENDA • TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6:30 PM 1. WORKSHOP MEETING 1.1 Call to Order- City Council&Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications &Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 6:35 PM 2. REVIEW TREE BOARD INTERIM CHARGE STATEMENT REGARDING TREE PROTECTION AND URBAN FOREST ENHANCEMENT • Staff Report: Community Development Department • Council Discussion • Council Consideration: Direction to the Tree Board and staff regarding the interim charge statement to be considered by the City Council at a future meeting. 7:15 PM 3. RECONSIDERATION OF PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' DUTIES TO SERVE AS LIAISONS TO OTHER BOARDS,COMMISSIONS,AND COMMITTEES • Staff Report: Community Development Department • Council Discussion • • Council Consideration: Direction to Planning Commission and staff regarding proposed changes to the duties of the Planning Commission members. 7:45 PM 4. RECEIVE UPDATE ON ENHANCED CITIZEN PARTICIPATION • Staff Report: Administration Department • Council Discussion • Council Consideration: Direction to staff on future plans continuing the program for enhanced citizen participation. 8:00 PM 5. RECEIVE BRIEFING ON THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTION MEASURES. • Staff Report: Community Development Department • Council Discussion • Future Council Consideration: Public Hearing before the City Council is scheduled for April 24,2007 COUNCIL AGENDA—APRIL 17,2007 page 2 • 8:15 PM 6. REVIEW PROPOSAL FROM THE WASHINGTON COUNTY COORDINATING COMMITTEE (WCCC) TO DEDICATE FUTURE REVENUE TO ARTERIALS AND COLLECTORS OF COUNTYWIDE SIGNIFICANCE • Staff Report: Community Development Department • Council Discussion • Council Consideration: Direct Mayor Dirksen, as the City's representative on the WCCC, regarding the City's position on the proposal. 8:35 PM 7. REVIEW THE REALIGNMENT OF SW 175TH AVENUE • Staff Report: Community Development Department • Council Discussion • Council Consideration: Provide direction on whether the City should take a position regarding the realignment. 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any fmal decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 10:00 PM 9. ADJOURNMENT i:\adm\cathylccat2007 W 70417.doc COUNCIL AGENDA—APRIL 17,2007 page 3 . • EXHIBIT A 5 . E C O N O M Y Commentary : The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states. that more housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core.Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor, the'1'DIP does call for medium-density, stand alone housing types, such as townhouses,in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. • Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. • Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in atrikcthrough. POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMI IT ED ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR IN RES_IDENTLAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TIIE R 40 DISTRICTS.) IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIATE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.)AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMITTED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES-; WITHIN THE MUC, MUR 1 AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CENTER,WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMTFIED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND MUR 2) TO R-50 (MUC,MUE 1 AND MUR 1): AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT, WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. • • 1 1 . S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a"heart" for their community: a place to live, work,and play.and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center,dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years.The most recent effort dates back to 2002.with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station indowntown Tigard.This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. A state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM)grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement,including community dialogues,workshops,open house,and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan ('IDIP).The TDIP set forth a vision to create"a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation.recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal,including Tax Increment Financing.are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment.Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street.the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function.but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown • • • In general.downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions.Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial.office.residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors(99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general. there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature.The creek,part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown,the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form.As a result,the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots.which are zoned R-4.5.R-12 (PD).R-25,C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development.which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary.Downtown is important to Tigard residents;many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character&Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a `focal point' for the community." and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown • • The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning,design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality,attractiveness,and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard.while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices,community services,public plazas,public transit centers,etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependant uses; industrial manufacturing;and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue,subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design,development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety,accessibility,and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types,including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • • 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area.adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto.transit.bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City.in conjunction with TriMet. shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride"activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system,especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W.Highway 217 and Interstate 5.the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant.compact.mixed-use area with housing.retail and employment opportunities. Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown • 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials,particularly in the building fronts and streetscape.Also develop appropriate density,height.mass, scale,architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Consider utilizing form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events.farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information,urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines,standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas,such as park blocks,plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses,public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from.and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown,such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets.pathways.entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot,and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment / facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public.including members of the development community.with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown • El • .• — , . h.; • •.... .• h i.4 i 0 11!!!!!-..!, !!,: 44,• 1 , : .• ,.• .• I g 1 .,,,. „.: ... ...-4. N... i: .4) : .. }. I ia:.- 1.:::.:. ,„•,."- .....,„.1... .• ..• r. .• ..• : .• ‘..., ki . .• . :,•!, : : .• '..• 4.._„„, .,,_,0\0",„...,„ i.. :. • •,, R:- 1 ..4;::: '...4,0,...` ..„.••• : •,,, 1 t i g•,,, • . : ,,,,,,, : • ..„, ■ H /t/'.-7 hs: /.././/4, L-77.7......'''''./4./..../// 1 .• / . ■ J ..---.P. e. c_py „......." „,,.... ...... i .... I „..4„..4 i "....<,...t.. '4%."...... , • . 4, ‘44444N,44.4..,...4 J.A.,..4.,m• •.44? • , .4„,ore....., I '.1.' '...k '4'. ..... ••.. ... • • ..... .. ... h . h....N:4 . • ''''''' 1.•••••••......... : ... „. .• i .:19"--. .• / "'.• N.. . .• .• , .• i /k /*" ; ' ,'CZ .e... .t.g. .• k. / .., . .• „.. .• .• .• : •h .,/ ' : ,h."• 1 .1.. .e . .• .4 .• .• .• ,,,,.' I i 1. .e' . .• .• :.• .• . .• /4 / / /4./. .• .• .• '''.• f *Ns, 11/4, . . ,.../.:4-. r.-.. . , . ,e.. / ?.,..(—‘4, • . . ... .., •• ri• .e., : , , (2 B i..) %,„,,, ei•••.[•••••••'' 4.... ./ .,•'..4.••,. / .• ‘,%4..... f i• I . • .4,4 • i'•41 '..) ,!■ .4,, .F".. .4 . I C„ Eh• •••' . , . K ,s, •‘.„. ; . •••• \ \ k ''''4\,./' ''.4. 7/ i• 2/. \ .0, N4,. ..• .• .• , ,'• 1 4.0 • •\ .../"/ ' ...4.y, 1 i J./ ..1*X 4 •'".. /"V '', 1 44P.. ..N.: 7.7.. ••' 4•••., • .• .• ', j 1 ,{ 1..1.• 1 .. \ 1.....Cl•) li .• < \ I .• .• 1 . , . eff •n,:. •■1 L• L• 11,4, ...,..<•"*. X P ,... ...• : ! , . . .• .x . • „4.4,44,'''.4""/ : : 1 : • I; /4., r/ .• .• .9. .1/2'7:1. 11 --44,. 4,.." .• I. .• .• .• • h Ehhhh ••••• hh. : : / hiEhhhhE hhhEE• I ,14,-- ..• ,,,..„ : .• . .• . ... . .1•;•!.•••11.:".j 11 ,. .• .• • F h. . .• • ht. l'hE /..< . • / E.„... • 11 k.... •••,,, • • / if '%''D:i f• .• .• r • : : r•: .• . .• • . i• I . . i• i I I , 1... _ . .. oning, Classifications Li rba n R Eh newa I Bo a n d a be' t.1 rhan RcTICAt;.:a 1 DI StriC1 . r" f zoni—,-..: Di,..-.,..i•-:•'7,....• •... ,,,,, „:: , ::,....:•••.:;:.: .• . .• .• .• : . .• .• . . . .• .• .• • • TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDANI •MARCH 19, 2007 7:00 p.m. TIGARD TIGARD CIVIC CENTER—TOWN HALL 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD TIGARD, OREGON. 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER • 2. ROLL CALL 3. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 4. APPROVE MINUTES 5. PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 • PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code_amendments LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R- 25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 10, and 12. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT • CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes March 19, 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, and Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Vermilyea Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Long Range Planning Manager; Sean Family, Associate Planner; Jerree Lewis, Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Planning Manager Ron Bunch reported that the Tree Board met on March 7th to discuss its proposed charge statement to develop a tree protection program. The program is intended to look at trees in a larger context rather than as street trees or trees in development property. The Tree Board also reviewed the Costco tree planting plan. Costco had been conditioned to have 35% tree coverage in their parking lot. They came back with a tree planting plan that they would like to try to meet the standards. • The secretary reported that the new Commissioners will be appointed by Council on March 27th. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the February 26, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 3-0. Commissioners Caffall and Walsh abstained. It was moved and seconded to approve the March 5, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. President Inman abstained. 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2006-00002 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 1 • • REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard-orgov/code amendments. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G,.0-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 10, and 12. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A) for the proposed amendment for an update of Downtown goals,policies, and action measures to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). He advised that the amendment would not change the Development Code. It lays the groundwork for future changes; any specific development code changes will be subject to further public hearings. Farrelly noted that with the new format, action measures will replace the current implementation strategies in the Comprehensive Plan. This particular amendment is needed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The current land use in the Comp Plan that deals with the Downtown is inadequate. Section 11, Special Areas of Concern that deals with the Downtown, treats it primarily as a shopping area. This amendment will reflect the multi-functional role of the Downtown. Another part of the Comp Plan that needs to be changed is Economy Policy 5.5 which restricts residential development above the first floor. Farrelly reviewed the goals of the TDIP. He advised that most of the language for this proposed amendment was taken from the TDIP. The policies and action measures are organized into 3 categories: Facilitate the development of an urban village; Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features; and Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles, and transit. This amendment would apply only to the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. Staff reviewed the proposed amendment against the applicable criteria and found it to be consistent with present Comp Plan policies and Development Code policies. The amendment is also consistent with applicable Metro requirements and all applicable Statewide Goals. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to City Council. President Inman asked about the new action measure 11.A.2. She asked if Tigard was actually pursuing form based code (FBC). Farrelly advised that this action measure would only pursue FBC in ways that are consistent with Oregon Land Use Law. We might not PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 2 ,J • • adopt FBC, but we may use some of the principles in the eventual new development code. This action measure allows us the opportunity, but does not require that we use FBC. Vice-President Walsh asked for clarification that the Commission was being asked to approve only a change to the Comprehensive Plan adopting the format and structure of the proposed Comp Plan that the Commission will see later. This one section is being approved ahead of time;it will be put in place of the existing section of the Comp Plan and nothing more. Farrelly concurred, saying that this starts the process to allow for further changes and gets the process moving along.. It does not change existing Development Code regulations or land use laws. Before changes to the Development Code happen, there will be more outreach to property owners and stakeholders. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN FAVOR John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane,Tigard 97223 commended staff and the Downtown Task Force for developing this portion of the Comprehensive Plan. He is concerned about the explanation for form based code, saying that the language states, "The City will utilize form based design where consistent with the State regulations." It doesn't say may use it. He would like to endorse the language as written. He disagrees that this section is outside the Comp Plan. It is Section 11 of the Comp Plan; it is the Comp Plan. This is the first piece of the Comp Plan to come before the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption. He wants to get it right the first time. In that effort, he has a list of issues that he brought up (Exhibit B). He asked that the Commission to continue the hearing so that these matters can be addressed. Mike Swanda, 13285 SW Village Glenn Drive, Tigard 97223, testified that he owns and operates My Time Beads at 12200 SW Main Street. He thinks the TDIP is a wonderful goal. He had one comment about Section 11.1.3 which states, "The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependent uses; industrial manufacturing; and industrial services uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village." He would like to see more clarification for the term "auto-dependent" uses. He asked what the term meant. Jonae Armstrong, 16333 SW Stahl Dr.,Tigard 97223, Tigard testified that she works at Washington Square. She has been watching this process and urged the Commission to continue the approval process to go on to City Council. She believes it is important to focus on the Downtown and offered her encouragement. Lisa Olson, 14720 SW Cabernet Ct., Tigard 97224, advised that she was a member of the Downtown Tigard Task Force, was the chair for the Streetscape work group, and will be on the steering committee for the Fanno Creek Master Plan. She encouraged the Commission to continue to look at keeping the community involved in this process and to encourage City staff to involve community members. There is a large number of people who have been working on this and understand what's going on. She would like the City to utilize the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 3 • • resources available in community members to continue to have the community involved in the process every step of the way. Phil Yount, 11222 SW Cottonwood Lane,Tigard 97223, stated that he was undecided about the amendment. He has been an interested observer and an occasional participant in some of the surveys and task force hearings, so he is aware of what's going,on. He supports the TDIP proposal in general. He was impressed with John Frewing's testimony. While he encourages the Commission to proceed with the process,he urged them to look carefully at Mr. Frewing's critique. What we do needs to be done right. Mike Stevenson testified that he owns a business at 9040 SW Burnham Street, Tigard 97223. He has been involved with the Downtown Task Force since the beginning and is happy with the progression. The TDIP affects him personally because he owns a large piece of property in the Downtown. He has concerns about Section 11.1.3 to not permit any new land uses, such as warehousing, auto-dependent uses, etc. If this process is going to take 20-25 years, he will be put in a "no-man's position" as far as expanding his business is concerned. Section 11.1.4 states that existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. He wonders what this means and he is concerned about what we will do with existing businesses. Mr. Stevenson has another thought about the staff report, under 3.5.3 — "The City has designated the 100-year floodplain ... Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain, the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain." Does that mean he will be required to give open land to the City? He asked for clarification on this. Staff answered that this code section is an existing policy. If he wanted to do some development, would he be required to donate some land? Staff advised that currently in the Tigard Development Code, there are specific standards that require protection and preservation of the floodplain. This was quoted in the staff report to show how the proposal is consistent with the existing Plan. The City cannot essentially exact property for dedication. Since this existing this policy is probably 23 years old, it may be out of date. However, it is the criteria we have to use now to judge the current proposal to make sure it's consistent with existing policy. The entire Comprehensive Plan will be updated, including the Natural Resources section. We have to work with the Comp Plan we have now. Mr. Stevenson will be subject to the policy as it exists currently. It may very well be amended in the future, but the existing policies had to be used as a tool to judge whether the new proposal meet the requirements of the existing Plan. President Inman noted that this is in a different chapter which will be reviewed at a later time. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN OPPOSITION None PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 4 T ' `f • • REBUTTAL Planning Manager Ron Bunch responded to Mr. Frewing's concerns. He noted that what Mr. Frewing spoke to, to a great deal, was the entire Comprehensive Plan, e.g., Goal 9 Economic Development; Goal 10 Housing; Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services; Goal 6 Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. This proposal is just one small part of the Comprehensive Plan. For example, in the Goal 9 Economic Development Rule that was quoted, in the Comprehensive Plan, there's a separate chapter that addresses Goal 9. The Industrial Lands Inventory, Analysis of Available Lands, Buildable Lands Inventory, etc., take place in the context of that particular section of the Comp Plan. This proposal is looking at a specific district— the Downtown. These tools (goals, policies, action measures) are needed to start having the broad community dialog to begin to implement the Urban Renewal District. The sections of ORS 197 that Mr. Frewing spoke to are out of context for this particular hearing. Regarding the process, the TDIP is a study that was accepted, but not adopted. Mr. Frewing referenced the need to have facts that are relevant and recent. This application was coordinated with the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). DLCD found the proposal to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Administrative Rules. Regarding the facts, Bunch advised that this is a legislative hearing; we are obligated to look at the facts according to specific criteria in the Comp Plan and other criteria. Staff reviewed the criteria and found that the proposal complies with all the applicable criteria. As a legislative amendment, essentially the City Council can determine what facts it wishes to rely upon. The facts that we consider relevant are the ones we have on hand—we can't constantly go back and get new facts and refer to them. We have to begin the process and stop it at some time. Regarding zoning classifications and mapping, this hearing is about creating the tools — goals, policies, and action measures. In referencing the maps, there are discrepancies in the TDIP and in the Community Development Code and in the Urban Renewal District. This proposal is just to establish the goals, policies, and action measures. This proposal only applies to the Urban Renewal District. Regarding the moving target of the floodplain, where the landuse designation should be, etc., those are refinements that will be built from the goals, policies, and action measures. The public amenities associated with the Plan are part of the development regulations that will come later. We need to have the tools first before we can build development regulations. When we amend the Development Code, we will use the tools to judge the Development Code Amendment— does it or does it not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding comments about the interrelated use of land, ORS 197, these comments apply to the whole Comprehensive Plan. Each element does not have to be judged against that, but when we have the whole Comp Plan put together in one document,we'll have the whole range of issues within which to judge. We have to look at whole plan, not just one part. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 5 • • These goals, policies, and action measures will provide the legislative basis by which we can develop a Transportation System Plan refinement that can be adopted as part of the TSP. We will get there using these tools. A pre-application was done. The papers are in the file. A key item for staff was coordinating this with DLCD, Metro, ODOT, Trimet, and LCDC. We have not received any comments against the proposal. The Planning Commissioners asked the following questions: • Section 11.1.3 says it shall not permit new land uses, such as warehousing, etc. What is an example of an auto-dependent use business? Staff responded that new drive-thru businesses would be an example. The proposal does not prohibit people from driving Downtown. Will this affect current businesses? Existing drive-thru businesses would be grandfathered in as non-conforming uses. It would protect the current business, but would not allow for expansion of the non-conforming business. The current non-conforming use standards that apply to the whole City allow 20% expansion. Specific code language for Downtown non-conforming businesses will need to be discussed. • Staff explained that the current non-conforming use standard allows existing non- conforming businesses to be grandfathered in and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. If the non-conforming use is discontinued for more than 6 months, it would not be permitted to come back. The new business would have to conform to current applicable zoning standards. Staff believes that in the CBD zone, there are several properties that have been exempted from that requirement. • Business owners were encouraged to work with staff on these issues. Staff noted that the current CBD zoning does not allow industrial uses. All existing industrial businesses in the Downtown are considered non-conforming and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. When we begin to develop the Code, we will determine the specifics on how to deal with non-conforming uses in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested doing an outreach to business owners that own non- conforming businesses in the Downtown. Staff answered that the Code development phase will include that type of outreach. • Under 11.1.3, would the Fanno Creek Microbrewery be allowed or not allowed? Staff answered that this is considered an eating establishment and would be an allowed use. Producing the microbrew would be considered auxiliary to the eating and drinking function. • Staff advised that industrial services provide services to manufacturing,warehousing, construction, etc., that are necessary to keep those services going. Some examples are janitorial services, machinery repair and refurbishing, and repair of lumber equipment. In some codes, it includes fleet operations to maintain trucking fleets and equipment. It varies by region. • Has staff talked to people involved in a performing arts center or a farmers' market? Broadway Rose Theatre is now beginning a capital improvement project to have their own performing arts center. Staff noted that farmers'market people are aware of the plans. The performing arts center is a catalyst project that is more long range projects, maybe 10-15_years PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 6 • • out. Commissioner Dougherty suggested involving more than just the Downtown boundaries in the discussion. Ron Bunch noted that these specific activities are considered action measures, which fall into placeholder categories for implementation. The statements which have real legislative intent are the goals and policies;action measures are things that we would like to implement and that we could use as a gauge or measurement to see how we're doing. For example, if Broadway Rose finds another place,perhaps we should consider another kind of peorming arts in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested adding a definitions section. Staff answered that the Plan will have a definitions section that will also include a list of acronyms. • President Inman said she thinks the language on the form based code principles reads fairly strong. She would like the language to state that it gives us the opportunity to utilize form based code, but not state that we will utilize it. The Commission likes the wording, "Consider utilizing form based codes." PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED President Inman feels good with the modification of 11.A.2 to say "consider" rather than "utilize" form based code. She hopes that the Commission gets the same participation when these issues come back so nothing will be dropped when we get to the implementation phase. Commissioner Walsh thinks it's a great start, the structure works, the language is supported. Commissioner Anderson noted that these tools can help with other committees and community involvement. He likes the language and the definition sheets. He supports the proposal. Commissioner Dougherty would like staff to seriously consider the comments that Mr. Frewing made. She thinks there should be definitions to prevent confusion and misunderstandings down the road. She agrees with President Inman on the dealing with the verbiage of form based code. Commissioner Walsh moved to recommend approval to City Council of Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) 2006-00002, Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update Downtown Goals, Policies and Action Measures, with the change to 11.A.2 to change the language to add "consider utilizing form based codes" in place of what is there, based on the staff report as presented and testimony given. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. •OTHER BUSINESS Staff advised that the there will be a meeting with Council on April 17th to discuss Planning Commission liaison duties. It was suggested that maybe Planning Commissioners and members of other committees could alternate attending each other's meetings. It was also suggested that staff might take a bigger role in information sharing. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 7 • • The Commissioners discussed the Form Based Code subcommittee. It was noted that form based code may be beneficial to the City and that having a subcommittee to review examples from other cities and make a recommendation is a good idea, however the committee needs parameters and a set timeline. Members of the CCAC and the Planning Commission feel they need more information before they can make a decision about form based code. Ron Bunch stated that the important thing for staff is that we're burning time;we need to move this along. Council would like to have a worksession in May about urban design in the Downtown. There will be a yes-no decision by Council soon. Bunch advised that staff has been directed to get a clear representation of what the future Downtown will look like in architectural form, block size, transportation, etc. Once we have that,we can then work backward to determine the kind of code we need to achieve that model. There are some codes and standards that can be done no matter what method we use. Staff can begin now to get an idea of what the Downtown will look like. Staff will take the leadership to put together information and work with the City Manager and Council to educate them so they can help make a decision. The subcommittee can provide an endorsement. It was decided that the subcommittee could meet before regularly scheduled Planning Commission meetings beginning on April 2na. Commissioners Inman and Anderson agreed to serve on the committee. Commissioner Walsh suggested having a short meeting prior to the public hearing on April 2nd to meet the new Commissioners and talk about the meeting process. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. jJerree wis, Planning ommission Secretary j 0 ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES-March 19,2007—Page 8 . E)4 - A _. . . . -;‘,1,0'S,c `.,, ., w� d,': e 4 ' .4d`, 7 3 r.P... ,-0- .--.-.: e� a Dt' '4{ w N t ! ` rEa $ Sin M•Yi• . . ,1 ' ,t •o'';,,D -. , -ns• .41 r, ° atir, *. ' � Comprehensive Plan Amendment ,_ �YY , . . ,,.♦ ,y. .. .y ,�t ,. 2027 i . ' '?. • C O eliensive Plan 3,-. nw` t i h° ,. n -. * ." F s� ria `=.4.4...4`:i.* 4 �: e `j t will be completely --,,r-f''* _r O + _ +'� updated in the next n i' MP a oi ' o p w "y° °: F year. t ,.1..�e.sd lea " ,t' -s, }i .rte �' ` '. :Q w•w�w.+^P 5 a�'i t c,� .fF � � '1'"i t tti � '' • This Amendment is a • .• y t cl°+a•k` � 5,-;,., �" t ( �r c3 r � t�:�m F t i�a .; ' 4Y- "':. f E� . KI fi .,; W A-i ` precursor to the y .7 ,, ,,... 1,, 4, , 4 d . ,-..A ,T �,. �y �,� �a,/) ' format of the evenhial �, �i. ,iti. a�- ; 7.•.' -. ',,I+'� updated Comp Plan. Antal • �vr;. < i,�,,� : gf,riy 4 ''.y ';e!.1 i. d,e L '' ,� tai a,, .n�� 1 • Comprehensive Plan New Format: Comprehensive Plan New Format: • fiction Measures are more specific short • Findings are the written statements of relevant and medium term actions that will facts that are the basis for the Goals, Policies, and implement the Goals and Policies. They Action Measures. can be evaluated on a regular basis, to • Goals are the broad-based statement of the check on their progress. community's desires. • Policies are general statements intended to guide I the City now and in the future. They provide I I - general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's Land use, codes, and standards. ....,� • 2 • • • • Why is the Comprehensive Plan Why is the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Needed? Amendment Needed? ,__l_',.. jtit.Y_--- "j eow • In order to implement ` °' .4%;J i•elt • �!, • It would provide the legiskttive fio,. the Tigard Do�vntotrn �\/�"�I7;,...÷........ .6,,,,,.. ..�:.�; /. PJ�. basis to make future �`: V ( ' Improvement Plan, it is ` ��►�, ct ';�i ;; � .* .., ;` amendments to the Mfr'` '!4 Sri--/ necessary to amend the �8" ' ;l ,e o 'f , {C� Comprehensive Pla ' �'� Development Code (including ti,. '+ ''t;�,r ArOONPIA `��` 'ems new kind Ilse and desian /'Special Arens of Concern 1i f^,j�� ;, \ ,;,t"/ Section 11.1 Central ' ;``�r� '"r r,� regulations.) %\ � �� ` •Business District) and �� 1 • `4` • 11, i�� ',.. Economy Policy 5.5. 4'111,`„ ` - ,4 i r,;-" 1,;';.. tc•s • 3 • • - Tigard Downtown. Improvement Plan • Current Comprehensive Plan 1 _,,Y n '1. vv ;\\. i. j u4,,,. ;, „+�'jr1 ii 'Sept. 2005: Downtown Hi q. .�,.k. !i�+`�'` Z. �.1 'Ey'Z'—.al, Plan Adopted • Current language is insufficient. i .` /- ', '!. /s hl I • Special firms of Concert Section 11.1 outdated- d,;.% %;`� 9 ,a s'd •Dec. 2005: Utb;in primarily focuses on Downtown as a shopping `'�'�p sr';4. �','� C Renewal Plan (to implement area. 4ti. ,:\ .K ,' .-;��' "1"DIP) appro\c • Economy Policy 5.5 recommends residential , 4 t only above the first floor. 4 \t \ "x , >, • development y , �`, ,ar`- :,,.�•.., �:, ,r, �• May 2006: '[';la Increment r; ( Mf j I inIni;ing BallotIN'L,t'urc Q, "Ter g ®- �_ appro�recl by voters ti 1 1 214.17..A.' - I10_l. Yr•NrtM Mslpn 11ttNnNlw 1® l • 4 . . . • • • • . . . • • . • Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan ' • TDIP Citizen Involvement .. • Downtown Task Force A citize n n-driven pla with the goal of creating: „!:54,4 w . (24 members) held "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the . -..';4.'' , Community Dialogs, community that is pedestrian-oriented, accessible by many . 4:0 modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural 1.1? 0 4 f •,.i.'I. Neighborhood Meetings, ••i•el• •t. ■ •,. ,.,_. .,• . • Open House, Survey resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that 1 ' ‘ I j•- 'el .--,1_,44 , , --; s Y,s../..i.: e .- • Over 1300 people reached enable people to IIVC,work,play and shop in an environment - ,,?.. ,:i iv,,01 ,. . — that is uniquely Tigard." t L. ..,!: - 1.--., 2.4 by citizen volunteers • • ',Li • The City of Tigard was • • , . . II f•; L , The"[DIP is the"resource report" for the Comprehensive , . awarded the 2005 Good Plan Amendment. 11 tr I ' Governance Award by the • League of Oregon Cities N .--.. for the TDIP citizen • ■ , • . . . • P -414V . 1'. planning effort. • . . . • • • ., • . . . • . 5 • • • • TRIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures o 1_l.t_ Facilitate the Development of an Most amendment language taken directly from the Urban Village TDIP. 7 Policies and 8 Action Measures Goal: identical to the TDIP's goal. ntq Policies and Action Measures fall tinder three s, , „ r categories in Section 11. f; i.a �, kr � , � _ : ? "r l, . 1 a' ` !� -, 6 , _. r ■ TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and . - -TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and • • _ . . . . . . • Action Measures . Action Measures . . . - . .. o 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space o 1i.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and .• System and Integrate Natural Features Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, 3 Policies and 4 Action Measures , Automobiles, Bicycles, and Transit 6 Policies and 10 Action Measures 1/' a.. �1. t u ;a.f�T_ ■' A 1? q" r),z C.r -'• '. '• iSf Y 'o° ,' .,4 .A. 7i7A YT -I,,/ :1r: . { ".1•i! `� E `� • f rf• __ } a✓x • 7 • • Downtown Urban Renewal District Downtown Urban Renewal District • is SL': ':1-�.;�•��_ �° �-�:Z' ' • ��._..��pp Ire�i�;47.!--°�� ��� 1 L.. iii 1 �, � = z �% \ ii.J�i{i. 1., � 1'} iiii ' . I:11'II�If.r^ • Slightly larger area � ;?fir, �_�.; •�� ..3 • Slightly burger area zs.,i'i +;i�iii41 ., tit �. than the CBD zone `i' c � , a. the zone than th CBD zo s.•r�� 1 .4.: `� and the original 1 ",:�� v!1' � and the original Pao '•;N4'>:..„ Am; # 4'r,, .s.+..9r, a�ntown rear11N; 2�1q ,_� Do::: :would appl to . 7..� • CP4,`� o �. this 193 acre area h_N:� `� �6�►\'`1,�� this 193 acre area 0%0A• . VvPs*\ ,•/4,,sv.,,,,...$ ,: 4,_.k*,,,v,.. .4.16..„...--IN . i 4,4,,,,, 1 .„,s.,,,,m,„:, 4.. hi A lotax.s.vw, . illk,..41:4 044/'\..,Nor. kik 440 � c } M . !% a.. �r / i ,. I tV�lgi1i1nini ellIII 6.1(W v 1R► 11 � Vans C6atia ...... iMutilations . m e.. .... 0 .,. . w. 8 • • . Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures : Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures: Applicable Tigard Criteria Applicable State and Regional Criteria •Tigard Community Development Code . • Applicable Metro Standards - Chapter 18.380 -Title 6 (Town Centers) Chapter 18.390 - • ' • Statewide Planning Goals •Applicable Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies • 1. Citizen Imrolvement 1. General policies 2. Land Use Planning 2. Citizen Involvement 5. Natural Resources 3.Natural Features and Open Space 8. Recreational needs 5. Economy • 6.Dousing 9. Economic Development 8.Transportation A 111 IIousing • 9.Energy . 12. Transportation • 9 • Conclusion Recommendation That the Planning Commission recommend The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action approval to the Tigard City Council to amend measure are consistent with the the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to replace Section 11.1 and amend Policy 5.5 as determined applicable Tigard, Metro, and State through the public hearing process. regulations and goals. . ;�;;` '¢ wa . .r.. ...' ,.�•...�'' ..,,.,,`'4 //!ice, }y_� °�z.— : • 10 • - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The `Background' and `Findings' of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the `Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan, such facts are provided as Volume 1, Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP, its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30) is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain . . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail, street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances, setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base(TDIP, 9/27/05), seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems, educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information, including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts, invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any `green' development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code, TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action, by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a `planned sidewalk' for a non-existant Wall Street extension, east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown, but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015 (6). For example, 0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area . . .". In the present comp plan proposal, only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis . . . ."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District' that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus, it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change, MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above, MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district, a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP, multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045 (1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding), Goal 11, regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? 0 • • , COMMUNITY \ , SPAPEI CITY OF TIGARD . • s�S = OREGON 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222• PO Box 22109• Portland, OR 97269 [ l G/\RD • Phone: 503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: Email: legals @commnewspapers.com The following will be considered by the Ti and City Council on Tuesda A nl 24 2007 at 7:30 PM at the Tigard Civic Center — AFFIDAVIT O F PUBLICATION Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon. State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public on ublic hearing on this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available'at City Hall or the rules of I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060E. • depose and say that I am the Accountin g Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard W Manager of The Times(serving Tigard, Planning Division(Staff contact: Sean Farrel y) 639-4171,or W Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223,by calling by general circulation, published at Beaverton, in email to ceanntigard-or.�ov. the aforesaid county and state, as defined by COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(CPA)2006-00002 ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS, POLICIES AND ACTION City of Tigard MEASURES - pro proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Public Hearing: CPA 2006-00002 REQUEST: Thep p Action TT10935 Comprehensive Nan would update the Goals,Policies,and ndt Plan's Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Imp a copy of which is hereto annexed, was vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the py Downtown.Urban Renewal District.The complete text of the pro- newspaper in the entire issue of said posed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://wWw•tigard- newspaper for I or.gov/code_amendments 1 LOCATION: Tigard Urban R e Renewal District.CABLE REVIEW D, C successive and consecutive weeks in the G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12'(PD), R-25. following issues TERIA April 5, 2007 Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and Metro 18.390;- Comprehensrve Plan Policies 1,2,3, 5, Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 5, 10,and 12. 0/KGe< UA-c, Publish 4/5/2007 TT10936 Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) April 5, 2007 11 - A �l. NOTARIW�PPUBLIC FOR OREGON My commission expires ..j/\ c)1._ t 000 Acct#10093001 f' ` OFFICIAL SEAL ) Doreen Laughlin i)-lam ,r SUZETTE I CURRAN g ( �''w • NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON () City of Tigard 1 �1 � COMMISSION N0.373063 Tigard,d SW Hall Blvd. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV.28,20071 Tigard, OR 97223 `- �-`-�-�-�-��-`�- �-�-�-�.. -� • Size:2 x 5.5 Amount Due $91.85 *Remit to address above 44 010 - • COMMUNITY SPAPERS OREGON a CITY OF TIGARD 6605 SE Lake Road, Portland, OR 97222• PO Box 22109• Portland, OR 97269 Phone:503-684-0360 Fax: 503-620-3433 i T I G ARD Email: legals @commnewspapers.com PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on Monday March 19,2007 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION 1 Civic Center-Town Hall; 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon. Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060E. The Planning depose and say that I am the Accounting Commission's review is for the purpose of making a recommen- Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, dation to the City.Council on the request. The Council will then - hold a public hearing on the request prior to making a decision. Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard general circulation, published at Beaverton, in j Planning Division(Staff contact: Sean Farrelly)at 13125 SW the aforesaid county and state, as defined by Hall Blvd.;Tigard,Oregon 97223,by calling 503-639-4171,or by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that email to COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT(CPA) 2006-00002 City of Tigard - PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO Public Hearing Item; CPA 2006-0002 UPDATE DOWNTOWN MGOSURES LICIES AND ACTION TT10922 REQUEST: • The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals,Policies,and Action a copy of which is hereto annexed, was Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's published in the entire issue of said vision of a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use Town Center in the, newspaper for i Downtown Urban Renewal District.The complete text of the pro- 1 posed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard- successive and consecutive weeks in the or.gov/code amendments followin issues LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: ;CBD, C- 9 G, C-P, R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRI- TERIA: March 1, 2007 Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2,3,5,6 and 11,Metro Functional i Plan Title 6, and Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 5, 10,and 12. Ckwur tz\i-ic Publish 3/1/2007 TT10922 _ Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manager) March 1, 2007 c5m_v.AL-Acia... c.)_>.). NOTARY'UBLIC FOR OREGON My commission expires a/ r t A I DOU� Acct#10093001 tit- . -�-1- - - - - - - - -`-`-�`�� 4191.�� r Doreen Laughlin �, OFFICIAL SEAL • SUZETTE City of Tigard ) NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON () 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 1 COMMISSION NO.373063 ) Tigard, OR 97223 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV,28,2007 6 Size:2 x 5.75 Amount Due$96.02 'Remit to address above . • 410 March 1, 2007 Greetings: You are invited to attend and provide testimony at an important Planning Commission public hearing on March 19`h, 2007 at 7 p.m. in Tigard Town Hall located at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. On this date, the Commission will hold a public hearing to consider recommending to the City Council that it adopt new goals, policies and action measures for the Downtown element (urban renewal district) of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed goals policies and action measures can be viewed on the city's website. http://www.tigard-or.gov/city_hall/departments/cd/code_amendments/downtown_goals.asp The proposed goals policies and action measures were jointly reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC). Subsequent to Council's adoption of the Downtown Comprehensive Plan section, additional public work sessions and hearings are planned for summer/fall 2007 to make Development Code changes to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TRIP). New land-use regulations for Downtown are needed to ensure the quality of future development. This is important to protect and enhance property values, encourage on-going • investment and also implement the community's future vision for Downtown Tigard. An important part of the project is the involvement of stakeholders and you are encouraged to participate. It will take several months to complete this portion of the project and we will keep you informed of participation opportunities. New Downtown development will be required to conform to these new land use regulations. However, existing buildings and land uses will be able to continue under some type of non-conforming use standard. The specifics of how to address non-conforming uses will be part of the project. If you have any questions, please contact staff Planner Sean Farrelly (503-718-2420 or e-mail sean(a,tigard-or.gov). Sincerely, Ron Bunch Long Range Planning Manager C. Carolyn Barkley • Gretchen BueI'!rer 12290 SW Main Street, A-2 13249 SW 136th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Alexander Craghead Suzanne Gallagher g 12205 SW Hall Blvd 13547 SW Mountain Ridge Ct. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Alice Ellis Gaut 'Ralph Hughes 10947 SW Chateau Lnae 12855 SW Morningstar Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Lily Lilly Roger Potthoff 12390 SW Knoll Drive P O Box 23968 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97281 Carl Switzer 11120 SW 109th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 • • • 12175 M_ C 8 .7- SW COMMERCLAL LL 23900 SW 1-1. CREEK RD BY BO` • OUT, • - • FANNY P S FOOD,OR 97140 10459 NW _ ARK DR PO'- AND,OR 972 • ALDERWOODS (OREGON) INC A FIN:TAX DEPT ALPROP CO PAO 6126 6149 SW SHATTUCK RD 250"H"ST PORTLAND,OR 97221 BLAINE,WA 98230 ASIAN ENTERPRISES,INC AMERICAN LEGION,THE PO B012990 TIGARD POST#158 TUALATIN,OR 97062 PO B0123482 TIGARD,OR 97281 ANDERSON,PHYLLIS M TRUST c/o ANDERSON,ROGER F ANKELE,BRIAN 10120 SW KABLE ST 3457 N WILLAMETTE BLVD TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97217 ANKELE,MARVIN R&KATHRYN J ASHER,BRIAN W AND SUSAN P 12511 SW SLAIN 15795 SW SERENA CT TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 B_fOOM LLC& BARNES,SANDRA L PAG KATHLEEN E c/o TUMAY CORPORATION 7122 SE MILWAUKIE AVE 11920 SW PACIFIC HWY PORTLAND,OR 97202 TIGARD,OR 97223 B-B-B-PROPERTIES c/o FLETCHCO PROPERTIES LLC BC ASSOCIA 1'ES LLC BY JEFFREY B FLETCHER 1128 SW ENGLEWOOD DR 2065 FAIR OAKS CT LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 SHERWOOD,OR 97140 BISHOP MARTHA E& BISHOP CHILDREN'S TRUST BSM REALTY LLC PO B0123832 3176 AMERICAN SADLER DR TIGARD,OR 97281 PARK CITY,UT 84060 BURTON,WILLLAM H ET AL BURNHAM BUSINESS&STORAGE LLC c/o FLETCHCO PROPERTIES,LLC 9500 SW BARBUR BLVD STE 300 BY JEFFREY B FLETCHER PORTLAND,OR 97219 2065 FAIR OAKS CT SHERWOOD,OR 97140 BU 1'1ERFIELD,CHARLES W JR& CACHt6E$,ALD C MARITAL TRU - \ZI S CAPISTRANO,NIC• 1 B 82 VIEWCREST DR 13670 SW\ • - OOD CT DUNDEE,OR 97115 TI . . '.., •R 97224 CALWEST INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS LLC • BY ePROPERTYTAX,INC CAPISTRANO,NICHOLAS III DEPT#207 12370 SW MAIN ST PO BOX 4900 TIGARD,OR 97223 SCOSDALE,AZ 85261 CAPISTRANO,NICOLAS&CRISTINA& CAPISTRINO,NICOLIS III& CACH FAMILY REVOCABLE"TRUST& CAPIS TRANO,CRISTINA CACH,GERALD C MARITAL TRUST REVOCABLE LIVING TRUSTS 13670 SW WRIGHT\VOOD CT 6646 SW 35TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97224 PORTLAND,OR 97221 CA STRANO,NICOLA IV CAPISTRANO,NICOLAS II t V LIV BY CAPI ' • • COLAS III TR B 0 '•LAS III TR 6646 SW ' 6646 SW 3 PO' AND,OR 97221 PO t " ND,OR 97221 CA' H JOHNSON FANS ^ L P II BY JO ON CARLOS,STEVE 8965 SW '� THAI 12435 SW ASH AVE TI 111),OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 CASCADE ACQUISITION LLC CAUTHORN,BRUCE R& 9180 SW BURHNH 1�4 SOMMERS,GREGORY J 9960 SW SA"1' TIGARD,OR 97223 1'LER TIGARD,OR 97224 C OPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC BY ERI LETHIN CHRISNLkN,RICHARD&HEATHER IRS 3443 SW DOSCHVIEW CT 172 MIDDLECREST RD PORTLAND,OR 97239 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 CLICKENER,ROBERT R&PATRICIA A COOLEY,CRAIG L&JUNE E 8485 SW HUNZIKER 21797 SW OAK HILL LN TIGARD,OR 97223 TUALATIN,OR 97062 CRAGHEAD,GARY A JUDY A DAVIDSON,WILLL1AI G AND DIXIE L 12205 SW HATA-,BV 8915 SW COMMERCIAL TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 DDM ENTERPRISES,LLC DEANGELO,S IEPHEN T& 19885 SW CAPPOEN RD BOSLEY,BECKI A SHERWOOD,OR 97140 13215 SW 124TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97223 DIBB,THERESA R REV LTV TRUST DOLAN&CO LLC BY B,THERESA R TR BY FLORENCE T DOLAN 88'COMMERCIAL ST 4523 NE DAVIS ST TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97213 . • DOUGHERTY,ALICLk EHRENFELT,TRACEY S 12260 SW HALL BLVD 14616 SW GRANDVIEW LN PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 • ERDMAN,TERRANCE E AND RDMZAN,THOMAS M FAZ .. - ADAM,L — E12405 SW MAIN ST 12571 SW TIGARD,OR 97223 TIG '.o,OR 97223 FINKE,ALEX AND LOTTI AND HANS CHRISTIAN FINLEY,NELLIE J TR PO B0123562 8945 SW CEN 1'ER ST PORTLAND,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 FRAHLER,WILLLAM M TRUSIEE FREY,HILDE C 14990 SW 137TH PL 21745 SW HEDGES DR TIGARD,OR 97224 TUALATIN,OR 97062 GLADSTONE,HELENE D TRUS l'EE HAAGEN,GARY L&CANDACE C TRS 150 IRON MTN BLVD 2514 SE 112TH AVE LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 VANCOUVER,WA 98664 H•STREET CROSSING LLC HANSON,DONALD E TRUST 8067 SW RIGERT CT PO BOX 12 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 WELCHES,OR 97067 HARRIS,JAMES R& HENDERSON,JACK R&MARY S MCMONAGLE,WILLIAM 12555 SW HALL BLVD SW BURNHAM ST PORTLAND,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 HEUVELHORST,MICHAEL J HOFFARBER,RAY ALBERT ESTATE OF c/o 1 ADEY,GEORGE S JR c/o LEE,SAMMY& 12551 SW MAIN ST NAM,NAM SOON TIGARD,OR 97223 11900 SW PACIFIC HWY TIGARD,OR 97223 HOYT CORPORATION BY US BANK PROPERTIES INLAD LLC 2800 EAST LAKE ST 11875 SW PACIFIC HWY MIINNEAPOLIS,MLN 55406 TIGARD,OR 97223 INTEGRATED DATA CONCEPTS INC INTEGRITY INVESTMENTS INC 11ir GREENBURG RD 2229 NE BURNSIDE SUITE 86 Ti ,OR 97223 GRESHAM,OR 97030 JASUE TRUST,THE& • • JEFFREY,NATHAN TRUST THE JB OAK HILL LI\IITED PARTNERSHIP BY ALBERTSON'S #65 9169 SW BURNHAM PO BOX 20 TIGARD,OR 97223 BOISE,ID 83726 JDA INVEST\iENTS LLC JOHNSON,DENNIS A&GAIL W PO BOX 23784 8875 SW CEN l'ER ST TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 JOHNSON,WARREN W&BE 1"1'Y TRS AN KAUFMANN,RANDALL&MARY TRUST JOHNSON,REES C&MARY ANNE G PO BOX 357 3112 SW SANTA MONICA ST MOOSE,WY 83012 PORTLAND,OR 97201 KLUSMAN,WANDA KNAUSS,WAYNE ET AL c/o GREENBERG,BARRY& c/o HUMBERSTON,RUSSELL D GREENBERG,ROBERT REVOCABLE TRUST 11960 SW GREENBURG RD PO BOX 4300 TIGARD,OR 97223 BEAVERTON,OR 97076 LANDING SQUARE LIMITED PARTNERSH LEARY,DAVID LYLE& VIUHKOLA,JENNIFER LEARY,KATHLEEN JOAN 5250 SW LANDING SQUARE#14 10020 SW JOHNSON ST PORTLAND,OR 97209 TIGARD,OR 97223 LY GUANCHENG& LI,WEI Z IRIS YANG/ING 11053 SW WASHINGTON ST 13018 SW 153RD TER PORTLAND,OR 97225 TIGARD,OR 97223 LIFEWORKS NW LUKE-DORF,INC 14600 NW CORNELL RD 10313 SW 69TH AVE PORTLAND,OR 97229 TIGARD,OR 97223 MAGNO LLC MAIN STREET LLC& BY MAGNO-HUMPHRIES INC DUDUNAKIS,MICHAEL P PO BOX 230626 18380 RIVER EDGE LN TIGARD,OR 97281 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 MARR,ROBERT M& PLAINS,ELDON H JR PO BOX 1178 WOLF-MARR,MARIE L 12420 SW MAIN ST HILLSBORO,OR 97123 TIGARD,OR 97223 MATSUMOTO,WILLL-1M Y&NINA A MAZZOCCO,DAVID E 87 BURNH_AM RD 975 SE SANDY BLVD,S FE 101 TI _ ,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97214 • MCCLURE,CHARLES J &ELLEN R TRU MCDONALDS CORPORATION 036/0041 c/o HILARY,JEROLD W&JEAN M DOUBLE K VENTURES INC 8965 SW CAROLINE DR 8255 SW HUNZIKER ST STE 203 PORTLAND,OR 97225 TIGARD,OR 97223 MEYER A H&INGRID MILLER,PRUDENCE M TRUST 9125 SW CEN 1'ER ST BY PRUDENCE M MILLER TR TIGARD,OR 97223 4220 SW GREENLEAF DR PORTLAND,OR 97221 MIRAGE WORKS LLC NICOLI PACIFIC LLC 9055 SW BEAV-HLSDL HWY 19600 SW CIPOLE RD PORTLAND,OR 97230 TUALATIN,OR 97062 NW PREFERRED FEDERAL CREDIT UNIO 8450 SW BURNHAM OLSEN,JOHN W&MARY JO PO BOX 231269 8820 SW CENTER ST TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 OLSON,NORRIS A&KATHLEEN A O'NEAL,LINDA S 13660 SW ASH AVE 8995 SW CEN 1'ER ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 O1j�ON DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RWROPERTY MGMT UNIT P J LAND COMPANY FILE#54888-A//763 10380 SW CAN 1'ERBURY LN 355 CAPITAL ST NE,RAM 411 TIGARD,OR 97224 SALEM,OR 97301 PACIFIC HIGHWAY HOLDING CO LLC PADDACK FAMILY TRUST• 201 SE OAK ST BY PADDACK,A LUELLA TR PORTLAND,OR 97214 11025 SW SUMMER LAKE DR TIGARD,OR 97223 PAYLESS DRUG STORES NW INC NEW ALBERTSON'S INC PENNY CONNOR INVESTMENTS LLC DEPT 70428-CORPORATE TAX 8905 SW COMMERCLAL#A PO BOX 20 TIGARD,OR 97223 BOISE,ID 83726 PEREZ,FELIP_A PORTLAND AERIE NO 4 FRA 1'ERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES 4333 E SALUSON AVE #B 8845 SW COMMERCLAL ST MAYWOOD,CA 90270 TIGARD,OR 97223 PRUNTY,CRAIG E&CARRIE A REEVES,BRIAN 85.V SORRENTO RD 8162 SW DURHAM RD B RTON,OR 97008 TIGARD,OR 97224 REMEDIOS,DAVID&MARIA& • • TAYLOR,HANS& ULIE& RUSSELL,TIMOTHY M AND DITTO,BRAD/SUSAN&ESMAILI,ASG N ANCY L 265 N BROOKSHIRE AVE 8985 SW CEN 1'ER STREET VENTURA,CA 93003 TIGARD,OR 97223 • SANOKEE SAVORY,DAVID S AND MARY F 375 NW GILMAN BLVD,STE C-203 BY SW OFFICE SUPPLY ISSAQUAH,WA 98027 12245 SW MAIN ST TIGARD,OR 97223 SAYLER,ANNA R SCOFFINS STREET INVESTMENT COMPA PO BOX 23757 8810 SW SCOFFINS ST TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97223 SCOTT&HOOKLAND REAL ESTATE PAR BY SCOTT,MICHAEL SCOTT,JERRY D&NATALIE C 9185 SW BURNHAM ST 10060 SW PICKS CT • TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97224 SELLER'S EDGE REALTY LLC SICKLES,DANIEL 12525 SW'vIAIN ST 10432 SW 52ND AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97219 SK•TES,MARIANELLY SNYDER,OWEN R&GAIL V PO BOX 2327 10250 SW HIGHLAND DR CLACKA v AS,OR 97015 TIGARD,OR 97224 SPEEDY LINGUINE,INC SPOHN,NANCY D REVOC LIV TRUST 12386 SW MAIN ST 9053 SW BURNHAM ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 SQUAWFISH DEVELOPMENT LLC S 1'EELE,NANCY TRUSTEE PO BOX 23784 PO BOX 230057 TIGARD,OR 97281 TIGARD,OR 97281 STEVENS,PAGE STEVENSON,MICHAEL J &KAY L 9180 SW BURNHAM ST 16815 MAPLE CIR TIGARD,OR 97223 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 SU\111ERS,JOSEPH R TEXACO REFINING&MARKETING,LNC BEY C BY EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC 1 W 121ST AVE SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US TIGARD,OR 97223 TAX DEPT PO BOX 4369 HOUSTON,TX 77210 • • • • THOMPSON LIVING TRUST THOMPSON,DENNIS C BY J RONALD/CECILIA I THOMPSON TRS 1847 N 150E 9295 SW ELECTRIC ST CEN 1'ERVILLE,UT 84014 TIGARD,OR 97223 THOMPSON,J RONALD&CECILIA . TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF 1847 N 150E COMMERCE,THE CENTERVILLE,UT 84014 12345 SW MAIN ST TIGARD,OR 97223 • • TIGARD AUTO STOP PARTNERS TIGARD JOY CINEMA LLC 2610 WETMORE AVE BY DAVID EMAMI PO BOX 1709 3380 BARRINGTON DR EVERETT,WA 98206 WEST LINN,OR 97068 TIGARD MANOR HOLDINGS LLC TIGARD PLAZA LLC BY ALLIANCE PROPERTIES 4280 SW 109TH AVE 8320 NW HWY 99 BEAVERTON,OR 97007 VANCOUVER,WA 98665 TIGARD PROFESSIONAL,CENTER TIGARD TOWNHOMES INC P 0 BOX 23006 BY MERRILL&CHARLOTTE HODGES TIGARD,OR 97223 PO BOX 2907 POULSBO,WA 98370 TI WATER DISTRICT TM-COUNTY METROPOLITAN 87% V BURNHAM ST TRANSPORTATION DIST OF OR PO BOX 23000 4012 SE 17TH AVE TIGARD,OR 97223 PORTLAND,OR 97202 TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE&RESCUE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO 20665 SW BLANTON ST PROPERTY TAX ALOHA,OR 97007 1400 DOUGLAS,STOP 1640 OMAHA,NE 68179 UNITED STALES POSTAL SERVIC VERIZON NORTHWEST INC 12225 SW SLAIN . PO BOX 152206 TIGARD,OR 97223 IRVING,TX 75015 WAGGIN'TAIL PROPERTIES,LLC BY SUPERIOR SIGNS WALTON,DARLENE E TRUST 12529 SW HALL BLVD 10955 SW BLACK DIAMOND TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 WELLS FARGO BANK NA BY LOI"1 1'1 T A11 LLP WILKING INVESTMENTS V LLC PCX 2609 16325 BOONES FERRY RD S 1'E 200 CARLSBAD,CA 92018 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97035 • • WOODARD,CHARLES L AND ARLIE C WYATT PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 23303 9095 SW BURN}-IAM ST TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 YOO,KYOUNG-HEE&JAEUK ZEIDER,RICHARD W&JANET K 17613 OAK MEADOW LN 13100 SW SUMMIT RIDGE ST LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 TIGARD,OR 97224 ZELLER,TIMOTHY L ZUBER,JOHN H 12215 SW MAIN ST 9025 SW BURNHAM TIGARD,OR 97223 TIGARD,OR 97223 • • • Fazilah Adam Ayes Labs Gus Anderson 12571 SW Main St 9135 SW 80th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 • Bill Anderson Jim Andrews 9731 SW London Ct. PO Box 23784 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97281 Janice Arave Dirk Asbury 12225 SW Lansdowne Lane 9468 B Southwest Ivana Court Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Brian Asher Jason Ashley 15795 SW Serena Ct. 13350 SW Brittany Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 BJ Atwood Steve &Carol Badell 12525 SW Main St. 9705 SW Frewing St. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 RI Bangs Linda Barrett 10:.1 SW 79th Ave. 11885 SW 91st Ave.,#33 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Pat Bauer David Baumgarten 11775 SW 91st Ave. 8670 SW Stratford Ct. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Stan Baumhofer Jeffrey Beach PO Box 8556 13220 SW Ash Dr. Portland, OR 97207 Tigard, OR 97223 Ken&Beverly Becket Sue Beilke 14660 SW 141st Ave. 11755 SW 114th Pl. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Christine Benavidez Scott Bernhard,DC 13 SW Merlin Place 10895 SW Tigard St. Ti , OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Steve &Tiffany Bigej Brian Bishop • 9540 SW Frewing Ct. Bishop Building Tigard, OR 97223 12290 SW Main St., Ste. 4 Tigard, OR 97223 • Martha E. Bishop Rob Blakely 10590 SW Cook Lane 11645 SW Hazelwood Lp. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tracey Blue John and Fanny Bookout 5030 SE Rex Dr. 10459 NW Lost Park Drive Portland, OR 97206 Portland, OR 97229 Becki Bosley Marvin Bowen 9037 SW Burnham 12562 SW Main St. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Ransom Boyce Myrna &Butch Boyce 14155 SW 97th Place 14155 SW 97th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 R yce Peter Braam PO ox 23093 9315 SW Lehman Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97223 Jim Bray Teddy June Bredeson 9930 SW Inez 11797 SW Boones Bend Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Beaverton, OR 97223 Tom Brian Ginny Brickley 7630 SW Fir 14970 SW 141St Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Jack Brown Charlie&Barb Brunner 7905 SW Oak 13175 SW Ash Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Gretchen Buehner Bob and Shari Burgess 13SW 136th Place 13320 SW Ash Ave. Ti W, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Sandra Burtzos • Joe Bustos • 12790 SW Blue Heron Place American Legion • Tigard, OR 97223 12160 SW Royal Ct#C Tigard, OR 97224 BillOtterfield Quest Schools Rex Caffall P.O. Box 230060 13205 SW Village Glen Dr. Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97223 Rob Callan Carol Campbell 11175 SW Eden Ct. 11235 SW Willow Wood Court Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Robert R. Cancelosi III Leon Capsouto 13332 SW 129th Ave. 11650 SW 67th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 John Cardenas Joshua Chaney 13300 SW Uplands Drive 9708 SW London Court Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Bnin Chessar Heather Chrisman NW and Stevens Chrisman Picture Frame 621 SW Morrison St, Suite 800 172 Middlecrest Rd. Portland, OR 0 Lake Oswego, OR 97304 Gary Ciment Ayes Labs Inc. Paul E. Clark 12571 SW Main St. 9160 SW Edgewood Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Paul E. Clark Cheri Collier 9160 SW Edgewood 11777 SW Queen Elizabeth Tigard, OR 97223 King City, OR 97224 Penny Connor Razz-Ma-Tazz Cleon Cox III 8905 SW Commercial 13580 SW Ash Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Gary Craghead Jo nn Mountain Shop Ruth Croft 1 SW Hall Blvd. 6060 SW 68 Ct. Tigard, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 • • Randy Curtin Patti Curtin 12550 SW Main Street 10105 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Millturtis Cash's Realty Scott&Kris Davenport 12525 SW Main St 13410 SW Ash Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Gillian Davis Jennifer DeMuth 2230 NE 12th 320 SW Stark, Ste. 415 Portland, OR 97212 Portland, OR 97204 George and Paula Diamond Theresa and Regina Dibb 18380 Rover Edge Lane T. Scandia Motors Inc. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 8848 SW Commercial St. Tigard, OR 97223 Eric Dickman Don Digman 3111 SE 53rd 13600 SW Ash Ave. Portland, OR 97206 Tigard, OR 97223 J o onnelson Oscar Dorantes 113 SW Ambiance PI 11885 SW 91st Ave.,#72 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Luis Dorantes Matt& Geneva Dougal 11885 SW 91st Ave., #72 13270 SW Ash Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Ed Duax Kon Dueryminski 13350 SW Ash Ave. 9350 SW Hall#34 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Connie Dunne Wilson John Ebling 13225 Village Glenn Cir. 7125 SW Ventura Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Tom Edwards Tyler Ellenson 89 W Burnham Tyler's Automotive Ti , OR 97223 12485 SW Main St. Tigard, OR 97223 • • Harvey&Janet Elser Don Feller 23900 SW Mm. Creek Rd. 9875 SW View Ct. Sherwood, OR 97140 Tigard, OR 97224 • Tom Fergusson Angela Ferlitsch 14850 SW 141st Ave. 14975 SW 141st Ave Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Sean &Holly Finnerty Jeff Fletcher 13255 SW Ash Ave. American Family Insurance Tigard, OR 97223 12202 SW MAIN STREET Tigard, OR 97223 Henry&Maureen Ford Sharon Fox 13165 SW Ash Ave. 15050 SW Kenton Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Warren Frendell Michael Freudenthal 11710 SW Warner Ave 16129 SW Palermo Ln. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jo rewing Greg&Jennifer Fritz 711 SW Lola Lane 13265 SW Ash Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Beverly Froude Rita Fulcher 12200 SW Bull Mountain Rd 15760 SW 76th Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Bob Fuqway Koline Fusitra PO Box 871 9705 SW Hall #30 Tualatin, OR 97062 Tigard, OR 97223 Larry Gage Larry Galizio 15149 SW Cabernet Drive 16455 SW 93rd Ave. Tigard, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97224 Lois Gande Lois Ganoe 13SW Ash Drive 13165 SW Ash Dr. Ti , OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • • Patty Gazeley Erik Gellatly 7034 SW 83rd Ave 14510 SW Chardonnay Ave Portland, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 1111 Steve &Kathy George Bill Gilham 13227 SW Ash Ave. 8320 SW Ellman Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 0 David Gillespie Janet Gillis 13621 SW Mountain Ridge 13711 SW Essex Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Dora Gourley Artist Pat Gray 7740 SW Afton Lane 8275 SW Chestnut Durham, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 Sheila Greenlaw-Fink Carolyn Griffith PO Box 23206 10915 SW Fairhaven Way Tigard, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 H r Guevara Sue Guthrie 130' SW Creekshire Drive 10070 SW Murdock St Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Bill Haack MaryAnn Hackman 9585 SW 69th Ave. 15225 SW 141st Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Victoria Hamilton Lisa Hamilton-Treick 15189 SW Roundtree Drive 13565 SW Beef Bend Rd. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Robert Hamnes Don Hanson 12105 SW 92nd Ave. 12519 SW Main Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Patrick Harbison Ann Hartman 13SW Chelsea Lp 14280 SW 141st Ave. Tigupr, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 • • Margaret Hartzell Jan Haynes 15399 SW Burgandy St. 13185 SW Ash Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 • Sheri Hays Marland Henderson 13290 SW Ash Drive 12950 SW Pacific Hwy., Suite 225 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Ken Henschel Joan Hensey 14530 SW 144th Ave. 13621 SW Mountain Ridge Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Pat Hermanson Renette Hier 7530 SW Cherry Drive 11170 SW Morgan Ct. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jerold Hilary Kathleen Hill 9250 SW Tigard St. 14900 SW 141st Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 P 1 Carlota and James Holley 14176 SW 133rd Ave. 13420 SW Village Glenn Ct. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Barry Houk Dave &Marilyn Hughes 11579 SW Sheffield Court 13505 SW Village Glenn Drive Tigard, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 Carina Huynh Paul Iford 13401 SW 136th Place 11547 Sw Lomita Ave Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 Michael Isom Jean Jackson PO Box 12461 Tigard Sub Shop Portland, OR 97212 12501 SW Main Street Tigard, OR 97223 Nicholas Jarmer Al Jeck 12SW 107th Court 9600 SW Oak, Ste. 230 TM!, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • • Diane M.Jelderks Rees Johnson 11890 SW 91st Ave. 3112 SW Santa Monica Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97201 Caahnson Forrest Johnson Armature Coil Co. Armature Coil Co. 8965 SW Burnham St. 8965 SW Burnham St. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Carl Johnson Dean Johnston 16030 SW Queen Victoria Place 8845 SW Commercial St. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Skip Jones Rose Juda 13335 SW Ash Ave. 11875 SW 91st Ave.,#38 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Zora Jungvirt George Kadey 13125 SW Ash Dr. Tigard Cycle and Ski Service Tigard, OR 97223 12551 SW Main St. Tigard, OR 97223 BA. Kaiser Roxanne Karnick 886 SW McDonald 14524 SW Chardonnay Ave. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 CR Kastel Phil Kelleher 14259 SW 100th Ave. John L. Scott,Tigard Tigard, OR 97224 P.O. Box 23023 Tigard, OR 97223 Tom and Zora Kirkpatrick Trudy Knowles 8880 SW Bomar Court PO Box 230275 Portland, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 Gene Knutson Peter and Kevin Lapp 15630 SW 98th Ave. 8310 SW Pine St. Tigard, OR 97224 Portland, OR 97223 Sabin Larson Bob Law 13SW Village Glenn Ct 12655 SW North Dakota Tiling, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 Suzanne Lawton • Chris &Brian its 14545 SW 88th Ave. Art Representative Tigard, OR 97224 12828 SW Walnut St Tigard, OR 97223 III S. Carolyn Long Janice and Andre Lopez 10629 SW Canterbury Lane 9400 SW Hill St. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Hazel Lyon Jeannette Lyons,N.D. 10440 SW 87th Ave. 12540 SW Main St.,Suite 110 Portland, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Gordon Mallory Mrs. Constance Manrow 12774 SW Terraview Drive 11905 SW 91st Ave., #37 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Darrin Marks Sharon Maroney 10729 SW River Dr. 14070 SW Hall Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 MiliVarr TWA Bob or Ned McCall 12420 SW Main Street 5480 NW Front Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97210 Mike&Barb McCoy Gerry McReynolds 13155 SW Ash Dr PO Box 23877 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 0 Katherine Meads Marjorie& Gary Meeks 9780 SW Ventura Ct. 13495 SW Village Glen Tigard, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 Al& Ingrid Meyer Paul Meyer 9125 SW Center St Stevens Marine Tigard, OR 97223 9180 SW Burnham Tigard, OR 97223 Dick Miller Miller's Auto Richard Miller 190SW Cappoen Rd. 8970 SW Burnham St. Sherwood, OR 97146 Tigard, OR 97223 • • G. Moore Marcie Moravec 15405 SW Kenton Dr. 14365 SW 80th Place Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97224 • Susan Morelli Matthew Muldoon 15912 SW Dozier Way 11155 SW 81st Ave Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Tom Murphy Ed Murphy 8152 SW Ashford St. 9875 SW Murdock St. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Dan Murphy Eva Myers PO Box 231004 11905 SW 91st Ave. Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97223 Donald Myers Hassan Najieb New Shoes Prof. Shoe Recrafters Get More Solutions 12255 SW Main St. 12460 SW Main St. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 D &Rhonda Neilson Schadia Newcombe 132 SW Village Glenn Dr. 13673 SW Mtn. Ridge Crt. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 William and Eliana Nolan Jay Ojeda 4309 SW Galeburn St. 12540 SW Main Street, Suite 110 Portland, OR 97213 Tigard, OR 97223 Chuck O'Leary Bob Oleson 16325 BOONES FERRY RD., SUITE 200 9023 SW Reiling St. LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97035 Tigard, OR 97224 Dan Olsen Lisa Olson 155 N. First 14720 SW Cabernet Court Hillsboro, OR 97123 Tigard, OR 0 Jamie Omura Dave Owen 99 W 90th Ave: Killers Exterminators Ti , OR 97223 9025 SW Burnham, #B Tigard, OR 97223 • S Mark Padgett Bethany Palmer 12974 SW Princeton Ln. 9070 SW Edgewood St. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • Kathy Palmer Kim Pangborn 14260 SW High Tor Drive 13731 SW Northview Drive Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Yudhi Patel Jana Patterson 14252 SW 134th Drive 13110 SW Ash Dr. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Joyce Patton Colin Penno 13980-101 SW Scholls Ferry Road 7913 SW Churchill Way Beaverton, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97224 Shanell Mary Perez Bonnie Peterson 11855 SW 91st Ave.,Apt. 63 13245 SW Ash Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 eterson Barbara Peterson 897 SW Burnham St. 15435 SW Oaktree Lane Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Kevin Pfannes Jim Philipson PO Box 100 7934 SW Ashford Gleneden Beach, OR 97388 Tigard, OR 97224 Robert A. Pierce Winning Money Strategies Jonny Polivka P.O. Box 23818 13435 SW Chelsea LP Tigard, OR 97281 Tigard, OR 97223 Lee Potampa Genevieve Price 10945 SW Highland Dr. 14580 SW 141st Ave. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Sandi Puro Ward Rader 141111 SW Jessica Way 7617 SW CedarcrestSt A , OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 • S Charles F. Radley Niranjan Ramakrishnan 15729 SW Colyer Way 9760 SW Omara St. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Matt Ratalsky Jack Reardon 8985 SW Mc Donald Washington Square Tigard, OR 97224 P.O. Box 23635 Tigard, OR 97281 Jean Reger Chris &Jane Reid 15495 SW Sequoia Pkwy, #190 9315 SW Lake Street Portland, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Catherine Renken Lisa Rice 15251 SW Burgundy 9505 SW Commercial St. Tigard, OR 0 Tigard, OR 97223 Chris Richards Shelley Richards 13380 SW Ash Ave. 15080 SW 89th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Jailichardson Ptial Northwest Steve&Rose Richmond 14945 SW Sequoia Parkway, Suite 150 13710 SW Ash Ave. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Judi&Morgan Roberts Dawn Roberts 13290 SW Ash Ave. 13290 SW Ash Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 DuWayne&Bonnie Roberts Don Roberts 13295 SW Ash Dr. 13500 SW Pacific Hwy, #491 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Bob Rohlf Dian Ross 12430 SW N. Dakota 11646 SW Royal Villa Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Julie Russell Phyllis Ryman 12a1 SW Terraview Drive Gammy's Gifts T , OR 97224 14200 SW Fanno Creek Ct. Tigard, OR 97224 • S Eric Salkeld Alex Sander 12095 SW 96th Place 14259 SW 55th Ct. Tigard, OR 97223 Tualatin, OR 0 • Paul Savory Ian Sanders 12475 SW 127th Ave. SW Office Supply Tigard, OR 97223 3205 NW Yeon Portland, OR 97210 Paul Savory Southwest Office Supply Sherrie Schilling 12245 SW Main 12535 SW Main Street Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 LeRoy Schmidt Betty&Alfred Schmidt 32294 EJ Smith Road 13145 SW Ash Dr. Scappoose, OR 97056 Tigard, OR 97223 Clarence Schmierer Julie Schnetzky 13130 SW Ash Dr. 11860 SW 91st Ave Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 K &Kori Schulmerich Joe Schweitz 131 SW Ash Dr. 14352 SW 90th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Doug Sellers Jean Seriu Home Street Bank Cottage & Garden Antiques 16200 SW Pacific Hwy. 12436 SW Main Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Jed Shannon Marion Sharp 15535 SW Oaktree Lane 13780 SW 115th Ave Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Holly Shumway • Pam Sigler 14535 SW Woodhire St. 13694 SW Hall Blvd #6 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Storm Smith TV &R Kathy Smith 14EiSW Jenkins Rd. 11845 SW 91st Apt. 80 Beaverton, OR 97005 Tigard, OR 97223 • • Bud Snyder Richard Spielman 10250 SW Highland Dr. 10115 SW Nimbus,Suite 250 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 • Nancy Spohn Cindy St. Claire 9053 SW Burnham St. 11485 SW Greenburg, #21 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Don Steary Gary Stephens 9380 SW Lake St. 15120 SW 141st Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Mike Stevenson B&B Print Source Larry&Marty Stone 9040 SW Burnham 13265 SW Ash Drive Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Bob Storer Don and Kathy Strauss 7225 SW Ventura Drive 9565 SW Frewing Ct. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 M Sturm Scot Sutton 94 SW 74th Ave. 15312 SW Kenton Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Peg Suzio Suzio Design Carolyn Swan 9025 SW Center St., Suite 100 13140 SW Ash Dr Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Mike Swanda Jeff Tainer My Tyme Beads Bank of Tigard 12200 Main St 10998 SW 68th Parkway Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Jill Tellez Marci Thornton-Smith 9280 SW 80th Ave. 14320 SW 80th Place Portland, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 0 Curt Tigard Ruth Timmins 1411 SW Royal Villa 7715 SW Stewart T , OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 • • Bob Tinnin Nancy Tracy 8876 SW Edgewood St. 7310 SW Pine St. Tigard, OR 97223 Portland, OR 97223 Margareth Tunes Carolyn Turbyfill 11724 SW Swendon Loop 16570 SW 93rd Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Allan Twombly Wynne Wakkila 19809 SW Aten Rd 15522 SW 141st Beaverton, OR 97007 Tigard, OR 97224 Rosie Walter Andrea Walter 11900 SW Morning Hill Drive 13118 SW Ash Dr. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Rod Warner Bruce Warner 9223 SW Hill St. 8025 SW Elmwood Street Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Ja &Hideki Watanabe John Wayer 132 0 SW Ash Dr. 12070 SW Fisher Road,P205 Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Eric J.Weberg Suzanne Webster 16114 SW DeKalb Street 11895 SW 95th Ave. Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Brian Wegener Karen Wegener Tualatin Riverkeepers 9830 SW Kimberly Dr. 12360 SW MAIN ST. Tigard, OR 97224 SUITE 100, OR 97223 Mo Wernet Carol West 9525 SW Frewing Ct. 9160 SW 69th Ave. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Ben Westfall Gregory White 1 SW Ash Dr. Davidson's Casual Dining T , OR 97223 12830 SW Pacific Hwy Tigard, OR 97223 • Maureen White Pat Whiting 7100 SW Hampton #212 8122 SW Spruce St. Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 • Nick Willard Dean Williams 9303 91st Ave. 13285 SW Yale Place Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Colleen Willis Julie Wilson 12361 King George Dr. 11020 SW Wishram Ct King City, OR 97224 Tualatin, OR 97062 John Winquist Sue Wirick 13670 SW Wrightwood Ct. 15812 SW Upper Boones Ferry Rd. Tigard, OR 97224 Lake Oswego, OR 97035 John Wirick Chuck Woodard 8948 SW Maui Ct. Main St Liquor Store Tigard, OR 97223 12490 SW Main St. Tigard, OR 97223 PWorrall Sean&April Yarger 77 SW Queen Elizabeth St.,Apt. 208 13585 SW Ash Ave. King City, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Kelly Yoo Re/Max Phil Yount 12550 SW 68th Parkway 11222 SW Cottonwood Lane Portland, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Joachim Youtis 11885 91st Ave.,Apt. 36 , 0 Tigard, OR 97223 , 0 , 0 • , 0 Barry Albertson Josh Thomas 15445 SW 150th Avenue 10395 SW Bonanza Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 Brooks Gaston Tim Esau 3206 Princess PO Box 230695 Edinburg, TX 78539 Tigard, OR 97281 Don & Dorothy Erdt Ross Sundberg 13760 SW 121st Avenue 16382 SW 104th Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97224 Ellen Beilstein Sue Rorman 14630 SW 139th Avenue 11250 SW 82nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97223 Ma = ='sho. Naomi Gallucci 10590 A• •: —rn- 11285 SW 78th Avenue d, OR 97223 Tigard, OR 97223 Vanessa Foster : '.n Wegener 13085 SW Howard Drive 9830 S►, •- Drive Tigard, OR 97223 T''. i, OR 97224 san Beilke Patricia Keerins 117 ,. 4 4th Place 12195 SW 121st Avenue T'►- d, OR 97 • Tigard, OR 97223 hn Frewin L lexander Craghead 7110 ane 1220 - - oulevard ard, OR 97223 Ti' a, OR 97223-. i Paul Owen CPO 4B 10335 SW Highland Drive 16200 SW Pacific Highway, Suite H242 Tigard, OR 97224 Tigard, OR 97224 - .ffall Craig Smelter 1320 :c ►i .•- enn PO Box 1467 ,;.ard, OR 97223 Tualatin, OR 97062 • Harold and Ruth Howland 13145 SW Benish Tigard, OR 97223 Kevin Hogan 14357 SW 133rd Avenue Tigard, OR 97224 G chen Buehner 13249 lace T)ar , OR 97224 Joseph Dyar 10285 SW Highland Drive Tigard, OR 97224-4668 Judith Anderson 16640 SW Jordan Way King City, OR 97224 - - I Froude 12200 - ., : • .ntain Road •ard, OR 97224 Brad Spring 7555 SW Spruce Street Tigard, OR 97223 n Beilke 11755 th Place Ti rd, OR 97223 City of Tigard, Oregon • 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, OR 97223 March 1, 2007 lv� DYE — ' Greetings: T I GARD You are invited to attend and provide testimony at an important Planning Commission &7'5 public hearing on March 19`h, 2007 at 7 p.m. in Tigard Town Hall located at 13125 f , SW Hall Blvd. On this date, the Commission will hold a public hearing to consider recommending to the City Council that it adopt new goals, policies and action measures for the Downtown element(urban renewal district) of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed goals policies and action measures can be viewed on the city's website. h ttp://www.tigard=or.gov/city_hall/departments/cd/code_amendmen is/down town_go als.asp The proposed goals policies-and action measures were jointly reviewed by the Planning Commission and the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC). Subsequent to Council's adoption of the Downtown Comprehensive Plan section, additional public work sessions and hearings are planned for summer/fall 2007 to make Development Code changes to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (1'DIP). New land-use regulations for Downtown are needed to ensure the quality of future development. This is important to protect and enhance property values, encourage on-going investment and also implement the community's future vision for Downtown Tigard.An important part of the project is the involvement of stakeholders and you are encouraged to participate. It will take several months to complete this portion of the project and we will keep you informed of participation opportunities. New Downtown development will be required to conform to these new land use regulations. However,existing buildings and land uses will be able to continue under some type of non-conforming use standard. The specifics of how to address non-conforming uses will be part of the project. - If you have any questions, please contact staff Planner Sean Farrelly (503-718-2420 or e-mail seantcutigard-or.gov). getmtv&iii Ron Bunch • Long Range Planning Manager ., Phone: 503.639.4171 • Fax: 503.684.7297 • www.tigard-or.gov • TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 ..a. tWayne&Dora Gourley , PO LAND OR 9.72'• r.„,,,,,'- Marc 11239 Bernard St. kr, - \ ', - ' r :"- Red' •-•- ' ' ; 7-4:4 „.---. k , •N„..A ,Woodburn,-OR 97071 8685 Nk.NY 0 14 R 2007 OM 1 T An:lexica& m Red Cross -- • - - _ 6,49 4,-Lei-% ,, e,i / 3 I ...I.5 .-- 1- ) 1 S e e 1 Department of Land Conservation and Dtevelcs)pitneizt) �-T„ ° \ Oregon 635 Capitol ��r�1gtalfdf � Salem,OR 97301-2540 \, �wc Theodore R.Kulongoski,Governor (503)373-0050 �� Fax(503)378-5518 www.lcd.state.or.us NOTICE OF ADOPTED AMENDMENT June 7,2007 �_ TO: Subscribers to Notice of Adopted Plan or Land Use Regulation Amendments FROM: Mara Ulloa, Plan Amendment Program Specialist SUBJECT; City of Tigard Plan Amendment DLCD File Number 001-07 The Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD) received the attached notice of adoption. A copy of the adopted plan amendment is available for review at the DLCD office in Salem and the local government office. Appeal Procedures* DLCD ACKNOWLEDGMENT or DEADLINE TO APPEAL: June 25,2007 This amendment was submitted to DLCD for review 45 days prior to adoption. Pursuant to ORS 197.830(2)(b)only persons who participated in the local government proceedings leading to adoption of the amendment are eligible to appeal this decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). If you wish to appeal,you must file a notice of intent to appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA)no later than 21 days from the date the decision was mailed to you by the local government. If you have questions, check with the local government to determine the appeal deadline. Copies of the notice of intent to appeal must be served upon the local government and others who received written notice of the final decision from the local government. The notice of intent to appeal must be served and filed in the form and manner prescribed by LUBA, (OAR Chapter 661, Division 10). Please call LUBA at 503-373-1265, if you have questions about appeal procedures. *NOTE: THE APPEAL DEADLINE IS BASED UPON THE DATE THE DECISION WAS MAILED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT. A DECISION MAY HAVE BEEN MAILED TO YOU ON A DIFFERENT DATE THAN IT WAS MAILED TO DLCD. AS A RESULT YOUR APPEAL DEADLINE MAY BE EARLIER THAN THE ABOVE DATE SPECIFIED. Cc: Gloria Gardiner, DLCD Urban Planning Specialist Stacy Humphrey, DLCD Regional Representative Steve Oulman, DLCD Transportation Planner Sean Farrelly, City of Tigard <paa> ya/ „ • itere00 0 electronic 0 mailed DLCD _ DJPTOF ,J+ Notice of Adoptift( Arti 06 2007 • 7 -1% THIS FORM MUST BE MAILED TtO,DLQ-1,—,7,7–fin = 74,710-YMIVAgrLYMIyii WITHIN 5 WORKING DAYS AFTER THEJFINAtattigiO** LOPMENT PER ORS 197.610,OAR CHAPTER 6607:15:10:91:03111:T'11 j; • "*. . — Jurisdiction: City of Tigard to-VittAMPVG C.RA2046,00002 Date of Adoption: April 24, 2007 D.atoMatled: June 4, 2407 Was a Notice of Proposed Amendment (Form 1,) ilitailet1c.■fiD.LCD? Date: January 5, 2007 Z Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Compfahensime Plan Map Amendment Ei Land Use Regulation Amendment i'tlihgAitap Amendment 0 New Land Use Regulation *Athol:, Summarize the adopted amendment. Do not use-ifeChrilcattaimis. Do not write "See Attached". Amend Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive flan,,, ;$00044treiscfcColorric.: DANVODWR,to ttp.datollac Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to reflect the Tigalid13Roptewn improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian oriented mixed use Town Center n the noiw4194.41,,rhati Renewa District and update Policy 5.5. Does the Adoption differ from proposal? Minor wording change to Action Measurell.A.2 40orateriterigikt fOot-basetheodes." Plan Map Changed from: n/a Zone Map Changed from: nla 40; Location: Downtown Urban Renewal District Acres Involved: 103 Specify Density: Previous: n/a toss: Applicable statewide planning goals: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1$ fl 12 11 14 15 14 17 18 19 El ri -Eg 01 4LiflflD Was an Exception Adopted? 0 YES Z NO Did DLCD receive a Notice of Proposed Amendime,nt„ 45-days prior to first evidentiary hearing? Z Yes 0 No If no, do the statewide planning goals wile 0 Yes 0 No If no, did Emergency Circumstances require Oftrietlitalteado,plion? 0 Yes 0 No DLCD file No. Oi-V --0 7 (/ 57c0) • Please list all affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts: Metro, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Cleanwater Services Local Contact: Sean Farrel ly Phone: (503) 718-2420 Extension: Address: 13125 SW Nall Blvd Fax Number: 503-624-3681 City: Tigard Zip: 97223 E-mail Address: sean @tigard-or.gov ADOPTION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS This form must be mailed to DLCD within 5 working days after the final decision per ORS 197.610,OAR Chapter 660-Division 18. 1, Send this Form and TWO Complete Copies (documents and maps)of the Adopted Amendment to: ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 635 CAPITOL STREET NE,SUITE 150 SALEM,OREGON 97301-2540 2. Electronic Submittals: At least one hard copy must be sent by mail or in person, but you may also submit an electronic copy, by either email or FTP. You may connect to this address to FTP proposals and adoptions: webserver.lcd.state.or.us. To obtain our Username and password for FTP, call Mara Ulloa at 503-373-0050 extension 238, or by emailing mara.ulloa @state.or.us. 3. Please Note: Adopted materials must be sent to DLCD not later than FIVE (5)working days following the date of the final decision on the amendment. 4. Submittal of this Notice of Adoption must include the text of the amendment plus adopted findings and supplementary information. 5. The deadline to appeal will not be extended if you submit this notice of adoption within five working days of the final decision. Appeals to LUBA may be filed within TWENTY-ONE (21)days of the date, the Notice of Adoption is sent to DLCD. 6. In addition to sending the Notice of Adoption to DLCD, you must notify persons who participated in the local hearing and requested notice of the final decision. 7. Need More Copies? You can now access these forms online at http://www.lcd.state.or.us/. Please print on 8-1/2x11 green paper only. You may also call the DLCD Office at(503) 373-0050; or Fax your request to: (503) 378-5518; or Email your request to mara.ulloa @state.or.us - ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST. http://www.fcd.state.or.us/LCD/forms.shtml Updated November 27,2006 - • EXHIBIT A 5 . E C O N O M Y Commentary :The proposed amendment would amend Policy 5.5 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan(Volume II) to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district.The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan states that more housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core.Although much of the new residential development would be focused in mixed use development above the first floor,the TDIP does call for medium-density,stand alone housing types,such as townhouses,in the area bordering Fanno Creek Park. • •Language to be added to the Comprehensive Plan is underlined. •Language to be deleted from the Comprehensive Plan is shown in Vie . POLICIES 5.5 THE CITY SHALL PROHIBIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS EXCEPT: COMPLIMENTARY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMITTED ABOVE THE FIRST FLOOR IN TIIE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AND ABOVE TIIE SECOND FLOOR IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS. (TIIE DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R 40 DISTRICTS.) IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT AT APPROPRIATE DENSITIES. IN COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ABOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. (THE DENSITY IN THE COMMERCIAL PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE • DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE R-40 DISTRICTS.)AND; EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE MIXED USE EMPLOYMENT ZONE SHALL BE CONSIDERED PERMI"I'1'ED USES AND NEW MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE PERMI'1'1'ED AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT R-40 DENSITIES:; WITHIN THE MUC, MUR 1 AND 2 AND MUE 1 AND 2 ZONES WITHIN THE WASHINGTON SQUARE REGIONAL CEN 1'ER,WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMITTED AND ENCOURAGED AT HIGH DENSITIES RANGING FROM R-25 (MUE 2 AND MUR 2) TO R-50 (MUC,MUE 1 AND MUR 1):AND WITHIN THE MUC-1 DISTRICT,WHERE RESIDENTIAL USES SHALL BE PERMI IThD AND ENCOURAGED TO DEVELOP AT A MINIMUM OF 25 UNITS PER ACRE TO A MAXIMUM OF 50 UNITS PER ACRE. RESIDENTIAL USES WHICH ARE DEVELOPED ABOVE NON- RESIDENTIAL USES AS PART OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO THESE DENSITIES. • • 1 1 . S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND Citizens have expressed a desire to create a"heart" for their community:a place to live, work.and play.and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center,dating back to around 1907.Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process, stretching back at least 25 years.The most recent effort dates back to 2002.with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard.This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail.. A state Transportation and Growth Management(TGM)grant facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process.A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement.including community dialogues.workshops.open house.and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan(TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP).The TDIP set forth a vision to create"a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented,accessible by many modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to live.work.play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP.The tools provided by urban renewal.including Tax Increment Financing,are intended to attract private investment And facilitate the area's redevelopment.Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election, FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193/1 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6%of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street,the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function.but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown • • In general.downtown properties have low improvement to land(I:L)ratios, Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0-10.0 or more.In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing-conditions.Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial,office.residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.)with heavy traffic levels.Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general,there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature.The creek.part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a, multi-use path. • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District(CBD).While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown,the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form.As a result.the area has developed without many of the pedestrian- oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. - The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots,which are zoned R-4.5.R-12 (PD),R-25.C-G (General Commercial) And C-P (Professional/Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W.These additional zones do not permit mixed use development.which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary.Downtown is important to Tigard residents:many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character&Quality of Life_section.includes a goal to achieve a future where"the Main Street area is seen as a`focal point' for the community."and"a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown 4110 The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2096 by 66%of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management FunctionalPlan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented.accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset.and features a combination of uses that enable people to live.work.play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning,design standards and design guideli - shall be developed and used to ensure the quality.attractiveness.and special character of the Downtown as the "heart"of Tigard.while being flexible enough to encourage development, 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail.restaurants.entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices,community services.public plazas.public transit centers.etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing auto-dependant uses; industrial manufacturing;and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue.subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design.development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety.accessibility,and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types.including ownership. workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • • • 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines an_Main Street will emphasize a"traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area.adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park, 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles,Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City.in conjunction with TriMet.shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system.especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W.Highway 217 and Interstate 5,the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant.compact.mixed-use area with housing.retail and employment opportunities. Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown • • 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials,particularly in the building fronts and streetscape.Also develop appropriate density,height.mass,scale,architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Consider utilizing form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules, 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line, 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held, 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information,urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines.standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas,such as park blocks,plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections"linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses,public spaces and transit. 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, Automobiles,Bicycles and Transit Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown • 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasize connectivity to.from_and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system, including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown.such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT's Special Transportation Area(STA) and Urban Business Area(UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets.pathways,entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot,and bikeways. 11.C.6 x.ress the themes o an ur.:n villa•e a d • een he_ 13, ; 'zin• - "uni •'n• elements"palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment/ facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park, 11.D.2 Provide public,including members of the development community.with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown • Exhibit B • Agenda Item: Hearing Date: March 19,2007 Time: 7:00 PM t ,' ti RE at. .,t IANN' 0' CO: I�S..I H' ®' O TI-y G G'. w;ORE"� GOB TIGARD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA)CPA2006-00002 PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend Section 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Goals, Policies, and Action Measures as a basis to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. The amendment would also update Section 5 to allow complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal District. APPLICANT: City of Tigard OWNER: N/A 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 LOCATION: Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District ZONING DESIGNATION: CBE),C-G,C-P,R-4.5,R-12(PD),R-25 • COMP PLAN: Commercial,Residential APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1,2,3 5,6,8,9 and 11;Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2,5,8,9,10 and 12. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION =Staff�reeomrmendt that.,(di.Elaiiii4i :'OOMittasston>recornm`n ��+��' t•,.... e d.`approoal�fo <+.Coon ,.-. .,: -:z•.a .tle'I' dC ._ c7Lto ".±`i: - �',b y;,; ;..`10-...; - -7. 'an7end� Fe T•' - lan-. �p Cb rel1` ,fiv-'e.P :toi're•la"- - - ,._ x ,,. p:P, p.;: 1:arid=anie�d'Poli'-' ;5<Sasdet"`" �_', op•h;: the:- ulilich'" z . STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 1 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • • SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live,work, and play,and to serve as a community gathering place,in Downtown Tigard. The current planning effort to create a "Heart" in Downtown Tigard dates back to 2002. A group of citizens and business owners were inspired to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on the planned Commuter Rail station in Downtown. A more extensive planning process was made possible with a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. Because of the Downtown Improvement Plan citizen involvement process, the City of Tigard was awarded the 2005 Good Governance Award from the League of Oregon Cities. The award recognizes exceptional city programs that unite citizens within a community. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan(1DIP) The planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan ( DIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for the Urban Renewal District in the May 2006 election. Proposal Description In order to implement the TDIP, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are necessary. These will establish the "legislative foundation" on which other land use actions and amendments to the Tigard Development Code can be based, including specific zoning map, land use and design standards. The first step is to completely replace Section 11.1 of the Comprehensive Plan,which covers the Downtown Central Business District of Neighborhood Planning Organization #1. The proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures would be applicable to the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District(which encompasses a slightly larger area than the Central Business District zone referred to in Section 11.) The City is currently updating the Comprehensive Plan in its entirety. Each section of the updated Plan will include Findings,Goals,Policies,and Action Measures. Here is an explanation of these terms: Findings are the written statements of relevant facts that are the basis for the Goals,Policies, and Action Measures. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 2 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • Goals are the broad-based statement of the community's desires. In this case the proposed Goal is taken directly from the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. Policies are general statements intended to guide the City now and in the future. They provide general legislative direction and are the foundation for the City's land use, codes, and standards. Action Measures are more specific short and medium term actions that will implement the Goals and Policies.This term will replace"Implementation Strategies" found in the existing Comprehensive Plan.They can be evaluated on a regular basis-every two years,to check on their progress.Action Measures are not required to be referenced when new land use codes and standards are proposed for adoption. In addition, Policy 5.5 of the Comprehensive Plan needs to be updated to allow for the opportunity for a variety of housing types called for in the TDIP, throughout the Downtown Urban Renewal District. SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria,findings and conclusions •Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 o Chapter 18.390 •Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Policies 1,2,3,5,6,8,and 9 •Applicable Metro Standards o Title 6 • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1,2,5,8,9, 10 and 12 City Department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.380:Zoning Map and Text Amendments This chapter sets forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this title and zoning district map. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type N procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Therefore, the proposed text amendments to the Tigard Development Code will be reviewed under the Type N legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter: Tigard Development Code Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures This chapter establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing applications. The amendment under consideration will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in the chapter. Section 18.390.060.G states that the recommendation by the Commission, and the decision by the Council, shall be based on consideration of the following STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 3 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • 1111 factors (reviewed above), including: 1) Statewide Planning Goals, 2) applicable federal or state statues or regulations, 3) applicable Metro regulations,4) applicable comprehensive plan policies, and 5) applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. CONCLUSION:Based on the analysis above,staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code and recommends the Planning Commission forward this proposed amendment to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the comprehensive plan identified the following relevant policies for the proposed amendments: Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.1.1: General Policies This policy states that all future legislative changes shall be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Regional Plan adopted by Metro. As indicated under the individual Statewide and Regional Plan goals applicable to this proposed amendment,the amendment is consistent with the Statewide Goals and the Regional Plan. Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1,2.1.2,and 2.1.3.: Citizen Involvement These policies state that the City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involvement program, provide opportunities for citizen involvement appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and that information on land use planning issues shall be available in understandable form for all interested citizens. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan process was notable for its broad-based public involvement. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement,including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. The May 2006 Tigard voters approved an Urban Renewal District for the area to finance the implementation of the plan. In addition, the City Center Advisory Commission, a citizen committee, has reviewed and suggested changes that were incorporated into the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This policy has also been met by publishing notice of the Planning Commission public hearing that was in the March 1,2007 edition of the Tigard Times.Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Comprehensive Plan Policy 3:Natural Features and Open Space 3.4 Natural Areas These policies protect natural resources, including wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat. The proposed amendment satisfies Policies 3.4.1-3.4.2 because it strengthens protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 4 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT - • • 3.5.Parks,Recreation,and Open Space Policies 3.5.1 The City shall encourage private enterprise and intergovernmental agreements which will provide for open space,recreation lands,facilities, and preserve natural, scenic and historic areas in a manner consistent with the availability of resources. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2 which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to be a central gathering place for the,community and to provide a recreation area for such activities as a farmers market and performances. 3.5.3 The City has designated the 100-year floodplain of Fanno Creek,its tributaries,and the Tualatin River as greenway,which will be the backbone of the open space system. Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain,the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain. The policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.3 which states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Additionally, the TDIP calls for the expansion of the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park, by purchasing additional property in the floodplain. 3.5.4 The City shall provide an interconnected pedestrian/bike path throughout the City. This policy is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.3.1,which states that the Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. In addition, the TDIP calls for a "rail-to-trail" path to be created in present railroad right-of-way. Comprehensive Plan Policy 5:Economy 5.3 The City shall improve and enhance the portions of the Central Business District as the focal point for commercial,high density residential,business,civic, and professional activity creating a diversified and economically viable core area The TDIP seeks to improve and diversify Downtown Tigard's economic and employment mix. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a)Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services;b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing;c) Civic functions (government offices,community services,public plazas,public transit centers, etc);d) Professional employment and related office uses; e) Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks." This proposed policy is aimed at facilitating the development of an urban village,promoting the retention of existing businesses,and creating opportunities for new investment. The proposal would also amend Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5 to make it possible to allow complementary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district.More housing and a variety of housing types will help create a vibrant and economically sound city core. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 5 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • Comprehensive Plan Policy 6:Housing 6.1.1 The City shall provide an opportunity for a diversity of housing densities and residential types at various prices and rent levels. This policy is satisfied because the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6, which states that "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." This policy is also satisfied by proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.5. which would create the opportunity for complimentary residential development throughout the Urban Renewal district.The change will likely result in increased housing choices at a variety of rent and price levels. Comprehensive Plan Policy 8: Transportation 8.1.2 Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation. This policy is satisfied by the inclusion of these proposed Policies: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City,in conjunction with TriMet,shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride"activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system,especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5,the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. Collectively these policies aim to develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles and transit. Projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail station, and expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes will further increase transportation options. Comprehensive Plan Policy 9:Energy 9.1.3 The City shall encourage land use development which emphasizes sound energy conservation,design,and construction. The main goal of the TDIP is to create an urban village,which would result in an opportunity to live, shop, recreate, and work in a pedestrian-friendly environment. The envisioned place would allow residents to conserve energy by reducing their dependence on automobiles, as the area is presently well-served by transit. Future projects such as the planned Downtown Commuter Rail STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 6 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • station, expanded sidewalk network and bike lanes could further decrease reliance on the automobile. Additionally the TDIP expresses a preference for sustainable practices in construction of new Downtown buildings and infrastructure. These proposed Action Measures would encourage this type of design: 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. CONCLUSION:Based on the analysis above,staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Metro Functional Plan Title 6: Central City,Regional Centers, Town Centers and Station Communities Requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center. Centers are defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads."The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan fulfilled the requirement to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for designated Town Centers. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would institute the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's goal of "creating a vibrant' and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian-oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset,and features a combination of uses that enable people to"live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Policies and Actions Measures would enable the future adoption of code and policies to implement the goal. CONCLUSION:Based on the analysis above,staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies . the applicable Metro regulations. THE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES ADOPTED UNDER OREGON REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1 — Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. This goal was met through the extensive public involvement in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, which included a Task Force of 24 citizens, community dialogues, workshops,an open house,and a public survey. The City Center Advisory Commission,a citizen group,has reviewed and provided input to the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 7 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • This goal has also been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Chapter 18.390. Notice has been published in the Tigard Times newspaper prior to the public hearing. Two Public Hearings are being held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council)in which public input is welcome. In addition, letters were sent to property owners in the Urban Renewal District and individuals on the interested parties list. Statewide Planning Goal 2—Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The proposed amendment to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan is being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations,Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first scheduled public hearing as required. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report;therefore,the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal S—Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources,open spaces,historic areas and sites. The proposed amendment is consistent with this goal because the proposed changes strengthen protection for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District, particularly the Fanno Creek wetland and riparian area. Proposed Policy 11.2.1 states that natural resource functions and values will be integrated into Downtown urban design. Proposed Policy 11.2.3 states that Downtown development will be consistent with the need to restore and protect the natural areas of Fanno Creek Park. Existing Goal 5 protections for natural resources in the Urban Renewal District will remain in place. Statewide Planning Goal 8-Recreational Needs This goal aims to provide for the siting of facilities for the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors. This goal is satisfied by proposed Policy 11.2.2,which calls for the Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park to be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. This public area is envisioned to provide a range of recreation activities such as farmers markets and performances. This will become a, central gathering place for the community and increase recreational opportunities for residents. Statewide Planning Goal 9-Economic Development This goal aims to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare,and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The proposed amendment includes Policy 11.1.2: "The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complementary land uses such as: a) Retail,restaurants,entertainment and personal services;b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing;c) Civic functions (government offices,community services,public plazas,public transit centers,etc);d) Professional STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 8 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT • • employment and related office uses; e)Natural Resource protection,open spaces and public parks." This policy is consistent with Goal 9 as it is aimed at facilitating the development of a vibrant and economically sound city core.The TDIP calls for opportunities for new housing,commercial, and employment which would create a thriving urban village. Statewide Planning Goal 10-Housing This goal aims to provide adequate housing for the needs of the community,region and state. One of the recommended catalyst projects in the TDIP is to increase the number of housing units in the Downtown. This could increase the number of potential patrons for Downtown businesses and potential riders of the new Commuter Rail line. The proposed Amendment includes Policy 11.1.6 which states: "New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types,including ownership, • workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment." The proposed amendment is consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning Goal 12-Transportation The goal aims to provide "a safe,convenient and economic transportation system." The proposed Amendment satisfies this goal with the inclusion of several Policies to Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit including: 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto,transit,bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride"activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system,especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W,Highway 217 and Interstate 5,the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital. projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. These proposed Policies would improve the safety, efficiency and economy of the transportation system in the Downtown Urban Renewal District and expand access to transportation options. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with-the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 9 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT . . . ......... SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Building Division and Police Department,have had an opportunity to review this proposal and have no objections. The City of Tigard's Public Works had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and Metro, were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. Tualatin Valley Fire&Rescue,Tualatin Valley Water District,and Cleanwater Services were notified of the proposed amendments and did not respond. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan was the result of extensive public involvement. In order to implement the Plan, changes are needed to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and the Development Code including new zoning and design standards. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would provide the"legislative foundation" to accomplish this. The proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT: EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. March 7.2007 PREPARED BY: Sean Farrelly DATE Associate Planner March 7 ,2007 APPROVED BY: Ron Bunch DA Planning Manager STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2006-00002 DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES,AND ACTION MEASURES PAGE 10 OF 10 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT •. ._. . Exhibit C CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes March 19,2007 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall,at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, and Walsh Commissioners Absent Commissioner Vermilyea Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Long Range Planning Manager; Sean Family, Associate Planner; Jerree Lewis,Planning Commission Secretary 3. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS Planning Manager Ron Bunch reported that the Tree Board met on March 7th to discuss its proposed charge statement to develop a tree protection program. The program is intended to look at trees in a larger context rather than as street trees or trees in development property. The Tree Board also reviewed the Costco tree planting plan. Costco had been conditioned to have 35%tree coverage in their parking lot. They came back with a tree planting plan that they would like to try to meet the standards. The secretary reported that the new Commissioners will be appointed by Council on March 27th. 4. APPROVE MEETING MINUTES It was moved and seconded to approve the February 26, 2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 3-0. Commissioners Caffall and Walsh abstained. It was moved and seconded to approve the March 5,2007 meeting minutes as submitted. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. President Inman abstained. 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA)2006-00002 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 1 0.. • REQUEST: The proposed amendment to Chapter 11 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would update the Goals,Policies,and Action Measures to reflect the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan's vision of a pedestrian- oriented,mixed use Town Center in the Downtown Urban Renewal District.The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code amendments. LOCATION: Tigard Urban Renewal District. ZONE: CBD, C-G,C-P,R-4.5,R-12 (PD),R-25. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 11, Metro Functional Plan Title 6,and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2,5, 10,and 12. STAFF REPORT Associate Planner Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A) for the proposed amendment for an update of Downtown goals,policies,and action measures to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). He advised that the amendment would not change the Development Code. It lays the groundwork for future changes;any specific development code changes will be subject to further public hearings. Farrelly noted that with the new format, action measures will replace the current implementation strategies in the Comprehensive Plan. This particular amendment is needed to implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The current land use in the Comp Plan that deals with the Downtown is inadequate. Section 11,Special Areas of Concern that deals with the Downtown,treats it primarily as a shopping area. This amendment will reflect the multi-functional role of the Downtown. Another part of the Comp Plan that needs to be changed is Economy Policy 5.5 which restricts residential development above the first floor. Farrelly reviewed the goals of the TDIP. He advised that most of the language for this proposed amendment was taken from the TDIP. The policies and action measures are organized into 3 categories: Facilitate the development of an urban village;Develop and improve the open space system and integrate natural features; and Develop comprehensive , street and circulation improvements for pedestrians,automobiles,bicycles,and transit. This amendment would apply only to the Downtown Urban Renewal Area. Staff reviewed the proposed amendment against the applicable criteria and found it to be consistent with present Comp Plan policies and Development Code policies. The amendment is also consistent with applicable Metro requirements and all applicable Statewide Goals. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to City Council. President Inman asked about the new action measure 11.A.2. She asked if Tigard was actually pursuing form based code (FBC). Farrelly advised that this action measure would only pursue FBC in ways that are consistent with Oregon Land Use Law. We might not PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 2 adopt FBC, but we may use some of the principles in the eventual new development code. This action measure allows us the opportunity,but does not require that we use FBC. • Vice-President Walsh asked for clarification that the Commission was being asked to approve only a change to the Comprehensive Plan adopting the format and structure of the proposed Comp Plan that the Commission will see later. This one section is being approved ahead of time;it will be put in place of the existing section of the Comp Plan and nothing more. Farrelly concurred, saying that this starts the process to allow for further changes and gets the process moving along. It does not change existing Development Code regulations or land use laws. Before changes to the Development Code happen, there will be more outreach to property owners and stakeholders. PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN FAVOR John Frewing,7110 SW Lola Lane,Tigard 97223 commended staff and the Downtown Task Force for developing this portion of the Comprehensive Plan. He is concerned about the explanation for form based code, saying that the language states,"The City will utilize form based design where consistent with the State regulations." It doesn't say may use it. He would like to endorse the language as written. He disagrees that this section is outside the Comp Plan. It is Section 11 of the Comp Plan;it is the Comp Plan. This is the first piece of the Comp Plan to come before the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption. He wants to get it right the first time. In that effort,he has a list of issues that he brought up (Exhibit B). He asked that the Commission to continue the hearing so that these matters can be addressed. Mike Swanda, 13285 SW Village Glenn Drive,Tigard 97223,testified that he owns and operates My Time Beads at 12200 SW Main Street. He thinks the TDIP is a wonderful goal. He had one comment about Section 11.1.3 which states,"The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing;auto-dependent uses;industrial manufacturing; and industrial services uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village." He would like to see more clarification for the term"auto-dependent"uses. He asked what the term meant. Jonae Armstrong, 16333 SW Stahl Dr.,Tigard 97223,Tigard testified that she works at Washington Square. She has been watching this process and urged the Commission to continue the approval process to go on to City Council. She believes it is important to focus on the Downtown and offered her encouragement. Lisa Olson, 14720 SW Cabernet Ct.,Tigard 97224,advised that she was a member of the Downtown Tigard Task Force,was the chair for the Streetscape work group, and will be on the steering committee for the Fanno Creek Master Plan. She encouraged.the Commission to continue to look at keeping the community involved in this process and to encourage City staff to involve community members. There is a large number of people who have been working on this and understand what's going on. She would like the City to utilize the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 3 • resources available in community members to continue to have the community involved in the process every step of the way. Phil Yount, 11222 SW Cottonwood Lane,Tigard 97223, stated that he was undecided about the amendment. He has been an interested observer and an occasional participant in some of the surveys and task force hearings, so he is aware of what's going on. He supports the TDIP proposal in general. He was impressed with John Frewing's testimony. While he encourages the Commission to proceed with the process,he urged them to look carefully at Mr. Frewing's critique. What we do needs to be done right. Mike Stevenson testified that he owns a business at 9040 SW Burnham Street,Tigard 97223. He has been involved with the Downtown Task Force since the beginning and is happy with the progression. The TDIP affects him personally because he owns a large piece of property in the Downtown. He has concerns about Section 11.1.3 to not permit any new land uses, such as warehousing,auto-dependent uses,etc. If this process is going to take 20-25 years, he will be put in a"no-man's position"as far as expanding his business is concerned. Section 11.1.4 states that existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. He wonders what this means and he is concerned about what we will do with existing businesses. Mr. Stevenson has another thought about the staff report,under 3.5.3—"The City has designated the 100-year floodplain ... Where landfill and/or development are within or adjacent to the 100-year floodplain,the City shall require the consideration of dedication of sufficient open land area for greenway adjoining and within the floodplain." Does that mean he will be required to give open land to the City? He asked for clarification on this. Staff answered that this code section is an existing policy. If he wanted to do some development, would he be required to donate some land? Staff advised that currently in the Tigard Development Code,there are specific standards that require protection and preservation of the floodplain. This was quoted in the staff report to show how the proposal is consistent with the existing Plan. The City cannot essentially exact property for dedication. Since this existing this policy is probably 23 years old,it may be out of date. However,it is the criteria we have to use now to judge the current proposal to make sure it's consistent with existing policy. The entire Comprehensive Plan will be updated,including the Natural Resources section. We have to work with the Comp.Plan we have now. Mr. Stevenson will be subject to the policy as it exists currently. It may very well be amended in the future,but the existing policies had to be used as a tool to judge whether the new proposal meet the requirements of the existing Plan. President Inman noted that this is in a different chapter which will be reviewed at a later time. PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN OPPOSITION None PLANNING.COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 4 4111 1111 • REBUTTAL, Planning Manager Ron Bunch responded to Mt Frewing's concerns. He noted that what Mr. Frewing spoke to,to a great deal,was the entire Comprehensive Plan,e.g., Goal 9 Economic Development; Goal 10 Housing;Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services; Goal 6 Areas Subject to Natural Hazards. This proposal is just one small part of the Comprehensive Plan. For example,in the Goal 9 Economic Development Rule that was quoted,in the Comprehensive Plan, there's a separate chapter that addresses Goal 9. The Industrial Lands Inventory,Analysis of Available Lands,Buildable Lands Inventory,etc., take place in the context of that particular section of the Comp Plan. This proposal is looking at a specific district—the Downtown. These tools (goals,policies, action measures) are needed to start having the broad community dialog to begin to implement the Urban Renewal District. The sections of ORS 197 that Mr. Frewing spoke to are out of context for this particular hearing. Regarding the process,the TDIP is a study that was accepted,but not adopted. Mt.Frewing referenced the need to have facts that are relevant and recent. This application was coordinated with the Department of Land Conservation and Development(DLCD). DLCD found the proposal to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals and the Administrative Rules. Regarding the facts,Bunch advised that this is a legislative hearing;we • are obligated to look at the facts according to specific criteria in the Comp Plan and other criteria. Staff reviewed the criteria and found that the proposal complies with all the applicable criteria. As a legislative amendment,essentially the City Council can determine what facts it wishes to rely upon. The facts that we consider relevant are the ones we have on hand—we can't constantly go back and get new facts and refer to them. We have to begin the process and stop it at some time. Regarding zoning classifications and mapping,this hearing is about creating the tools— goals,policies,and action measures. In referencing the maps,there are discrepancies in the TDIP and in the Community Development Code and in the Urban Renewal District. This proposal is just to establish the goals,policies,and action measures. This proposal only applies to the Urban Renewal District. Regarding the moving target of the floodplain,where the landuse designation should be, etc., those are refinements that will be built from the goals, policies, and action measures. The public amenities associated with the Plan are part of the development regulations that will come later. We need to have,the tools first before we can build development regulations. When we amend the Development Code,we will use the tools to judge the Development Code Amendment—does it or does it not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Regarding comments about the interrelated use of land,ORS 197,these comments apply to the whole Comprehensive Plan. Each element does not have to be judged against that, but when we have the whole Comp Plan put together in one document,we'll have the whole range of issues within which to judge. We have to look at whole plan,not just one part. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 5 • These goals,policies,and action measures will provide the legislative basis by which we can develop a Transportation System Plan refinement that can be adopted as part of the TSP. We will get there using these tools. A pre-application was done. The papers are in the file. A key item for staff was coordinating this with DLCD,Metro,ODOT,Trimet, and LCDC. We have not received any comments against the proposal. The Planning Commissioners asked the following questions: • Section 11.1.3 says it shall not permit new land uses, such as warehousing, etc. What is an example of an auto-dependent use business? Staff responded that new drive-thru businesses would be an example. The proposal does not prohibit people from driving Downtown. Will this affect current businesses? Existing drive-thru businesses would be grandfathered in as non-conforming uses. It would protect the current business, but would not allow for expansion of the non-conforming business. The current non-conforming use standards that apply to the whole City allow 20%expansion. Specific code language for Downtown non-conforming businesses will need to be discussed. • Staff explained that the current non-conforming use standard allows existing non- conforming businesses to be grandfathered in and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. If the non-conforming use is discontinued for more than 6 months,it would not be permitted to come back. The new business would have to conform to current applicable zoning standards. Staff believes that in the CBD zone, there are several properties that have been exempted from that requirement. Business owners were encouraged to work with staff on these issues. Staff noted that • the current CBD zoning does not allow industrial uses. All existing industrial businesses in the Downtown are considered non-conforming and allowed to continue, subject to certain restrictions. When we begin to develop the Code,we will determine the specifics on how to deal with non-conforming uses in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested doing an outreach to business owners that own non- conforming businesses in the Downtown. Staff answered that the Code development phase will include that type of outreach. • Under 11.1.3,would the Fanno Creek Microbrewery be allowed or not allowed? Staff answered that this is considered an eating establishment and would be an allowed use. Producing the microbrew would be considered auxiliary to the eating and drinking function. • Staff advised that industrial services provide services to manufacturing,warehousing, construction,etc.,that are necessary to keep those services going. Some examples are janitorial services;machinery repair and refurbishing, and repair of lumber equipment. In some codes,it includes fleet operations to maintain trucking fleets and equipment. It varies by region. • Has staff talked to people involved in a performing arts center or a farmers' market? Broadway Rose Theatre is now beginning a capital improvement project to have their own performing arts center. Staff noted that farmers'market people are aware of the plans. The performing arts center is a catalyst project that is more long range projects, maybe 10-15 years PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 6 out. Commissioner Dougherty suggested involving more than just the Downtown boundaries in the discussion. Ron Bunch noted that these specific activities are considered action measures, which fall into placeholder categories for implementation. The statements which have real legislative intent are the goals and policies;action measures are things that we would like to implement and that we could use as a gauge or measurement to see how we're doing. For example, if Broadway Rose finds another place,perhaps we should consider another kind of performing arts in the Downtown. • The Commission suggested adding a definitions section. Staff answered that the Plan will have a definitions section that will also include a last of acronyms • President Inman said she thinks the language on the form based code principles reads fairly strong. She would like the language to state that it gives us the opportunity to utilize form based code,but not state that we will utilize it. The Commission likes the wording, "Consider utilizing form based codes." PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED President Inman feels good with the modification of 11.A.2 to say"consider" rather than "utilize"form based code. She hopes that the Commission gets the same participation when these issues come back so nothing will be dropped when we get to the implementation phase. Commissioner Walsh thinks it's a great start,the structure works,the language is supported. Commissioner Anderson noted that these tools can help with other committees and community involvement. He likes the language and the definition sheets. He supports the proposal. • Commissioner Dougherty would like staff to seriously consider the comments that Mr. Frewing made. She thinks there should be definitions to prevent confusion and _ misunderstandings down the road. She agrees with President Inman on the dealing with the verbiage of form based code. Commissioner Walsh moved to recommend approval to City Council of Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA)2006-00002,Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update Downtown Goals,Policies and Action Measures,with the change to 11.A.2 to change the language to add"consider utilizing form based codes"in place of what is there,based on the staff report as presented and testimony given. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 6. OTHER BUSINESS Staff advised that the there will be a meeting with Council on April 17th to discuss Planning Commission liaison duties. It was suggested that maybe Planning Commissioners and members of other committees could alternate attending each other's meetings. It was also suggested that staff might take a bigger role in information sharing. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 7 • The Commissioners discussed the Form Based Code subcommittee. It was noted that form based code may be beneficial to the City and that having a subcommittee to review examples from other cities and make a recommendation is a good idea,however the committee needs parameters and a set timeline. Members of the CCAC and the Planning Commission feel they need more information before they can make a decision about form based code. Ron Bunch stated that the important thing for staff is that we're burning time;we need to move this along. Council would like to have a worksession in May about urban design in the Downtown. There will be a yes-no decision by Council soon. Bunch advised that staff has been directed to get a clear representation of what the future Downtown will look like in architectural form,block size,transportation,etc. Once we have that,we can then work backward to determine the kind of code we need to achieve that model. There are some codes and standards that can be done no matter what method we use. Staff can begin now to get an idea of what the Downtown will look like. Staff will take the leadership to put together information and work with the City Manager and Council to educate them so they can help make a decision. The subcommittee can provide an endorsement. It was decided that the subcommittee could meet before regularly scheduled Planning Commission meetings beginning on April 2°d. Commissioners Inman and Anderson agreed to serve on the committee. Commissioner Walsh suggested having a short meeting prior to the public hearing on April 2nd to meet the new Commissioners.and talk about the meeting process. 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m. • Jerree wis,Planning =mission Secretary ATTEST: President Jodie Inman • PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—March 19,2007—Page 8 • E)4- A . • S a �. •, � pb-� 1, � ' s, � r;� Comprehensive Plan Amendment a ` u a ce�e n e r+` ay'- e ,,r,„4,_ :,.Y •-{ '`(�{.•r ai`'3�-- / �` r,�,i l t O})p -. a. .r��" 3. - - �Y, 3.�.:. i. 'j-• f �1 i tl b G76 PF., F ; FF k,, 'Y, Y e"i/s�**t-,4 y ;,„4 a ^}`�i.� q*. .. ' s nz�. I' x�� , ',#t ; • Comprehensive Plan _'/-'----,O2 0 ��, �k. F .x , will be completely :- C� 'l'''';•Z1 � i�a 6$ e ��,' i�Fi%77,',!;414,,.!A',.' tit„ ,,ifY-c xa u )(Ia�C(1 in the I)f tt f� �I 1Pta ll((1:: 4i •e 7z°t-�1,5 �s 3t, 1 a }'e'I•. sc.0i d ~ 3f"".1,." " 9 '4 .� �, / i ._ ' t § 't..r i Y' r-...,!,-..t'' ,�, • Tllis Auielidl))clit is a 1 .. r w fir$ 1 -. ' s ---,-k.,;,,-{ ✓ Y t precursor YO tile. " r,�' , �' p r ;`` format of the eventual • h` . 4+a-R� . �- �''`57e'fit, '7+ 10- .-• 3,,, ...,•:-; rr� c<`{�" updated Comp Plan. I ry .� '�..rte.,uS, {"^�'i'�'`+Ft r1 .,�i N"b:. �• y, ;r -,�- it •,; 1 N11_.i1!i'TC -.- 2"'Y c 1y I ''+%� : i r 4 fih ri J �.. I ;�q i.,::„:„.:,_11 • t .. +cr F 4 11 v „..4.,. g t. 1ltUP t .& ,"'.4+'4 i •'j . 7 !„,,,.,.....,...4:. wi It- • 1 • • • • Comprehensive Plan New Format: Comprehensive Plan New Format: • Action Measures are more specific short • Findings are the written statements of relevant and medium term actions that will facts that are the basis for the Goals,Policies,and implement the Goals and Policies. They Action Measures. can be evaluated on a regular basis, to • Goads:are the broad-based statement of the check on their progress. community's desires. • Policies are g ' `` i eneral statements intended to guide El, I4y J I i I( ill the.City now and in the future.They provide 1 =11 general legiskitive direction and are the foundation 17 11 for the City's land use,codes,and standards, •a•ar• A/WU.k • •• 2 9 • 0 Co) IV— v 3' a'3` `dun ` °$ / .f 1..)- 4a }},t' , -,.Jc, r / V . J YE lr • f7O�4 1 , _.4 C.* Tj ir�aJ r v 'Fri oC" — . " `" ,u u r.• CJ .- c..—. 2 U i Ili co ��...y{{ C z cn ,-■■ ..0 .,. H tV, � i • � #ifs c4 ,1: JO;V /1 b } a U '. = - .. O• � G O M U ` 7 74 ...7, ._' . G: C. . ;� O ,O U U 0 .O • . • • Tigard Downtown Improve nerit Plan Ciir ent Comprehensive Plan N 5 .; �, �,►� . . . :,'.::; ii:.s ',ovi � •Sept. 2003:.1)o\;.nto\1 n • �" a,'y� r Plan adopted. Current language is insufficient 'V''.'" r•f. }�• 4: , ■ Special Areas of Concern Section 11.1 outdated- .1'a' ? . ti. .Dec. 2005: L tlYin l X �'��5 1 t`n kt�t .. w print<uily focuses on Downtown as a shopping " ', �' � , ! : Ri:nc.. Pl.l�i (to implement.... • area: Debt, ,=, *y ...'g.:-1,.. , 7 � �� . -1 DIP) .lppro�eel Economy Policy 5.5 recommends residential • `-� y T • �.�..,:� 'b'''''''''...;'7‘:''''''.` f $-�C �?� \ si`'1a�'2006: I�2`:increment;. ..• development only above the first floor. , , ,- i . ,�.. . - Cj a, ;,, I:illan�:iri ballot \Icasutc• •�,,,,,® appro\-ed by voters •• •. , . . . ... ........_ -.�®fir -� I , . . . . . . ® , _tom .� s ' •. . •,.....:.--.- . ...,..r... .. • .. . . . . . :._....•. . . . . . • • . . • ,,,.,„,.....m . ..• . . , .. . „. . . . . . • . ... . . ,. . . . .. . , . . • . , .. . , . . : . .. . .. • :. .. .. . . • • . . .. . . ,:, • • 4 . „., • • • i . .Tig�u�d Downtown Improvement Plan TDIP Citizen Involvement -. Dova ntgvvn Tasl;Force. •tl Citizens driven plan with thc•goal of creating: i (24 members) held • "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the ,, t• r Conmuu)ity Dialogs, comntuniit\ th tt is pedestrian-oriented,:tcees ihlc by many �I; 1\C l)l)Or1100C11�'IBCtit)�S,' r• modes of transportation,recognizes and uses natural zkit i ., ;• r Open House,Survey resourees ac an asset,and katures a combination of use,that t j . F ' f • Over 1300 people reached cn:d>Ic people to live,work,play and shop in an environment • • dint is uniquely`Picard." 1- - by citizen volunteers . •.:..----. • Thc•City of Tigard Nyas .. he I D1 P is the"rtsourcc report"for the CoMprehensive . . . u avv'ardedthe 2005 Good :-. • •]'Luz Atilehdment. : 117', Governance Award by ' League of Oregon Cities for the TDIP citizen • � •• planning:.effott 5 TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TDIP and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures 0 11.1_ Facilitate the Development of an Most amendment Laitonage taken directly from the Urban Village TDIP. 7 Policies and 8 Action lifeasures Goal identical to the TDIP's goal. Policies ind Actioii_IV1casiires fall under three categories in Section 11. , • , 6 • • . TDIP:and Proposed Goals, Policies, and TD1P and Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Action Measures 11? Develop and In)prove the Open Space . o 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and System and Integrate Natural Features Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians, 3 Policies and 4 Action Measures Automobiles,Bicycles,and Transit 6 Policies and 10 Action Measures .? ,�,'�g r _.x i f s ]t -W' • o� ', v � �° a.T. I F' :�F r� .yam , • jn. . ��/n .e r yta A t2 1p f.. -"`�, . ' : �G ayy�G- �►� • f ..r i • 7 • -. Downtown Urban Renewal District Downtown Urban Renewal District . ,7,13 f c-'1�•1,i'�rr'v1,• I' Slightly larger.area e :*-� .1 �. q s, r^ • Slicrhtw larder area . �J �I:,�t,∎7.t. than the Cl3D zone 5 :`��.I\ than the C13ll cone I�? /•:;.'` '!`�'•�.d and the original I4 / • ,: • • •. Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Measures Proposed Goals, Policies, and Action Mc asures: • Applicable Tigard Criteria . Applicable Mate and Regional Criteria 'Tigard Cominunitt Development Code .Applicable Metro Standards Chapter,l$.3S0 -Title 6 (Town Centers) . : • • Chapter 15.390 • •Statewide.Planning Goals •.Applicable Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policies . 1. Citizen Involvement . _1. General policies . • . . • . 2. • Land Use Planning 2.Citizen Involvement •. • 5. Natural Resources• .3:Natural Features and Open-Space . . . . : .. . : • • ' 8. Recreational eed s 5..Fconom} < .• 6.I lousing 9: Economic Develojnnent •• S.Transportation _ 10. Ilousing• 9:Energy 12.Transportation . • .. • • a . • • 9 • • • • • ; Conclusion Recommendation - • Thar the I?Iannit%Conunission recommend Tl e•liroposed Goals, Policies; and Action approval to the Tigard City Council to amend measure are consistent with the the Tigard Comprehensive Plan to replace Section 11.1 and amend Policy 5.5 as determined applicable Tigard, Metro, and State a - l?P throe&h the public hering process. • • regulations and goals. • • • • . . yr 10 • • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The`Background'and`Findings'of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the`Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP,its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain. . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail,street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances,setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TRIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information,including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fenno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any`green'development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a`planned sidewalk'for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area.,° In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis.. .."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus,it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TRIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exiudes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(1). This should be provided to comply with state rules.. • 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazIrd areas(eg flooding),Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? • III Exhibit ----- • 0 Is bitD II r I MEMORANDUM TIGARD TO: Tigard City Council FROM: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA-2006-00002) March 19,2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing Comments DATE: March 29,2007 At the March 19,2007 Planning Commission Public Hearing a number o f citizens gave public testimony in favor of the Amendment. Two of the speakers,Mike Stevenson and John Frewing,raised issues that will be addressed in this memo. Nonconforming Uses Mike Stevenson. a downtown property owner,raised a concern about the future of nonconforming uses under the new zoning that will be adopted. Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment contains Policy 11.1.4 which states "Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion." How to specifically treat nonconforming uses will be a major issue in the Development Code amendment process. Staff will work with stakeholders to develop acceptable regulations.An important point to consider is that many of the existing industrial and automotive repair uses in the Downtown are presently nonconforming uses.They became nonconforming when the zoning was last changed (to CBD) in 1983. Process and Procedural Issues John Frewing raised thirteen points (included as Exhibit B) regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff rebutted many of these points at the public hearing. Most of the points refer to processes set up to update entire Comprehensive Plans,rather than a "Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment"which amends a portion of an existing plan (as this one does). The City provided the required 45-day notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development,and received no 1 • • • comment from them. If the agency had concerns with the proposed amendment, they would have provided comment to the City. Here is a rebuttal of each of Mr. Frewing's points. Mr. Frewing's comments are numbered and staff response follows: i Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. Response: All of the reports in the appendices of Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan are dated 2004 and 2005 and relied on contemporaneous data. It is unlikely that conditions in Downtown Tigard have changed to any significant degree in the past two to three years. The only data that appears to be six years old is the Census data (the latest data is from 2000) and Metro's Regional Transportation Plan completed in 2000 (currently being updated). 2 The`Background'and`Findings'of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the`Policies'of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. Response: The intention of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is to change the Goals, Policies, and Action Measures to implement the TDIP It will provide the legislative foundation to adopt the specific zoning and other land use regulations that are called for in the'i'MIP.After this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is adopted, the next stage will be to amend the Development Code to define and map specific new zoning districts. Comprehensive Plan Amendments do not,in and of themselves, change the zoning of properties. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. Response: The TD1P,in its entirety, contains extensive factual information that is the result of extensive research and technical analysis.The Comprehensive Plan Amendment takes its language directly from the TDIP. The TDIP will serve as the Volume 1 Resource document. In addition,as a legislative amendment,the City Council can determine what the relevant facts are to base its decision on.The Planning Commission has recommended adoption based on the findings (facts) and the conclusions in the staff report. 2 • 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show.the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP,its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map--in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Pararnatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain.. ". Response: The cover page of the staff report and elsewhere in the application identifies the Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal District as the location of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Included in this application is the map of the Urban Renewal District,which has been legally and specifically defined in the Urban Renewal Plan. As for the floodplain issue,Tigard relies on the most current FEMA floodplains to administer its code. Any previous maps referred to in the TDIP are not pertinent. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment,including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information,including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TRIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place near Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any'green'development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). Response: This Comprehensive Plan Amendment is being adopted under the"post- acknowledgement plan amendment process" outlined in ORS 197.610.DLCD was sent a copy of the proposed amendment 45 days in advance of the hearing and has not indicated any problems. Under 197.610,it is not necessary to "interrelate all functional and natural systems and activities."The update of the entire Comprehensive Plan will follow this requirement. The Green/Corridor Urban Creek as described in TDIP would be a man-made feature.The feasibility and scope of this proposed project will be determined as part 3 4110 • of the Downtown Urban Design Plan.A comprehensive plan would not be the appropriate forum to describe the details of this potential project. 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a`planned sidewalk'for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. Response: City Council resolution 05-62 accepted the findings and recommendations of the TDIP,as well as the associated TDIP documents. Council directed staff to use the Plan's goals,objectives, and recommended actions as a guide for future programming of Downtown improvements. However if an appendix document within the TDIP is contradicted by another adopted Plan, the adopted Plan would take precedence. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR.660-009-00I5(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area...". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis..."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. Response: The regulations regarding economic development refer to Comprehensive Plans covering an entire jurisdiction,not a post-acknowledgement plan amendment such as this. The Comprehensive Plan,currently being updated,will address the entire City- wide Economic Development issues. The Economy chapter will include supply and demand of industrial and employment land, and related issues. 4 4111 • HOUSING I 0 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus,it is impossible to determine the camp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency#1: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP_ This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-40 standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. Response: Policy 5.5 provides policy specifying where complementary residential development shall be allowed in some commercial zones all around the city. It does not only apply to the Downtown. Policy 5.5 needed to be amended to allow complementary housing in all zones of the Urban Renewal District, (not only above the second floor as the Policy currently states). The zoning matters referred to by Mr. Frewing as"inconsistencies"actually are not related to the Downtown. The zones referred to are existing mixed used zones throughout the City.At any rate,this Comprehensive Plan Amendment is not instituting new zoning designations,but setting the legislative ground work to make future changes. 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. Response: - A Buildable Lands Inventory(BLI) is available on the City's web site and up to date as of January 1,2007..It is not necessary to include the BLI with this post- acknowledgement Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18380 and 18.390?? Response: All applicable procedures for City-initiated Type IV Amendments have been followed and meet the requirements of 18.380 and 18.390. 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TIGARD DOWNTOWN GOALS,POLICIES AND ACTION MEASURES Comments of John Frewing 3/19/07 before the Tigard Planning Commission 1 Most of the data relied upon is 3 to 6 years old. Much more recent data is available and should be used in a revised comp plan amendment for downtown. 2 The`Background'and`Findings'of the proposed comp plan amendment mention respectively the TDIP and current zoning classifications for downtown Tigard,but the`Policies' of the proposed comp plan amendment do not identify or reference zoning classifications which are conclusions in the TDIP. Thus,there is no change in zoning made by this comp plan amendment. 3 State rules require that decisions of the Commission and Council be based on fact. The proposed comp plan amendment does not include any facts which define the need and circumstances of the comp plan change. At least some such facts appear to be included in the TDIP and the more recently adopted Urban Renewal Plan,but are not part of the proposed changes. In the current comp plan,such facts are provided as Volume 1,Resources. The facts supporting the proposed changes should be identified and adopted as part of the comp plan change. 4 The physical boundaries of the downtown area subject to this revised comp plan are not defined. In the Existing Conditions/Opportunities and Contstraints Report,Figure 1 purports to show the plan area,but it includes areas outside the urban renewal plan boundaries. In the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map of the TDIP,a different boundary is shown. In the main body of the TDIP,its Figure 1 shows still a different boundary. Further inconsistencies exist between the TDIP,Figure 1 and the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map—in the TDIP Figure 1,the FEMA floodplain is shown to include most of Tigard City Hall buildings,but in the Paramatrix Technical Memorandum map,the mapped floodplain is moved south of these buildings. This is significant because the Fanno Creek Open Space Overlay zone (TDIP,page 30)is defined as "between Burnham Street and the Fanno Creek 100-year floodplain. . .". 5 Nothing exists in the proposed comp plan amendment that ensures public amenities will be developed at about the same pace as private developments in the downtown area. This is important to include;the experience of the Washington Square Regional Center plan shows that the public amenities(eg a circumferential trail,street improvements)have not been developed as millions of dollars have gone into intensive commercial development according to the plan. Perhaps one kind of control for at least one aspect of the plan would be to require that properties ADJOINING the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone be subject to some additional design review(including view clearances,setback distances, pedestrian amenities,etc)in addition to properties IN the Green Corridor/Urban Creek Overlay zone. 6 The proposed comp plan amendment, including its purported factual base(TDIP,9/27/05),seems to fall far short of the state requirements(ORS 197.015,ORS 227.170)that it"interrelates all functional and natural systems and activities relating to use of lands including but not limited to sewer and water systems,transportation systems,educational facilities,recreational facilities and natural resources and air and water quality management systems"and be"based on factual information,including adopted comprehensive plans." Of these minimum scope requirements,transportation systems have been discussed the most,but in the TDIP and proposed comp plan amendments,none of the other systems/activities have been discussed in substance. For example,the entire discussion of the natural resources is to state that Fanno Creek originates near Wilson High School and drains to the Tualatin River,with diverse wildlife species. There is no discussion of trends in wildlife counts,invasive species, water pollution,air pollution,noise impacts of development,etc. There is no mention of the required CWS buffer zone around riparian and wetland areas which is likely to impact vision statements of a central gathering place new Fanno Creek(ie it must be moved away from the stream further than shown on drawings). There is no discussion of the small stream which will be the focus of the Green 1111 • Corridor/Urban Creek catalyst project and what natural features it might harbor. There is no discussion of tree canopy cover and how to achieve it,an important part of any`green'development and significant because of Tigard's past failure to enforce development conditions for this subject(eg Costco parking acreage). 7 To the extent that the TDIP appendices provide the basis for future modification of related local plans, eg Community Development Code,TSP,they should be qualified to indicate that they do NOT reflect any community plan for action,by any city body. For example,Figure 1 of Appendix C(Kittleson, 10/24/04)shows a`planned sidewalk'for a non-existant Wall Street extension,east of the current Tigard library—not only is this outside of any definition of downtown,but it is not supported by any pedestrian traffic studies. Similarly,the proposed bike facilities of Figure 2 are a disjointed collection of routes not supported by any study or discussion with interested citizen groups. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8 OAR 660-009-0015 has requirements that are effective as of 1/1/07 and appear not to have been met in this comp plan update. See for reference,OAR 660-009-0015(6). For example,0015(1)requires the plan to"identify the major categories of industrial or other employment uses that could reasonably be expected to locate or expand in the planning area. .". In the present comp plan proposal,only real estate trends have been analyzed as distinguished from types of employment,eg by SIC code. 9 OAR—0020(1)(b)requires the city to adopt a policy"stating that a COMPETITIVE supply of land as a community economic development for the industrial and other employment uses selected through the economic opportunities analysis. ..."(full cap emphasis added my me). This does not exist in the proposed comp plan amendment and must be added to comply with state rules. HOUSING 10 The proposed comp plan change to Policy 5.5 regarding allowance of housing makes reference to a `Commercial Professional District'that is not one of the zoning districts outlined in the TDIP (Paramatrix, August 05,Technical Memorandum,pp 12-14 and associated zoning map). Thus,it is impossible to determine the comp plan's housing for downtown. Inconsistency 111: In this same comp plan change,MUE multifamily housing is encouraged to develop at R-40 densities,while in the TDIP noted above,MUE multifamily housing is limited to R-25 densities. The inconsistency should be resolved. Inconsistency#2: The proposed comp plan change for Policy 5.5 refers to MUC-1 district,a designation not included on the recommended zoning map of the TDIP. This reference to MUC-1 calls for housing between a minimum of 25 units/acre to 50 units/acre,but exludes from these density limits housing developed above non-residential uses. In the TDIP,multifamily housing in the MUC district is ONLY allowed above non-residential uses and is required to comply with the R-4()standards and density. The inconsistency should be resolved. • 11 A Buildable Lands Inventory is not provided for the downtown area as required by OAR 660-007- 0045(1). This should be provided to comply with state rules. 12 This comp plan amendment appears to not address important and relevant Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Such ommisions include Goal 6 regarding the quality of air,water and land resources, Goal 7 regarding protection of the community from natural disaster and hazard areas(eg flooding),Goal 11,regarding planning for public facilities and Goal 13 regarding energy conservation. A revision of the proposed comp plan section for downtown should include consideration of these issues. 13 Note to review: Does the record of the pre-app meeting and application itself meet the requirements of Tigard CDC 18.380 and 18.390?? DRAFT • S P E C I A L AREAS O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live,work, and play, and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center, dating back to around 1907. A central business district developed around the railway station, serving the then small farming community with businesses such as a bank, hotel,restaurants and a farming supply store. The prevalent urban form of one and two-story buildings is still present on Main Street. In the 1940s and 50s the automobile became the primary mode of transportation. Tigard's population grew steadily, but Downtown Tigard lost its prominence with the Pacific Highway viaduct,which bypassed Main Street, and the construction of Washington Square Mall and other large shopping centers. Today, the existing uses in the Downtown Urban Renewal District include retail, office, residential, auto- dependent businesses, and large-lot light industrial businesses as well as public park, civic, and transit uses. Industrial uses are prominent to the southeast of the plan area. Retail commercial uses are concentrated to the northwest along OR 99W. Within the Urban Renewal District, there is a small amount of residential development, including a mobile home park and one and two-story apartment buildings. Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process,stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002, with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. In 2004 the City received a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant, which facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues,workshops, open house, and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." To achieve this vision and the Preferred Design Alternative, the TDIP made several policy recommendations. Eight catalyst projects were proposed to help create a more active Downtown: 1. Streetscape Enhancement Program 2. Green Corridor/Urban Creek 3. Hall Blvd. Regional Retail 4. Downtown Housing Development 5. Ash Area Downtown Improvement 6. Performing Arts and Recreation Center 7. Fanno Creek Public Area Special Areas of Concern, 1 Downtown • DRAFT 8. Relocating Post Office The TDIP also made recommendations on Transportation System Improvements, Code and Regulatory Adjustments, Funding Sources, and Follow-Up Actions. The City Council accepted the TDIP in September 2005. Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP.The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan The Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan provides specific guidance for Streetscape Enhancement, one of the catalyst projects. It was developed with significant citizen involvement. The Plan includes a Design Framework, Streetscape Design Concepts, and Gateway and Public Spaces, all of which will encourage the development of a pedestrian-friendly Downtown. Statewide Goals and Policies In addition to the Statewide Goals, there are a number of other state policies that are relevant to the Downtown: Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (FPR) directs cities and counties to develop balanced transportation systems addressing all modes of travel including motor vehicles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians. The TPR envisions development of local plans that will promote changes in land use patterns and transportation systems that make it more convenient for people to walk,bicycle,use transit, and drive less to meet their daily needs. The TPR also directs cities and counties to plan changes in transportation facilities in tandem with land use and development patterns. Oregon Highway Plan The 1999 Oregon Highway Plan includes a series of policies and actions related to integrating land use and transportation. 99W and Hall Boulevard are two roadways (both under ODOT's jurisdiction) which run through the Downtown, which could conceivably receive these designations to help foster compact development: Special Transportation Area (STA)is a designated district of compact development located on a state highway within a downtown in which the need for appropriate local access outweighs the considerations of highway mobility. Urban Business Area (UBA)is a highway segment designation which may vary in size and which recognizes existing areas of commercial activity or future nodes or various types of centers of commercial activity within a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown • DRAFT • Regional Planning Requirements Metro's 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center, defined as "compact,mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." Town Centers are described as the central focus of community life, serving residents living within two or three miles. Some key objectives for developing Metro-designated 2040 Centers include: • Promoting more intensive mixed-use development. • Providing infrastructure to support more intensive development. • Creating effective local and regional transportation connections to and within the center for all travel modes. • Providing public spaces and distinct center identification. • Recognizing the natural environment as a desired amenity. 2. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street, the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function, but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. In general, downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) Under existing conditions, Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial, office, residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general,there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown. A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek, part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown • • . DRAFT • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown, the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result, the area has developed without many of the pedestrian-oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots, which are zoned R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25, C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary, Downtown is important to Tigard residents; many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrows Community Character & Quality of Life section,includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a `focal point' for the community," and"a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning, design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown • DRAFT etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing;auto-dependant uses;industrial manufacturing; and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with Triplet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown • DRAFT Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant, compact, mixed-use area with housing, retail and employment opportunities. 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials, particularly in the building fronts and streetscape. Also develop appropriate density, height, mass, scale, architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Utilize form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information, urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines, standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks, plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses, public spaces and transit. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown • DRAFT • • 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from,and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system,including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown, such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT'S Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets, pathways, entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot, and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's.public investment / facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public,including members of the development community,with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 7 Downtown -.�. _.. _ �'Ft-12 ( R-12 R-25-- 1 ; 'R-7 = � cis J tj p) — ".�Pb�•_ the=` NR R,45 , \.': .\ `'ail' r� /' CBD, • • ! 2 ; '' • CBD I-L • R-25 \ . R-12 ? , - ` yr.� :R-4.5 ��, - . , -- ; : =(PD) I Zoning Classifications = - Urban Renewal Boundary Urban Renewal Area Zoning Boundaries City of Tigard Oregon 0 - 300 600 1200 N Certagnplr.-C0113113IIMM Dewlaps.Dept ,,r,.mas Feet s. C.n.rr®.a.w„s:.ga.ca.,.Mc. • 111j PRE-APR HELD BY: CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISIONP LAND USE PERMIT APPLICATION '' City of Tigard Pemizt Center 13125 SW Hall Blul, Tigard OR 97223 p Ok-c Phone 503.639.4171 Fax:503.598.1960 �;^�, 2006 File Other r Case# 41144 Date 11161(0 By ' Receipt# L , Fee Date Complete TYPE OF PERMIT YOU ARE APPLYING FOR ❑ Adjustment/Variance(I or II) El Minor Land Partition(II) ❑Zone Change(III) 'Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) El Planned Development(III) ❑Zone Change Annexation(IV) ❑ Conditional Use (III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(I,II or III) ❑Zone Ordinance Amendment(IV) ❑Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑ Site Development Review(II) ❑ Home Occupation(II) ❑ Subdivision(II or III) LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL OCCUR(Address if available) POW P1 j)Wvt 11/ vl f e i ( Nis fr I'c 7`— TAX MAPS&TAX LOT NOS. TOTAL SITE SIZE - ZONING CLASSIFICATION 3 aC reS ad, C- 61 C.-l0, lP-t/, S, Az(/f)J,Inc 2S APPLICANT* e ►r fy TsA(d MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP /3/ LS 5W f-/4l( Qlvd. %IS4rd o 5722 3 PHONE NO. FAX NO. 57)3 - 63/ - YU/ f PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. Sean /rre(Iv SP-3 - 71 - 2y2-0 PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP PHONE NO. FAX NO. *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) I4mPh trap/Pr 11 o F-- file �ornQre%Phc�i,/e F"�h = S C14/ ��Pa 3 O *- Cori r o r n = �i w�l 7�w K ((i ban /CP�1 ii ( 4(3' C f yj ��►(q JP e Ga4 /S 4//c.ii-J , �i d /¢c f,6 `, "94.4511 CPS k re (fec 1 Iij e 7 q r TJO w '1/OW vl (G1pi voi,z Ps/ /# 5 APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT ALL OF THE REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN THE "BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS"INFORMATION SHEET. is\curpin\masters\land use applications\land use permit app.doc • THE APPLICANT SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • If the application is granted,the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. ♦ All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued,based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria,and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNATURES OF EACH OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE REQUIRED. Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date 2-//g o� Applicant/Agent/ epresee s Signature Date • Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date • CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATIONS BASIC SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS This checklist identifies the basic submittal requirements for a land use application. BASIC INFORMATION: ❑ Completed Master"Land Use Permit"Application with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization ❑ Title transfer instrument or grant deed ❑ Written summary of proposal ❑ Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) ❑ Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed #10 envelopes for all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property. Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-size (#10), addressed with 1" x 4" labels (see envelope submittal requirements). Property owner mailing lists must be prepared by the City for a minimal fee (see request for 500' property owner mailing list form). ❑ Documentary evidence of Neighborhood Meeting for the following: Site Development Review, Subdivision, Conditional Use, Sensitive Lands Review, Zone Change, Comprehensive Plan Amendments. ❑ Neighborhood Meeting Affidavits of Posting & Mailing Notice, Minutes, Sign-in Sheets ❑ Service Provider Letter ❑ Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2.(e) ❑ Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes ❑ Filing Fee (see fee schedule) PLANS REQUIRED: In addition to the above basic information, each type of land use application will require one or more of the following maps or.plans. PLEASE SUBMIT EACH OF THE PLANS CHECKED BELOW WITH YOUR APPLICATION (See separate attachment for details on what information to include on each plan): ❑ Vicinity Map ❑ Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan ❑ Existing Conditions Map ❑ Preliminary Utilities Plan ❑ Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map ❑ Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan ❑ Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan ❑ Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan ❑ Site Development Plan ❑ Architectural Drawings (elevations &floor plans) O Landscape Plan ❑ Sign Drawings ❑ Public Improvements/Streets Plan NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: The City requires multiple copies of submittal materials. The number of copies required depends on the type of review process. FOR PURPOSES OF REVIEWING YOUR APPLICATION FOR COMPLETENESS, ONLY 3 COPIES ARE NEEDED. THE BALANCE OF THE COPIES WILL BE REQUESTED FROM YOU, ONCE DEEMED COMPLETE, TO MAKE YOUR APPLICATION SUBMITTAL COMPLETE. • h:\patty\masters\application submittal requirements.doc UPDATED: 26-Jun-02 • CITY OF TIGARD LAND USE APPLICATIONS 06/07 FEE SCHEDULE PROCEDURE FEE ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNITS $130 ANNEXATION $2,447 APPEAL Director's Decision(Type II)'to Hearings Officer $250 Expedited Review(Deposit) * $300 Hearings Referee $500 Planning Commission/Hearings Officer to City Council $2,461 APPROVAL EXTENSION $259 BLASTING PERMIT $263 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Initial $5,091 Major Modification $5,091 Minor Modification $562 DESIGN EVALUATION TEAM(DET) RECOMMENDATION(DEPOSIT) $1,260 DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISION REVIEW Single-Family Building Plan $51 Commercial/Industrial/Institution $322 HEARING POSTPONEMENT $254 HISTORIC OVERLAY/REVIEW DISTRICT Historic Overlay Designation $3,933 Removal of Historic Overlay Designation $3,933 Exterior Alteration in Historic Overlay District $602 New Construction in Historic Overlay District $602 Demolition in Historic Overlay District $602 • HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT(ORIGINAL PERMIT) Type I Home Occupation Permit $39 Type II Home Occupation Permit $276 INTERPRETATION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE $595 LAND PARTITION Residential and Non-Residential(3 Lots) $3,650 Residential and Non-Residential(2 Lots) $3,003 Expedited $4,293 Final Plat $873 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $468 MINOR MODIFICATION TO AN APPROVED PLAN $562 NON-CONFORMING USE CONFIRMATION $265 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Conceptual Plan Review $6,980 Detailed Plan Review Applicable SDR Fee PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE $362 SENSITIVE LANDS REVIEW With Excessive Slopes/Within Drainage Ways/Within Wetlands (Type II) $2,357 With Excessive Slopes/Within Drainage Ways/Within Wetlands (Type III) $2,537 Within the 100-Year Floodplain (Type III) $2,537 SIGN PERMIT Existing and Modification to an Existing Sign (No Size Differential) $39 Temporary Sign (Per Sign) $19 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND MAJOR MODIFICATION Under$1,000,000 $4,314 $1 Million/Over $5,662 +$6/Each$10,000 Over$1 Million Minor Modification $562 • SUBDIVISION • Preliminary Plat Without Planned Development • $4,990 +$88/Lot Preliminary Plat With Planned Development • Add$6,980 Expedited Preliminary Plat Without Planned Development $5,654 +$86/Lot Expedited Preliminary Plat With Planned Development Add$6,980 Final Plat $1,604 Plat Name Change $266 TEMPORARY USE PERMIT Director's Decision $295 Special Exemption/Non-Profit Organization -0- TREE REMOVAL • $182 VACATION(STREETS AND PUBLIC ACCESS) $2,144 Deposit +Actual Costs VARIANCE/ADJUSTMENT • Administrative Variance $602 Development Adjustment $265 Special Adjustments - Adjustment to a Subdivision $265 - Reduction of Minimum Residential Density $265 - Access/Egress Standards Adjustment $602 - Landscaping Adjustment(Existing/New Street Trees) $303 Parking Adjustments - Reduction in Minimum or Increase in Maximum Parking Ratio $602 - Reduction in New or Existing Development/Transit Improvement $602 - Reduction in Bicycle Parking $602 - Alternative Parking Garage Layout $265 - Reduction in Stacking Lane Length • $602 Sign Code Adjustment $602 Street Improvement Adjustment $602 Tree Removal Adjustment $265 Wireless Communication Facility Adjustments - Setback from Nearby Residence $602 - Distance from Another Tower $265 ZONING MAP/TEXT AMENDMENT Legislative— Comprehensive Plan(CPA) $8,703 Legislative— Community Development Code (DCA). $3,421 Quasi-Judicial(ZON) . $3,134 ZONING ANALYSIS (DETAILED). • $562 ZONING INQUIRY LE•1-1"ER(SIMPLE) $65 JOINT APPLICATION PLANNING FEE 100% of Highest Planning Fee +50% of All Additional Fees Related to the Proposal EFFECTIVE DATE: OCTOBER 29,2003(Updated annually according to Resolution No.03-59) (Resolution No.21:59, Repealing Resolution No.02-38,Repealing Resolution No.98-58,Repealing Resolution No.96-30,Repealing Resolution No.91-01) *-Established by state statute NOTE 1: WITHDRAWN APPLICATIONS: In cases of withdraw of an application;refund of fees may be applicable,less costs incurred, as determined by the Director. Generally, refunds of 80 percent will be made for applications received and withdrawn prior to sending out request for comments to agencies and notice of public hearing being sent. Fifty-percent refunds will be made where notice of public hearing has been sent but no staff report has begun. NO REFUNDS WILL BE PROVIDED FOR APPLICATIONS.FOR WHICI-I A STAFF REPORT HAS BEGUN. NOTE 2: PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: For all Type II,III and IV applications,applicants must submit two (2) sets of pre-stamped, pre-addressed envelopes for all property owners of record within 500 feet of the subject properties. The very most current records of the Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation shall be the official records for determining ownership. Contact the City of Tigard to request 500-foot property owner mailing labels. NOTE 3: LONG RANGE PLANNING SURCHARGE: A Long Range Planning surcharge of.1476 x the application fee has been added by the City Council Resolution No.04-99,passed and effective on 12/28/04. H:\patty\masters\Tigard Fee Schedule 06-07.doc(update effective:7/1/06) • +► t "�gi LAND USE APPLICATION PROCESSING TIMELINES City of Tigard • ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF:REVIEW Same Day HOP I(Home Occupation Permit) N/A 5-6 Weeks HOP II(Home Occupation Permit) 500 feet notification 5-6 Weeks SDR(Site Development Review) 500 feet notification 10 Days MIS(Lot Line Adjustment) Abutting properties • 5-6 Weeks MLP(Minor Land Partition) 500 feet notification 10 Days VAR(Variance)(Flexible Setback) Abutting properties 2-5 Days SGN(Sign Permit) • N/A • 6-8 Weeks SUB(Subdivision&Sub.With Variance) 500 feet notification 2-5 Days - TUP(Temporary Use Permit) Abutting properties • 2-5 Days TUC(Temporary Use Certificate) • N/A • 2-5 Days TRP(Tree Removal Permit) N/A " )6i ARTNGS OFFICER 6-8 Weeks SLR(Sensitive Lands Review) 500 feet notification 6-8 Weeks CUP(Conditional Use Permit) 500 feet notification • 6-8 Weeks SCE(Sign Code Exception) 500 feet notification G COM1yIIS SIQN� • 6-8 Weeks CPA(Comprehensive Plan Amendment) 500 feet notification 6-8 Weeks PDR(Planned Development Review) 500 feet notification - 6-8 Weeks ZON(Zone Change) 500 feet notification • 6-8 Weeks ZOA(Zone Ordinance Amendment) N/A •CITY COUNCIL• 6-8 Weeks CPA(Comprehensive Plan Amendment) 500 feet notification 6-8 Weeks • ZCA(Zone Change Annexation) 500 feet notification 6-8 Weeks ZOA(Zone Ordinance Amendment 500 feet notification NOTE: The time clock begins when the application is ACCEPTED, rather than at submittal. These timelines are an approximation. Revised 3/9/04 C:\My Documents\PT-FORMS,ECT\LAND USE TIMELINES.doc CITY OF TIGARD A� PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES CrnPr� a"Xr omum eve pm m ent Shaping A Better Community (Pre-Application Meeting Notes are Valid for Six 6 Months RERp iv<c IZ SW/if RENR: str NON-RESIDENTIAL APPLICANT: C r /y o f rS Ard AGENT: Phone:f y,3 ) (y 3 5 - 5/I 7 C Phone: ( ) PROPERTY LOCATION: fenew4 Ar 1 ADDRESS/GENERAL LOCATION: (IC bin 1 frf�C./ TAX MAP(S)/LOT #(S): NECESSARY APPLICATIONS: PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: - of i;. „/r- . - S Jv' c d 1.11e sur'S 6.)r 1Q &wt., 7(4/n L4 & t IC et' 4f 1 1Sf/'1Gf. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /' n MAP DESIGNATION: cent-6,1 t 8,4 ih mss Ot f✓►'c f G ek,e{4 1 C a ft In PC!"'s I, 1io f'sc 1oH / 601101 ere Ir4 I) fled►',,in -1-,S k 1JPhst'1c ► lfet)Q(ett //G /� Low Oefris(ff Res' id ell 1-14,1 1 Of eii S/)1 c-e ZONING MAP DESIGNATION: ( B 6, ('-4 ) 6 -/J e 21 , /f-/2_(/.0) ZONING DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18. 1 MINIMUM LOT SIZE: sq. ft. Average Min. lot width: ft. Max. building height: ft. Setbacks: Front ft. Side ft. Rear - ft. Corner ft. from street. MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE: % Minimum landscaped or natural vegetation area: %. ❑ NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING (Refer to the Neighborhood Meeting Handout) THE APPLICANT SHALL NOTIFY ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET, INTERESTED PARTIES, AND THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION of their proposal. A minimum of two (2) weeks between the mailing date and the meeting date is required. Please review the Land Use Notification handout concerning site posting and the meeting notice. Meeting is to be held prior to submitting your application or the application will not be accepted. NOTE: In order to also preliminarily address building code standards, a meeting with a Plans Examiner is encouraged prior to submittal of a land use application. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 1 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section NARRATIVE (Refer to Code Cater 18.390) • The APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A NARRATIVE which provides findings based on the applicable approval standards. Failure to provide a narrative or adequately address criteria would be reason to consider an application incomplete and delay review of the proposal. The applicant should review the code for applicable criteria. ❑ IMPACT STUDY (Refer to Code Sections 18.390.040 and 18.390.050] As a part of the APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS, applicants are required to INCLUDE IMPACT STUDY with their submittal package. The impact study shall quantify the effect of the development on public facilities and services. The study shall address, at a minimum, the transportation system, including bikeways, the drainage system, the parks system, the water system, the sewer system and the noise impacts of the development. For each public facility system and type of impact, the study shall propose improvements necessary to meet City standards, and to minimize the impact of the development on the public at large, public facilities systems, and affected private property users. In situations where the Community Development Code requires the dedication of real property interests, the applicant shall either specifically concur with the dedication requirement, or provide evidence which supports the conclusion that the real property dedication requirement is not roughly proportional to the projected impacts of the development. ❑ ACCESS (Refer to Chapters 18.705 and 18365) Minimum number of accesses: Minimum access width: Minimum pavement width: All driveways and parking areas, except for some fleet storage parking areas, must be paved. Drive-in use queuing areas: ❑ WALKWAY REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.705.030) WALKWAYS SHALL EXTEND FROM THE GROUND FLOOR ENTRANCES OR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR LANDING OF STAIRS, ramps, or elevators of all commercial, institutional, and industrial uses, to the streets which provide the required access and egress. Walkways shall provide convenient connections between buildings in multi-building commercial, institutional, and industrial complexes. Unless impractical, walkways should be constructed between a new development and neighboring developments. ❑ SPECIAL SETBACKS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.730] > STREETS: feet from the centerline of > LOWER INTENSITY ZONES: feet, along the site's boundary. > FLAG LOT: 10-FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. ❑ SPECIAL BUILDING HEIGHT PROVISIONS (Refer to Code Section 18.730.010.BJ BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS - Buildings located in a non-residential zone may be built to a height of 75 feet provided that: > A maximum building floor area to site area ratio (FAR) of 1.5 to 1 will exist; > All actual building setbacks will be at least half('/z) of the building's height; and > The structure will not abut a residential zoned district. ❑ BUFFERING AND SCREENING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.7451 In order TO INCREASE PRIVACY AND TO EITHER REDUCE OR ELIMINATE ADVERSE NOISE OR VISUAL IMPACTS between adjacent developments, especially between different land uses, the City requires landscaped buffer areas along certain site perimeters. Required buffer areas are described by the Code in terms of width. Buffer areas must be occupied by a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and must also achieve a balance between vertical and horizontal plantings. Site obscuring screens or fences may also be required; these are often advisable even if not required by the Code. The required buffer areas may only be occupied by vegetation, fences, utilities, and walkways. Additional information on required buffer area materials and sizes may be found in the Development Code. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 2 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section The ESTIMATED REQU ED BUFFER WIDTHS applicable to your• proposal area are: feet along north boundary. feet along east boundary. feet along south boundary. feet along west boundary. IN ADDITION, SIGHT OBSCURING SCREENING IS REQUIRED ALONG: ❑ LANDSCAPING (Refer to Code Chapters 18.745,18:165 and 18.7051 STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL DEVELOPMENTS FRONTING ON A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE STREET as well as driveways which are more than 100 feet in length. Street trees must be placed either within the public right-of-way or on private property within six (6) feet of the right-of- way boundary. Street trees must have a minimum caliper of at least two (2) inches when measured four (4) feet above grade. Street trees should be spaced 20 to 40 feet apart depending on the branching width of the proposed tree species at maturity. Further information on regulations affecting street trees may be obtained from the Planning Division. A MINIMUM OF ONE (1) TREE FOR EVERY SEVEN (7) PARKING SPACES MUST BE PLANTED in and around all parking areas in order to provide a vegetative canopy effect. Landscaped parking • . areas shall include special design features which effectively screen the parking lot areas from view. These design features may include the use of landscaped berms, decorative walls, and raised planters. ❑ RECYCLING (Refer to Code Chapter 18.755) Applicant should CONTACT FRANCHISE HAULER FOR REVIEW. AND APPROVAL OF SITE SERVICING COMPATIBILITY. Locating a trash/recycling enclosure within a clear vision area such as at the intersection of two (2) driveways within a parking lot is prohibited. Much of Tigard is within Pride Disposal's Service area. Lenny Hing is the contact person and can be reached at (503) 625-6177. ❑ PARKING (Refer to Code Section 18.765.040) REQUIRED parking for this type of use: . Parking SHOWN on preliminary,plan(s): . . SECONDARY USE REQUIRED parking: Parking SHOWN on preliminary plan(s): NO MORE THAN 50% OF REQUIRED SPACES MAY BE DESIGNATED AND/OR DIMENSIONED AS COMPACT SPACES. PARKING STALLS shall be dimensioned as follows: ➢ Standard parking space dimensions: 8 feet, 6 inches x 18 feet, 6 inches. ➢ Compact parking space dimensions: 7 feet, 6 inches x 16 feet, 6 inches. Note: Parking space width includes the width of a stripe that separates the parking space from an adjoining space. Note: A maximum of three(3)feet of the vehicle overhang area in front of a wheel stop or curb can be included as part of required parking space depth. This area cannot be included as landscaping for meeting the minimum percentage requirements. HANDICAPPED PARKING: ➢ All parking areas shall PROVIDE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED AND DIMENSIONED DISABLED PERSON PARKING spaces. The minimum number of disabled person parking spaces to be provided, as well as the parking stall dimensions, are mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). A handout is available upon request. A handicapped parking space symbol shall be painted on the parking space surface and an appropriate sign shall be posted. ➢ BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ❑ LOADING AREA REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.765.0801 Every COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET shall be provided with a loading space. The space size and location shall be as approved by the City Engineer. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 3 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • ❑ BICYCLE RACKS (Refer to Collection 183651 BICYCLE RACKS are required FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. Bicycle racks shall be located in areas protected from automobile traffic and in convenient locations. ❑ SENSITIVE LANDS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.1151 The Code provides REGULATIONS FOR LANDS WHICH ARE POTENTIALLY UNSUITABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT DUE TO AREAS WITHIN THE 100-YEAR . FLOODPLAIN, NATURAL DRAINAGEWAYS, WETLAND AREAS, ON SLOPES IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT, OR ON UNSTABLE GROUND. Staff will attempt to preliminary identify sensitive lands areas at the pre- application conference based on available information. HOWEVER, the responsibility to precisely identify sensitive land areas, and their boundaries; is the responsibility of the applicant. Areas meeting the definitions of sensitive lands must be clearly indicated on plans submitted with the development application. Chapter 18.775 also provides regulations for the use, protection, or modification of sensitive lands areas. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS PROHIBITED WITHIN FLOODPLAINS. ❑ STEEP SLOPES (Refer to Code Section 18.115.080.01 When STEEP SLOPES exist, prior to issuance of a final order, a geotechnical report must be submitted which addresses the approval standards of the Tigard Community Development Code Section 18.775.080.C. The report shall be based upon field exploration and investigation and shall include specific recommendations for achieving the requirements of Section 18.775.080.C. ❑ CLEANWATER SERVICES(CWS)BUFFER STANDARDS (Refer to R a 0 96-44/USA Regulations-Chapter 31 LAND DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO SENSITIVE AREAS shall preserve and maintain or create a vegetated corridor for a buffer wide enough to protect the water quality functioning of the sensitive area. Design Criteria: The VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTH is dependent on the sensitive area. The following table identifies the required widths: TABLE 3.1 VEGETATED CORRIDOR WIDTHS SOURCE: CWS DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS MANUAL/RESOLUTION &ORDER 96-44 SENSITIVE AREA DEFINITION SLOPE ADJACENT WIDTH OF VEGETATED TO SENSITIVE AREA4 CORRIDOR PER SIDE5 ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining: <25% • 10 to <50 acres 15 feet >50 to <100 acres 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands <0.5 acre 25 feet • Existing or created wetlands >0.5 acre <25% 50 feet • Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow ♦ Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres ♦ Natural lakes and ponds ♦ • Streams with intermittent flow draining: >25% 10 to <50 acres 30 feet >50 to <100 acres 50 feet • Existing or created wetlands >25% Variable from 50-200 feet. Measure ♦ Rivers, streams, and springs with year-round flow in 25-foot increments from the starting • Streams with intermittent flow draining >100 acres point to the top of ravine (break in ♦ Natural lakes and ponds <25%slope), add 35 feet past the top of ravine6 4Starting point for measurement = edge of the defined channel (bankful flow) for streams/rivers, delineated wetland boundary, delineated spring boundary, and/or average high water for lakes or ponds, whichever offers greatest resource protection. Intermittent springs, located a minimum of 15 feet within the river/stream or wetland vegetated corridor, shall not serve as a starting point for measurement. 5Vegetated corridor averaging or reduction is allowed only when the vegetated corridor is certified to be in a marginal or degraded condition. 6The vegetated corridor extends 35 feet from the top of the ravine and sets the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. The 35 feet may be reduced.to 15 feet,if a stamped geotechnical report confirms slope stability shall be maintained with the reduced setback from the top of ravine. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 4 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section • • Restrictions in the VegetS Corridor: • NO structures, development, construction activities, gardens, lawns, application of chemicals, dumping of any materials of any kind, or other activities shall be permitted which otherwise detract from the water quality protection provided by the vegetated corridor, except as provided for in the CWS Design and Construction Standards. Location of Vegetated Corridor: IN ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH CREATES MULTIPLE PARCELS or lots intended for separate ownership, such as a subdivision, the vegetated corridor shall be contained in a separate tract, and shall not be a part of any parcel to be used for the construction of a dwelling unit. CWS Service Provider Letter: PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL of any land use applications, the applicant must obtain a CWS Service Provider Letter which will outline the conditions necessary to comply with the R&O 96-44 sensitive area requirements. If there are no sensitive areas, CWS must still issue a letter stating a CWS Service Provider Letter is not required. ❑ SIGNS (Refer to Code Chapter 18.780) SIGN PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ANY SIGN in the City of Tigard. A "Guidelines for Sign Permits" handout is available upon request. Additional sign area or height beyond Code standards may be permitted if the sign proposal is reviewed as part of a development review application. Alternatively, a Sign Code Exception application may be filed for Director's review. ❑ TREE REMOVAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS [Refer to Code Section 18.790.030.CJ A TREE PLAN FOR THE PLANTING, REMOVAL AND PROTECTION OF TREES prepared by a certified arborist shall, be provided for any lot, parcel or combination of lots or parcels for which a development application for a subdivision, partition, site development review, planned development, or conditional use is filed. Protection is preferred over removal where possible. THE TREE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE the following: ➢ Identification of the location, size and species of all existing trees including trees designated as significant by the City; ➢ Identification of a program to save existing trees or mitigate tree removal over 12 inches in caliper. Mitigation must follow the replacement guidelines of Section 18.790.060.D according to the following standards and shall be exclusive of trees required by other development code provisions for landscaping, streets and parking lots: Retainage of less than 25% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires a mitigation program according to Section 18.150.070.D. of no net loss of trees; Retainage of from 25 to 50% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that two- thirds of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; Retainage of from 50 to 75% of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires that 50% of the trees to be removed be mitigated according to Section 18.790.060.D.; + Retainage of 75% or greater of existing trees over 12 inches in caliper requires no mitigation; ➢ Identification of all trees which are proposed to be removed; and ➢ A protection program defining standards and methods. that will be used by the applicant to protect trees during and after construction. TREES REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR PRIOR TO A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LISTED ABOVE will be inventoried as part of the tree plan above and will be replaced according to Section 18.790.060.D. ❑ MITIGATION (Refer to Code Section 18.790.060.E REPLACEMENT OF A TREE shall take place according to the following guidelines: ➢ A replacement tree shall be a substantially similar species considering site characteristics. ➢ If a replacement tree of the species of the tree removed or damaged is not reasonably available, the Director may allow replacement with a different species of equivalent natural resource value. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 5 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section " • ➢ If a replacement* of the size cut is not reasonably aable on the local market or would not be viable, the Director shall require replacement with more than one tree in accordance with the following formula: The number of replacement trees required shall be determined by dividing the estimated caliper size of the tree removed or damaged, by the caliper size of the largest reasonably available replacement trees. If this number of trees cannot be viably located on the subject property, the Director may require one (1) or more replacement trees to be planted on other property within the city, either public property or, with the consent of the owner, private property. ➢ The planting of a replacement tree shall take place in a manner reasonably calculated to allow growth to maturity. IN-LIEU OF TREE REPLACEMENT under Subsection D of this section, a party may, with the consent of the Director, elect to compensate the City for its costs in performing such tree replacement. ❑ CLEAR VISION AREA [Refer to Code Chapter 18.7951 The City requires that CLEAR VISION AREAS BE MAINTAINED BETWEEN THREE (3) AND EIGHT (8) FEET IN HEIGHT at road/driveway, road/railroad, and road/road intersections. The size of the required clear vision area depends upon the abutting street's functional classification and any existing obstructions within the clear vision area. ❑ ADDITIONAL LOT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS (Refer to Code Section 18.810.060) MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 25 feet unless lot is created through the minor land partition process. Lots created as part of a partition must have a minimum of 15 feet of frontage or have a minimum 15-foot-wide access easement. The DEPTH OF ALL LOTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 2% TIMES THE AVERAGE WIDTH, unless the parcel is less than 1%times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. • CODE CHAPTERS _ 18.330(Conditional Use) 18.620(Tigard Triangle Design Standards) _ 18.765(off-Street Parking/Loading Requirements) - 18.340(Directors Interpretation) 18.630(Washington Square Regional Center) _ 18.775(Sensitive Lands Review) - - 18.350(Planned Development) 18.705(Access/Egress/Circulation) - 18.780(Signs) - 18.360(Site Development Review) 18.710(Accessory Residential Units) - 18.785(Temporary Use Permits) 18.370(Variances/Adjustments) 18.715(Density Computations) - 18.790(Tree Removal) • - 18.380(Zoning Map/Text Amendments) 18.720(Design Compatibility Standards) _ 18.795(Visual Clearance Areas) - 18.385(Miscellaneous Permits) • 18.725(Environmental Performance Standards) _ 18.798(Wireless Communication Facilities) - 18.390(Decision Making Procedures/Impact Study) 18.730(Exceptions To Development Standards) _ 18.810(Street&Utility Improvement Standards) - 18.410(Lot Line Adjustments) 18.740(Historic Overlay) _ 18.420(Land Partitions) 18.742(Home Occupation Permits) _ 18.430(Subdivisions) 18.745(Landscaping&Screening Standards) - 18.510(Residential Zoning Districts) 18.750(Manufactured/Mobil Home Regulations) - 18.520(Commercial Zoning Districts) 18.755(Mixed Solid Waste/Recycling Storage) - 18.530(Industrial Zoning Districts) 18.760(Nonconforming Situations) CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 6 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section ADDITIONAL CONCERNS OR COMME : • • PROCEDURE Administrative Staff Review. Public hearing before the Land Use Hearings Officer. Public hearing before the Planning Commission. ✓ Public hearing before the Planning Commission with the Commission making a recommendation on the proposal to the City Council. An additional public hearing shall be held by the City Council. - •APPLICATION SUBMITTAL PROCESS All APPLICATIONS MUST BE ACCEPTED BY A PLANNING DIVISION STAFF MEMBER of the Community Development Department at Tigard City Hall offices. PLEASE NOTE: Applications submitted by mail or dropped off at the counter without Planning Division acceptance may be returned. The Planning counter closes at 5:00 PM. Maps submitted with an application shall be folded IN ADVANCE to 81/2" x11". One, 81/2" x 11" map of a proposed protect shall be submitted for attachment to the staff report or administrative decision. Applications with unfolded maps shall not be accepted. The Planning Division and Engineering Department will perform a preliminary review of the application and will determine whether an application is complete within 30 days of the counter submittal. Staff will notify the applicant if additional information or additional copies of the submitted materials are required. CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 7 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section The administrative decisSor public hearing will typically occur Sroximateiy 45 to 60 days after an application is accepted as being complete by the Planning Division. Applications involving difficult or protracted issues or requiring review by other jurisdictions may take additional time to review. Written recommendations from the Planning staff are issued seven (7) days prior to the public hearing. A 10-day public appeal period follows all land use decisions. An appeal on this matter would be heard by the Tigard . A basic flow chart which illustrates the review process is available from the Planning Division upon request. Land use applications requiring a public hearing must have notice posted on-site by the applicant no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. This PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE AND THE NOTES OF THE CONFERENCE ARE INTENDED TO INFORM the prospective applicant of the primary Community Development Code requirements applicable to the potential development of a particular site and to allow the City staff and prospective applicant to discuss the opportunities and constraints affecting development of the site. BUILDING PERMITS PLANS FOR BUILDING AND OTHER RELATED PERMITS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR REVIEW UNTIL A LAND USE APPROVAL HAS BEEN ISSUED. Final inspection approvals by the Building Division will not be granted until there is compliance with all conditions of development approval. These pre-application notes do not include comments from the Building Division. For proposed buildings or modifications to existing buildings, it is recommended to contact a Building Division Plans Examiner to determine if there are building code issues that would prevent the structure from being constructed, as proposed. Additionally, with regard to Subdivisions and Minor Land Partitions where any structure to be demolished has system development charge (SDC) credits and the underlying parcel for that structure will be eliminated when the new plat is recorded, the City's policy is to apply those system development credits to the first building permit issued in the development (UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THE TIME IN WHICH.THE DEMOLITION PERMIT IS OBTAINED). PLEASE NOTE: The conference and notes cannot cover all Code requirements and aspects related to site planning that should apply to the development of your site plan. Failure of the staff to provide information required by the Code shall not constitute a waiver of the applicable standards or requirements. It is recommended that a prospective applicant either obtain and read the Community Development Code or ask any questions of City staff relative to Code requirements prior to submitting an application. AN ADDITIONAL PRE-APPLICATION FEE AND CONFERENCE WILL BE REQUIRED IF AN APPLICATION PERTAINING TO THIS PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE IS SUBMITTED AFTER A PERIOD OF MORE THAN SIX (6) MONTHS FOLLOWING THIS CONFERENCE (unless deemed as unnecessary by the Planning Division). PREPARED BY: S4 h A-acre //y CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING DIVISION /_ STAFF PERSON HOLDING PRE-APP. MEETING PHONE: 503-639-4171 . FAX: ,503-684-7291 EMAIL Lstafrs first name)@ci.tigard.or.US TITLE 18(CITY OF TIGARD'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE)INTERNET ADDRESS: www.ciiigard.or.us H:lpattylmasters\Pre-App Notes Commercial.doc Updated: 15-Dec-04 (Engineering section:preapp.eng) • CITY OF TIGARD Pre-Application Conference Notes Page 8 of 8 NON-Residential Application/Planning Division Section - •DRAFT • • S P E C I A L A R E A S O F C O N C E R N 11.1 DOWNTOWN TIGARD URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT Citizens have expressed a desire to create a "heart" for their community: a place to live,work, and play, and to serve as a community gathering place. Main Street and the surrounding area have served as Tigard's historic center,dating back to around 1907. A central business district developed around the railway station, serving the then small farming community with businesses such as a bank, hotel,restaurants and a farming supply store.The prevalent urban form of one and two-story buildings is still present on Main Street. In the 1940s and 50s the automobile became the primary mode of transportation. Tigard's population grew steadily,but Downtown Tigard lost its prominence with the Pacific Highway viaduct,which bypassed Main Street, and the construction of Washington Square Mall and other large shopping centers. Today, the existing uses in the Downtown Urban Renewal Districtinclude retail, office, residential, auto- dependent businesses, and large-lot light industrial businesses as well as public park, civic, and transit uses. Industrial uses are prominent to the southeast of the plan area. Retail commercial uses are concentrated to the northwest along OR 99W. Within the Urban Renewal District, there is a small amount of residential development, including a mobile home park and one and two-story apartment buildings. Planning for Downtown Tigard's revitalization has been a long-term process,stretching back at least 25 years. The most recent effort dates back to 2002,with the announcement of plans for a Washington County Commuter rail line with a planned station in downtown Tigard. This inspired a small group of citizens and business owners to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on Commuter Rail. In 2004 the City received a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant, which facilitated the hiring of consultants and a more extensive planning process. A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues,workshops, open house, and a public survey. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) The TGM grant and planning process resulted in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." To achieve this vision and the Preferred Design Alternative, the TDIP made several policy recommendations. Eight catalyst projects were proposed to help create a more active Downtown: 1. Streetscape Enhancement Program 2. Green Corridor/Urban Creek 3. Hall Blvd. Regional Retail 4. Downtown Housing Development 5. Ash Area Downtown Improvement 6. Performing Arts and Recreation Center 7. Fanno Creek Public Area Special Areas of Concern 1 Downtown • • DRAFT 8. Relocating Post Office The TDIP also made recommendations on Transportation System Improvements, Code and Regulatory Adjustments, Funding Sources, and Follow-Up Actions. The City Council accepted the TDIP in September 2005. Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for Urban Renewal in the May 2006 election. Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan The Tigard Downtown Streetscape Design Plan provides specific guidance for Streetscape Enhancement, one of the catalyst projects. It was developed with significant citizen involvement. The Plan includes a Design Framework, Streetscape Design Concepts, and Gateway and Public Spaces, all of which will encourage the development of a pedestrian-friendly Downtown. Statewide Goals and Policies In addition to the Statewide Goals, there are a number of other state policies that are relevant to the Downtown: Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) directs cities and counties to develop balanced transportation systems addressing all modes of travel including motor vehicles, transit, bicycles and pedestrians. The TPR envisions development of local plans that will promote changes in land use patterns and transportation systems that make it more convenient for people to walk, bicycle,use transit, and drive less to meet their daily needs. The TPR also directs cities and counties to plan changes in transportation facilities in tandem with land use and development patterns. Oregon Highway Plan The 1999 Oregon Highway Plan includes a series of policies and actions related to integrating land use and transportation. 99W and Hall Boulevard are two roadways (both under ODOT's jurisdiction) which run through the Downtown,which could conceivably receive these designations to help foster compact development: Special Transportation Area (STA)is a designated district of compact development located on a state highway within a downtown in which the need for appropriate local access outweighs the considerations of highway mobility. Urban Business Area (UBA)is a highway segment designation which may vary in size and which recognizes existing areas of commercial activity or future nodes or various types of centers of commercial activity within a downtown. Special Areas of Concern 2 Downtown DRAFT S • Regional Planning Requirements Metro's 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan The Metro 2040 Growth Concept and Framework Plan designates Downtown Tigard as a Town Center, defined as "compact, mixed-use neighborhoods of high-density housing, employment and retail that are pedestrian-oriented and well served by public transportation and roads." Town Centers are described as the central focus of community life, serving residents living within two or three miles. Some key objectives for developing Metro-designated 2040 Centers include: • Promoting more intensive mixed-use development. • Providing infrastructure to support more intensive development. • Creating effective local and regional transportation connections to and within the center for all travel modes. • Providing public spaces and distinct center identification. • Recognizing the natural environment as a desired amenity. 2. FINDINGS • Existing Conditions Land Use The Urban Renewal Area contains approximately 193.71 acres (including 49.57 acres of right-of-way) and comprises 2.6% of the City's 7496 acres of total land area. It contains 193 individual properties.The current land uses are dominated by development with little pedestrian-friendly orientation. Outside of Main Street, the existing buildings do not create a sense of place and cohesive function, but rather appear to be spread out and auto-dependent. Block sizes are large for a downtown. In general, downtown properties have low improvement to land (I:L) ratios. Healthy I:L ratios for downtown properties range between 7.0 -10.0 or more. In Tigard's Urban Renewal Area 2004-05 I:L averages were 1.43 for commercial properties and 2.79 for multi-family residential. (Report Accompanying the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.) • Under existing conditions, Downtown is underdeveloped and lacks the mix of high quality commercial, office,residential and public uses suitable for an urban village. Transportation System The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general,there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Railway tracks also bisect the Downtown.A planned system upgrade will make both commuter and freight train operation more efficient and less disruptive to automobile traffic. Natural Features Fanno Creek flows through downtown and is the most notable natural feature. The creek, part of its floodplain and associated wetlands are part of a 22-acre city park with a multi-use path. Special Areas of Concern 3 Downtown S • DRAFT • Current Zoning Districts and Comprehensive Plan Designations The majority of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD). While the current CBD zone allows the mix of uses necessary for a successful downtown, the regulations lack the language to guide new development to be consistent with the preferred urban form. As a result, the area has developed without many of the pedestrian-oriented qualities specified in the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept. The Tigard Urban Renewal Area encompasses the original Plan area and several additional tax lots, which are zoned R-4.5, R-12 (PD), R-25, C-G (General Commercial) and C-P (Professional/ Administrative Commercial.) Several of these tax lots are located to the northwest of Highway 99W. These additional zones do not permit mixed use development,which is crucial for successful downtowns. • Community Values According to the Comprehensive Plan Issues and Values Summary, Downtown is important to Tigard residents; many use it on a weekly basis. Many would like it to see improvements so it will become a gathering place for the community. Tigard Beyond Tomorrow's Community Character & Quality of Life section, includes a goal to achieve a future where "the Main Street area is seen as a `focal point' for the community," and "a clear direction has been established for a pedestrian-friendly downtown and is being implemented." The passage of the Urban Renewal measure in May 2006 by 66% of voters also shows strong community support for Downtown's revitalization. • Metro Requirements for Town Center Planning Title 6 of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and transportation plans that are consistent with Metro guidelines for Town Centers. GOAL The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. POLICIES 11.1. Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.1.1 New zoning, design standards and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development. 11.1.2 The Downtown's land use plan shall provide for a mix of complimentary land uses such as: a) Retail, restaurants, entertainment and personal services; b) Medium and high-density residential uses including rental and ownership housing; c) Civic functions (government offices, community services, public plazas, public transit centers, Special Areas of Concern 4 Downtown DRAFT • etc) d) Professional employment and related office uses e) Natural Resource protection, open spaces and public parks 11.1.3 The City shall not permit new land uses such as warehousing; auto-dependant uses;industrial manufacturing; and industrial service uses that would detract from the goal of a vibrant urban village. 11.1.4 Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion. 11.1.5 Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives. 11.1.6 New housing in the downtown shall provide for a range of housing types, including ownership, workforce and affordable housing in a high quality living environment. 11.1.7 New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street" character. 11.2 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.2.1 Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into Downtown urban design. 11.2.2 The Fanno Creek Public Use Area, adjacent to Fanno Creek Park shall be a primary focus and catalyst for revitalization. 11.2.3 Development of the Downtown shall be consistent with the need to protect and restore the functions and values of the wetland and riparian area within Fanno Creek Park. 11.3 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.3.1 The Downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike and pedestrian facilities. 11.3.2 The Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses. 11.3.3 The City in conjunction with TriMet shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the Downtown is not dominated by"park and ride" activity. 11.3.4 Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the Downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail,Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the Downtown's transportation needs in its Special Areas of Concern 5 Downtown • DRAFT Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts. 11.3.5 Streetscape and Public Area Design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses. 11.3.6 The City shall require a sufficient but not excessive amount of parking to provide for Downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged. ACTION MEASURES Staff will work on these short and medium term actions to implement policies that will support the creation of a vibrant, compact, mixed-use area with housing,retail and employment opportunities. 11.A Facilitate the Development of an Urban Village 11.A.1 Develop design guidelines and standards that encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture with quality design and permanent materials,particularly in the building fronts and streetscape. Also develop appropriate density, height, mass, scale, architectural and site design guidelines. 11.A.2 Utilize form based code principles in ways that are consistent with state planning laws and administrative rules. 11.A.3 Adopt non-conforming use standards appropriate to a downtown in transition. 11.A.4 Develop code measures to mitigate any compatibility issues when new downtown development occurs in close proximity to the Downtown's commuter rail line. 11.A.5 Provide areas in the Downtown where community events, farmer's markets, festivals and cultural activities can be held. 11.A.6 Designate the Downtown area as the preferred location for Tigard's civic land uses. 11.A.7 Promote an awareness of the Downtown's history through measures such as public information, urban design features and preservation of historic places. 11.A.8 Monitor performance of design guidelines, standards and related land use regulations and amend them as necessary. 11.B Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into Downtown 11.B.1 Acquire property and easements to protect natural resources and provide public open space areas, such as park blocks, plazas and mini-parks. 11.B.2 Develop "green connections" linking parks and greenways with adjacent land uses, public spaces and transit. Special Areas of Concern 6 Downtown DRAFT S S 11.B.3 Incorporate public art into the design of public spaces. 11.B.4 Enhance the landscape and habitat characteristics of Fanno Creek as a key downtown natural resource. 11.0 Develop Comprehensive Street and Circulation Improvements for Pedestrians,Automobiles, Bicycles and Transit 11.C.1 Develop a circulation plan that emphasizes connectivity to, from, and within the Downtown in the design and improvement of the area's transportation system,including developing alternative access improvements to Downtown, such as connections across Highway 99W. 11.C.2 Address public safety and land use compatibility issues in the design and management of the Downtown's transportation system. 11.C.3 Investigate assigning different roadway designations within the general area of the Downtown as means to support transportation access to Town Center development such as ODOT'S Special Transportation Area (STA) and Urban Business Area (UBA). 11.C.4 Implement an integrated Downtown pedestrian streetscape and landscape plan. 11.C.5 Acquire property and easements to implement streetscape and landscape plans, and develop needed streets,pathways, entrances to the Commuter Rail park and ride lot, and bikeways. 11.C.6 Express the themes of an urban village and green heart by utilizing the "unifying elements" palette from the Streetscape Design Plan to design streetscape improvements. 11.C.7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street design through innovative landscaping and stormwater management and provision of multimodal infrastructure. 11.C.8 Encourage sustainability features in the design of Downtown buildings. 11.C.9 Encourage the formation of a Downtown Parking and Transportation Management Association. 11.C.10 Incorporate the Downtown's public investment / facility needs into the City's Public Facility Plan and implementing Community Investment Plan. D. Other Action Measures 11.D.1 Develop and implement strategies to address concerns with homeless persons and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park. 11.D.2 Provide public,including members of the development community,with regular informational updates on Urban Renewal progress and an accounting of funds spent by the City Center Development Agency. Special Areas of Concern 7 Downtown • • DRAFT Action Chart: Downtown Action Timeline Who Implements Short Medium Long (City Departments) Term Term Term Ongoing_ Next 5 6 to 10 11+ Years Years Years FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN URBAN VILLAGE 11.A 1 Develop Design Guidelines for the X CD LR,CD-CP Downtown Urban Renewal Area 2 Utilize form based code principles that X CD-LR,CD-CP are consistent with state law 3 Adopt non-conforming use standards X CD-LR,CD-CP Develop code measures to mitigate 4 compatibility issues X CD-LR,CD CP Provide areas where community events, 5 farmer's markets,or other events can be X X CD-LR,CD-CP held 6 Designate the Downtown area as the X CD-LR preferred location for civic land uses Promote an awareness of the --- X CD-LR,CD-CP Downtown's history 8 Monitor s, land use eg of lation --. X CD-LR,CD-CP guidelines, land use regulations 11.B DEVELOP AND IMPROVE OPEN SPACE AND INTEGRATE NATURAL FEATURES Acquire property and easements to 1 protect natural resources and provide X X CD-LR, PW public open space areas 2 Develop"green connections" X X CD-LR,CD-E, PW 3 Incorporate public art into the design of X -- X CD-LR,CD-E, PW public spaces. 4 Enhance the landscape and habitat of X -■ X CD-LR,CD-E, PW Fanno Creek 11.0 DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE STREET AND CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS 1 Develop Access and Circulation Plan X CD-E,CD-LR Address public safety and land use 2 compatibility issues in the design and X CD-E,CD-LR management of the transportation system 3 Investigate assigning different roadway X CD-E,CD-LR designations 4 Implement an integrated pedestrian X CD E,CD-LR streetscape and landscape plan Special Areas of Concern 8 Downtown DRAFT I Action - no Implements of Medium 11cm gly Departments) 4Gga 4Cftinal 4- as On o oin o Nag 6 C3Qp9© 994 Acquire property and easements to 5 implement streetscape and landscape X X X CD-E,CD-LR plans,and new streets 6 Use the"unifying elements" palette to X CD E, CD-LR design streetscape improvements 7 Emphasize sustainable practices in street X CD E, CD-LR design Encourage the formation of a Downtown 8 Parking and Transportation Management X CD-LR Association 9 Encourage sustainability features in the X X CD-LR design of Downtown buildings Incorporate the Downtown's public 10 investments into the City's Public Facility X X CD-E,CD-LR Plan and implementing CIP 11.D OTHER ACTION MEASURES Develop and implement strategies to 1 address concerns with homeless persons X CD-LR and vagrancy in the Downtown and Fanno Creek Park 2 Provide public with regular informational X X CD-LR updates on Urban Renewal progress CD-LR=Community Development-Long Range Planning CD-CP=Community Development- Current Planning CD-E= Community Development—Engineering PW= Public Works Special Areas of Concern 9 Downtown . . . - . • ••• • .• R: : . • • .• •-• /•••, f.44 .• 1.4e,•••••••• • .• .• • • 151.••2 5 •,5 54 5 • 55, .11 • .1 2 • 1 Pi) • 11:5 • •5 5 ,,,... 55. 55.•••4. ::,•15 Z(.)nin$...z hAssiticatioris Urban Rerteuva Boundary I:jut-Yap, .• •.. t I.< •