The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 08/10/1987 S �rr 4 L AMENDED AGENDA — 8/7/87 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate ; STUDY AGENDA sign—up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, AUGUST 10, 1987, 6:30 P.M. ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start TIGARD CIVIC CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are H 13125 SW HALL BLVD. asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters H TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or City Administrator. 6:30 1. STUDY SESSION — 6:30 P.M. 6;35 2. SOLAR ACCESS STUDY DISCUSSIGN o Community Development 3irector 6:50 2.1. PORTLAND FIXTURE (SDR 87-15) REVIEW DISCUSSION o Community Development Director 7:20 3. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to : discuss labor relations, real property transactions, and current and pending litigation issues. 7:30 4. BUSINESS MEETING — 7:30 P.M. — Call To Order and Roll Call 7:35 5. 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: . 5.1 Recess Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Award Bids For: a. Gaarde Street Storm Drain Improvement b. Genesis No. 3 Asphalt Pavement Overlay, Genesis No. 3 Concrete Work c. Backhoe/Loader d. Automatic Electric Asphalt Patch Box Adjourn Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Reconvene Council . Meeting. 5.2 Approve Solid Waste Rate Clarification — Resolution No. 87— 5.3 Approve Budget Adjustment FY 1987-88 — Resolution No. 87— 5.4 Approve Chamber/Old City Hall Lease Agreement — Authorize Council President To Sign 7:40 6. PUBLIC HEARING — DARTMOUTH STREET LID 3 o Public Hearing Continued from 8/3/87 o Declarations Or Challenges o Summation By City Attorney o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination o Council Questions Or Comments o Recommendation By City Attorney — Continue To 9/28/87 — 7:30 PM 9:00 7. ADJOURNMENT .01 lw/4748A COUNCIL AGENDA — AUGUST 10, 1987 — PAGE 1 /0- 1 T I G A R D C I T Y C 0 U N C I L REGULAR MEETING MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 — 6:39 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Council President, Jerry Edwards; Councilors: Valerie Johnson and John Schwartz; City Staff: Chuck Corrigan, Legal Counsel; Bob Jean, City Administrator; Keith Liden, Senior Planner (present for presentation on Study Session only); Bill Monahan, Community Development IN Director; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; Catherine Wheatley, Deputy Recorder; and Loreen Wilson, City Recorder (present for Study Session only). 2. STUDY SESSION a. Solar Access Update 1 . Councilor Edwards called a Council Committee meeting to order at 6:39 p.m. since a quorum of Council was not present. 2. Senior• Planner Liden updated Council on the Solar Access project- in the Metro area. lip distributed an outline and attachments which highlighted his presentation to Council. Senior Planner Liden synopsized the history of the Solar Access Project which came about through a plan for making sure there will be adequate, low—cost- electric power in the future; solar access would be one method for obtaining such power needs. The Tigard City Council agreed to participate in this program in 1985 with 2.0 other jurisdictions in the Portland area. Tigard also has some Comprehensive Plan policies that support at least taking a look at solar access as a possibility . Efforts in development of a solar access plan included research and development of a model ordinance. Participating jurisdictions would have the option to: o Adopt the model ordinance in total o Adopt portions of the proposed ordinance which are appropriate or necessary o Adopt modified provisions which provide fer solar access protection, or o Elect not to adopt any plan or code changes. The Ordinance would intend to cause some immediate energy savings by requiring new development to have good solar orientation. It has been found that minor changes to new subdivision plats can make a great difference even if there was not any particular solar design in a house. A house, through the proper orientation to the sun, could realize Page 1 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 i energy savings of 15-20%. The ordinance would also attempt to maintain future options so that in 15-20 years solar types of applications would be more feasible. Because this program is metro-wide and local jurisdictions have been working from a common source, chances are it wouldn't be so confusing for a developer to go from one community to another in the metro area. Senior Planner Liden reported the project is roughly on schedule; review and adoption of an ordinance by local jurisdictions is scheduled for early 1988. Senior Planner Liden reported he was a member of the committee developing the model ordinance. The committee consisted of developers and government planners attempting to devise a document which would meet the needs of the development community as well as the cities. 3. Council President noted that the City of Tigard adopted a resolution which supported efforts of the solar access program. No solar access ordinance had been adopted to date by the City of Tigard. (Councilor Schwartz arrived: 6:45 p.m. ) A. Councilor Johnson questioned if the Committee's findings for solar access and subsequent ordinance development would contain anything binding on cities participating in the development of the model Ordinance. Senior Planner Liden indicated no. The only expectation from this study would be that local jurisdictions hold hearings to formally consider whether there would be anything adopted. 5. In response to a question from Councilor Johnson, Senior Planner Liden said he had been spending about 4 hours a month on this project. 6. City Administrator commented that the LCDC post-acknowledgement would be coming up in about a year-and-a-half. He asked if there have been any indications where LCDC is on energy issues? y Senior Planner Liden said he had received no indication that this would be a mandatory issue on the part of LCDC. b. Portland Fixture (SDR 87-15) Review Discussion 1. Council President noted that Councilor Schwartz had arrived (6:45 p.m.) at the meeting; therefore, a quorum of Council was present and the meeting was called to order. 2. Councilor Eadon joined the meeting for this agenda item via Speaker Phone at 6:50 p.m. Page 2 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 i 3 . Also present, representing Portland Fixture's interests were the following people: Dave Roche United Grocers, Inc. Louis Zimel Portland Fixture Company. Norm Dowty R & H Construction Company Bob Klas Ehmann & Associates, AIA David Zimel Mercury Development Paul Gram Mercury Development Tom Lancaster Consulting Engineer 4. Community Development Director summarized this item. The Council decided to call up SDR 87-15 for further review at a public meeting on August• 31, 1987. Submitted to the Council in their August 10, 1987 packet was a memorandum from the Community Development Director to Senior Planner Liden (dated August 4, 1987) which summarized Council's concerns. Community Development Director• advised he had also been in contact with Councilor Eadon concerning preliminary information from the Developer addressing the Council's concerns . Present at the meeting were several representatives of this Portland Fixture project- (noted above); they were available to address items of Council concern. 5. David Zimel of Mercury Development was spokesperson for the / Portland Fixture Project and responded to the majority of the (� concerns with other representatives being called upon as noted. The Community Development Director went through the points addressed in his August 4th memorandum with the response by the developer being noted b(�low: o Item 1 - Council was concerned about the Tualatin Rural Fire Protection Districts' need to sign off on the project. The Fire District responded that any new traffic signal to be installed must be equipped with opticom controls. They are somewhat concerned that this size of development could cause the 3000 gpm fire flow requirement to be exceeded. It is required that an automatic sprinkler protection system be incorporated into all buildings in this development. Mr. Zimel responded they are prepared to address all of the Fire Department's comments and take care of each concern. The traffic signal was designed in 1985-86 and access permits were issued last year. i Councilor Eadon asked if the Highway Department reviewed the access approvals in light of new development over the last year along Highway 99. Page 3 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 i Mr. Zimel said he felt the Highway Department would have contacted the developer if they had concerns over the access permits. Mr. Zimel said he has been in touch f with different project engineers with the State and there has not been enough change to merit any change in the signals . Senior Planner Liden reported that Lee Gunderson of the Highway Department reviewed the current proposal and they were still comfortable with the traffic study. o Item 2 —Community Development Director outlined concern of Council on Page 2, Item 5, under the Engineering Division findings in the Notice of Decision. The Council was concerned that the driveway locations should be in conformance with the State and make sense relative to traffic circulation on Pacific Highway and signalization of Pacific Highway. Councilor Johnson asked if the City Engineer had reviewed this traffic circulation plan. City Engineer indicated he had not reviewed the traffic analysis which was propared before he was employed by the City. Community Development Director reported at that time the City did not have a Traffic Engineer, but Frank Curry was working for• the City and reviewed the traffic plan. o Item 3 — Community Development Director noted the next item for clarification was landscaping and bufferinq. lie noted there would be a fifteen—foot wide buffer strip provided along all properties which were residentially zoned. Council questioned where this fence would be located. Mr. Zimel said the fence would be on the property line. The fence would be solid wood, eight—feet tall, and continuous along the property. Mr. Zimel distributed a photograph of a similar fence for Council to view. He noted the solid wood design would help buffer noise. Councilor Eadon questioned the wind resistance of the fence. Mr. Zimel reported the fence—post footings would be set in concrete. Senior Planner Liden also advised that this type of fence would require a Building Permit and would be subject to the Building Official's approval. Council President expressed concern over maintenance and the appearance of the fence in three to five years. Norm Dowty, R & H Construction Company, reported this fence would be designed by an architectural firm and the material would be pressure treated (50—year life wood) for the whole structure. This fence was not like a neighborhood fence, but was a commercial product. The finished side of the fence would be on the neighborhood side. Pagi 4 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 o Item 4 -There was discussion on noise mitigation. Dave _.. Zimel said the project was in an optimum situation because an 6-foot high fence knocks out a lot of noise and because the property "sits down" on the site which would further reduce noise. At some points the top of the building would be roughly opposite the top of the height of the fence. o Item 5 - Noise front the HVAC systems was discussed next. Bob Klas, Architect addressed this item of concern. Mr. Klas outlined the following noise mitigation measures: — the roof of the building would be about level with the top of the fence — the rear parapet wall would block noise; this wall would extend above the top of any mechanical units on the roof top if there should be any ducts through the roof carrying noise, sound-deadening material could be used if necessary roof top equipment would be enclosed by screened walls with suund-deadening material on the inside face. All air conditioning units would be located fexactly in the middle of the building. Community Development Director responded to concern of Councilor Johnson with regard to duct-noise on the roof. He advised the Building Department would monitor decibel levels to determine if sound--deadening material would be necessary. o Item 5 - Trees — Community Development Director outlined in his memorandum that Council was concerned that the minimum number of trees (85) be planted or left remaining and that the planted trees would be mature enough to have a positive effect at the time of planting. Dave Zimel distributed to Council pictures of trees of another development gat Murray & Allen Blvd. in Beaverton. Mr. Zimel advised they anticipated placing trees of similar size at this project. Dave Zimel, in response to a question by Councilor Johnson, advised they would try to save as many existing trees as possible. He also reported that the larger trees are situated so that they will be saved. Mr. Zimel also noted there was the possibility that some trees may be situated too close to the asphalt which would no": survive. The existing trees to be saved were marked with an "E" on the drawings submitted to Council. Page 5 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1997 n Councilor Eadon asked if the large oak tree would stay. The developer affirmed that this tree would stay. T Council President asked akiout the size of the trees. Dave Zimel said it would depend on what was available from nurseries. tie recommended 1-1/4" caliper as a guideline for size of tree. o Item 6 - Signage - applicant requested an increase in sign size of 50% and sign height of 25%. Staff recommended approval of the increased sign size but not of the increased sign height. Dave Zimel explained the developers desire to have adequate size signage for the anchor and smaller tenants. City Administrator' asked if there had been other businesses in the area which had been granted similar requests. Community Development staff indicated Park 217 and Crossroads Shopping Center were granted larger-sized signs. Senior Planner Liden noted thiswas riot a request for variance. Increased sign sire can be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director as part of Site Development Review Process if the project qualifies as a shopping center. A shopping center was defined as over 4 acres in sire with 8 or more tenants. This project met this criteria- 0 Item 7 - Trash Pickup and Warehouse Working - Community Development Director noted Mayor Brian suggested that the dumpster design he such that the grocery store can access the dumpster through a tube coming out of the building. The other issue concerned warehouse workers in loading areas creating noise and disturbing neighbors. Dave Roche with United Grocers advised the trash compactor is a sealed unit. Fie showed Council a brochure with a picture of the compactor proposod for this project. This type of compactor would mitigate problems with odor and noise. Dave Zimel added that the grading of the property was such that noise will come from a very low level which would tend to knock out sound. The eight-foot high fence would also mitigate noise. Mr. Roche said the dumpster opened on the top and there would be a chute fastened to the building. All of the trash and refuse would be be dumped from within the building, thereby reducing noise. The dumpster would sit at grade level and about two to three feet below the finished floor. Trash pick up would not occur between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Page 6 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 Mr. Roche advised that all work around the loading dock would be done on the inside. J Councilor Eadon expressed concern over residents near grocery stores experiencing problems with noise from the loading docks when the doors may be left open and radios turned on during early morning hours (i .e. , 2:00 a.m. ). Mr. Zimel said this could probably be eliminated "pretty easily. " He said these are "business people who want to be in the community for awhile, and if we have one irresponsible employee, I would hope that we'd be notified of that and do something about it." Councilor Johnson asked Mr. Zimel if he'd be comfortable with a condition to the effect that every attempt would be made to eliminate noise during those hours including "closed warehouse doors, etc."? Council President added those kinds of issues are controllable — the City could contact- the owner with any problems . Generally, the owners are very concerned and aware of public sentiment and would not want problems to continue. Council President said the project representatives have put together a good, high quality presentation. He said he would like to see everything the Portland Fixture representatives have agreed to this evening put in writing so there would not be misundersLandings as to what was stipulated in the future. City Administrator said everything discussed tonight fit within the framework of Lhe original Director's Decision. A memo of understanding between the developer and the City should be written for clarification and could avoid further time delays. Council President asked if City Administrator's suggestion satisfied concerns of Council present. Councilor Johnson agreed the presentation was excellent. The remaining two items (8 and 9) in the memo dated August 4 had not been discussed; however, Councilor Johnson said she trusted the Community Development Director to pursue these issues to the same degree as with the other items. Councilor Eadon mentioned concerns over outside lighting and construction hours. She said she would riot want heavy equipment running at 5:00 and 6:00 in the morning. Community Development Director and project representatives agreed that the lighting would be monitored by Community Development Staff and the hours of construction could be stipulated. Community Development Director advised the Site Development Review could be finalized with the developer's submittal of an itemized list dealing with each item noted in the Dir-ctor's Decision. Community Development Director would review the list and, if accepted, the project would be ready to go. He suggested copies of the itemized letter from the Page 7 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 developer be sent to each Council member. If, after receipt of the letter, Council does not call up the project for further review, then the construction would proceed. The Hearing, which was scheduled for August 31st, would be cancelled. Councilor Eadon advised Council President she agreed with the procedure outlined by the Community Development Director, but would like an opportunity to look at the material presented at the meeting. Councilor Johnson said she is satisfied and will trust Planning Director to see conditions and stipulations are met. She added she !could be more comfortable to have the developer' s understanding in writing. She said she did not want to delay the development any further. Council Schwartz said he concurred with Councilor Johnsons' remarks. Council President also agreed. fie asked that Councilor Eadon work as closely as possible with the Community Development Director so she would be comfortable with the issues discussed. Since Councilor Eadon was out of town for a few days, Council President suggested she give the City Recorder tier address so material on this agenda item could be forwarded to her by "express mail." Council President asked if this met with Councilor Eadon's approval. �t Councilor Eadon indicated this procedure would be satisfactory. City Administrator said that he understood the Developer was to provide a memorandum of understanding with regard to the provisions outlined in the Director' s Decision. Council consensus was: — The Public Hearing for• August 31 would continue to be advertised. — Community Development Director would conduct- a telephone poll a few days after the Council had received the memorandum of understanding. Through this telephone poll, the Community Development Director could determine if the majority of Council desired to review this item on August 31. — If the majority of the Council aas satisfied with the memorandum of understanding, then the August 31 Public Hearinc, would be cancelled. City Attorney asked, since this was an unusual procedure, if the applicant agreed to this process. Dave Zimel said that they agreed to the procedure outlined, but asked how much time would this take. Council President said after the Page 8 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 memorandum of understanding was received by Council, the Community Development Director would contact each Council member a few days thereafter (Councilor Johnson suggested 7 {- days) . t Dave Zimel was advised by Community Development Director that the developer should write the memorandum of understanding. Business meeting was called to order at 8:47 p.m. 3. POINT OF ORDER — CONSTRUCTION AT DURHAM ROAD AND PACIFIC HIGHWAY (HIGHWAY 99) a. Council President reported he had been advised that Mrs. Margaret Benz was at the to meeting present to Council a petition concerning the construction project at Durham Road and Pacific Highway. Council President noted there was no hearing procedure scheduled on this study agenda. Council President requested the petition be entered into the record; however, no testimony would be taken at this time. Mrs. Benz delivered to the Deputy Recorder the petition as noted. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Schwartz to: 4. 1 Recess Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Award Bids For: a. Gaarde Street Storm Drain Improvement b. Genesis No. 3 Asphalt Pavement Overlay, Genesis No. 3 Concrete Work C. Backhoe/Loader d. Automatic Electric Asphalt Patch Box Adjourn Local Contract Review Board Meeting; Reconvene Council Meeting. 4.2 Approve Solid Waste Rate Clarification — Resolution No. 87-113 4.3 Approve Budget Adjustment FY 1987-88 — Resolution No. 87-114 4.4 Approve Chamber/Old City Hall Lease Agreement — Authorize Council President To Sign Approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 5. PUBLIC HEARING — DARTMOUTH STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT a. Public Hearing Continued from August 3, 1987 b. There were no declarations or challenges. C. City Attorney summarized this item. He began by outlining the procedural his of the case. The Local Improvement District was previously approved by the Council, it was formed, and there was a preassessment done. That action was appealed through a rather lengthy litigation process. A decision was reached by the Court of Appeals which ruled: Page 9 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 o Rejection of arguments challenging formation of the District o Discovery of an error in the description of the improvement to be made — a part of the road extended beyond the boundary of the Local Improvement District. The Court ruled this was not a permissible description of the improvement and remanded it back to the City. City Attorney reported the current posture of the case was: o the district was formed, o there was a defect in the Enginner's Report, and o an ordinance empowers Council to cure the defect in the Engineer' s Report (if so desired) and continue with the project. City Attorney advised the purpose of the August 10th Hearing was to take tesimony from the public and from members of the potential LID on the question of how the City should proceed. Deliberation was not scheduled for this August 10th meeting. After hearing testimony, City Attorney advised Council they could set the matter- over to September 2.8. On September 28, the Council could Lake further testimony or deliberate further on what to dr. Options available would be: o Terminate the LID. o Determine to cure the defect in the Engineer' s Report and continue with the LID. a Continue with a different L.ID should Council decide to change the configuration. t City Attorney further ad•rised the specific focus of the hearing was that of the new Engineer's Report. He sad that the Report is f not substantially different than the old one, but it does cure the defect in the description of the improvement and some language had been deleted. He pointed out that no new property owners had been l added to the Engineer's report and there was no proposal to include new properties within the boundaries of the LID. f City Attorney commented about a change which may be needed in the Engineer's Report. He said that it appeared the sheets projecting the proposed assessments were based upon the old report and some revisions may be necessary. b. A letter from Homer Williams, in support of the LID, had been received. The Deputy Recorder read said letter into the record at the request of the City Attorney. (See Exhibit "A.") C. Council President asked for questions from the Council. There being none, Council President called for Public Testimony. Page 10 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 i d. Public Testimony Proponents 0 Tim Neuman, 618 N.W. Glisan, Portland, Oregon, testified he represented Washington International Properties Company. tie said he had been working with Homer Williams concerning his property for almost two years and that they hoped to be an active developer in the area. He said, "Our interest, of course, is subject to this LID going forward. We have a specific user in mind for a portion of the property and they have been sitting tight now for almost a year. So, we're anxious to see this proceed." o Geraldine Ball, 11515 S.W. 91st, Tigard testified she had no objection to the formation of the Dartmouth Extension LID providing the boundaries remain as shown on Exhibit A, dated August the 3rd, 1987. o Marilyn Bishop, representing the Robert Randall Company at 9500 S.W. Barbur Boulevard, read into the record a letter that she delivered to the Mayor and the me-►bens of the City Council prior to the August 3rd hearing: The Robert Randall Company is owner of a tax lot consisting of between five and six acres which is included in the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District. The Company has a substantia) interest in the project since our riot assessment pursuant to the original assessment roll represented about 25 percent of the estimated project. cost. We wish to express our• support for the projeeL as proposed. As stated in a letter to Mayor Brian, dated April 14, 1987, we are anxious to proceed with development of our property, but that is dependent upon the Dartmouth Street improvements. We urge you to proceed with project as planned. She concluded by saying that they wholeheartedly supported the development. Opponents o Charles Ruttan of Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins & Tongue, 851 S.W. Sixth, Suite 1500, Portland, Oregon testified. Hp noted that with him was Doug Van Dyke of his office. Also present in the audience with Mr. Rattan was Gordon S. Martin, and Wayne Kittleson, a consulting engineer who was also representing the Martins' interest. Page 11 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 Mr. Ruttan said that most of his testimony would be coming from the two volumes of information presented to Council shortly before the meeting. He reminded Council that his firm had written to the Council a couple of months ago and requested that work sessions be held to discuss the numerous issues with respect to this particular LID. He reiterated this request. He reported that he believed once Council has had an opportunity to review the exhibits and the testimony presented, that one or more work sessions would be appropriate. Mr. Ruttan explained that it was the Martins' position that the LID should not go forward. He reported that there are numerous studies which need to be completed to include the studies currently being done by the Oregon Department of Transportation. Once that was done, then the road network should be reexamined and redesigned if necessary. He stated further that back in March and April of 1984, the Traffic Studies had not been done which were now before Council. Mr. Ruttan argued that, Ed Hart-, former Region Engineer for the Oregon Department of Transportation, stated in a letter that the Dartmouth/Pacific Highway Intersection, based on the design of the Local Improvement District No. 40, would result in a unacceptable level of service based on traffic studies wherein the assumptions were jointly developed by Wayne Kitt:leson and Toni Schwab and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Mr. Ruttan said that, to their knowledge, this written position had riot changed. Mr. Ruttan concurred with the City Attorney when he mentioned that the formation issues that: they raised were rejected by the Court. Fie commented that in reversing an assessment, "they" only needed to rule on one issue. He continued by saying that numerous issues were presented, and pointed out that there was no ruling one way or another on any of the assessment issues raised. Mr. Ruttan referred to the two volumes of information presented to the Council: Volume I — Dartmouth LID — Traffic Concerns and Related Issues Volume II — Dartmouth LID — Traffic Concerns and Related Issues Mr. Ruttan then read the Overview from Volume I into the record (a copy of this is attached as Exhibit "8"). Mr. Ruttan then read the Conclusions from Volume I into the record (a copy of this is attached as Exhibit "C") . Mr. Van Dyke then read the Summary of Exhibits — Introduction — from Volume I into the record (a copy of this is attached as Exhibit "D." Mr. Van Dyke noted a couple of wording changes and they are marked on this exhibit as he so referenced.) Page 12 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 Mr. Ruttan urged the City Council to review and study his Dartmouth LID presentation and discuss it with staff and Legal Counsel. He requested "then. . that we reconvene." He suggested three or four work sessions to discuss all of the concerns. Mr. Ruttan requested Council to read Exhibit 59, Volume II — the Harrier Consultants letter dated August 6, 1987, that was prepared by Alvin B. Harrison. He reported that Mr. Harrison worked extensively with the Martins in the early stages of Washington Square. Mr. Ruttan further testified that they think the road is obviously a very important factor. He said that the Martins, since 1968, have been involved in one way or another with the discussions on the triangle area road networks. Mr. Ruttan explained that the Martins have lived in the area since 1927 and would like to see ,4 the construction of this property; but, they would like to see it progress in such way that the City and the property owners can develop it in a economical, efficient manner. Mr. Ruttan thanked the Council for their time. He requested some r leave to submit additional written testimony in the way of response to the Engineer' s Report they received that evening. He noted he had not addressed any of the assessment issues in verbal testimony or in Volumes I or II. e. Council President indicated that Cnuncil would receive any and all documents that Mr. Martin and his representatives had. He asked if there were questions from the Council with regard to what had just been said. i f. Councilor Johnson said she needed to review the material presented before she wanted to ask questions. g. Councilor Schwartz concurred with Councilor Johnson and said he t may have some questions after reviewing the material. h. Mr. Ruttan indicated they would be happy to respond at any time, either in writing or orally, depending upon the Council's preference. P i . City Attorney recommended that Council allow three weeks for i Mr. Martin and his representatives to respond to the Engineer's r Report. i City Attorney said he would appreciate it if Mr. Ruttan could identify for the City any and all of the "ODOT OARS" that applied to the case. He added that it would be helpful to the Council to know exactly what the standards were that Mr. Ruttan thought should apply. Mr. Ruttan responded to the above request by saying, "Certainly." Page 13 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1997 "taking" issue in City Attorney referred to the land swap, on Page Mr. Ruttan's testimony see Exhibit "C" — 7.2 "Taking," 8) . City Attorney advised that when he had reviewed Beene eliminated. Engineer'• Report, the reference to this possibility for the City City Attorney asked Mr. Ruttan, "Will it be necessary to road, or will, to condemn that land in order to assure access on the other hand, Mr. Martin guarantee that tte ahat prooininining property owner would have access to the road through without condemnation?" i requested leave to respond to the above question in the Mr. Ruttan req ould respond to the Engineer's Report. same timely fashion they w City Attorney indicated th's would be satisfactory. person (the Mayor) who j . Council Preident advised there was only one he inning; therefore, most was in on this Dartmouth LTD fr the the information, but also of Council was not only reading the doinga lot of back—history homework with regard to Attorney?e issue. ate then asked for a recommendation from the City til k, City Attorney recommended that the matter btr lcouldhave staff andnthe September 28. At that time, engineer respond to any of the comments that have been made. an 1. Mr. Ruttan asked for amps` advance otic'{` t sa d la that h�Int-hey opportunity to respondover from August appreciated Council setting this public hearing 34d to the 10th which gave them more time to put their reports together. City advised Mr. Ruttan there tont they were now on Sept tuber 28 fornotice that answering Ci•.y Attorney the opportunity may technically has not been closed questions by Council. The hearing although Council may do so on September 28th. Councilor Johnson commented that she believed there would probably be some questions on September 28th. uested that Council questions be asked as they Mr. Ruttan req sk all questions on September 28. develop and not to wait to a City Attorney advised that the City would try to honor this request. page 14 — COUNCIL MINUTES — AUGUST 10, 1987 M. Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to continue this public hearing to September 28, 1987. Approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 6. ADJOURNMENT: 8:30 p.m. Approved by the Tigard City Council on c� Deputy Recorder - City of Tigard ATTEST: Mayor - City of Tigard O458D Page 15 - COUNCIL MINUTES - AUGUST 10, 1987 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O.BOX 370 PHONE(503)684-0360 Notice 7-6513 BEAVERTON.OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising e C i ty o f Tigard • (3Tearsheet Notice li i PO Box 23397 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit Tigard, OR 97223 - TJCA,?D v AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) / COUNTY OF WASHINGTON. )ss' f I, Anne JPan being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Director,or his }principal clerk, of the a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at !gar r d in the aforesaiid noun by�ld a tai n at the oua printed copy of which is hereto annexed,was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for 1 successive and consecutive in the following issues: Aug . 6 Subscribed a sworn before me t is_Z 6 , 1987 Mibfary Public for Oregon My Ccnimisslon Expires: §-20-88 AFFIDAW ififorma- etc,14 ttc Ai uld�t r4s+i a •;gi7f; , , Jj=CO��,REGM,� T 'TtbiG A11GiJ�1 iQ,l93t `s �': �6't1?41 'F+'ucf3�c ' 1ar71�r�fEo$ Y{.'TfM SY9'2}nt,.+i'S7 SIr�'aZ. 4b��1�� h! •, � �':�. s- DATE ��D 2 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) Item Description: a3varida Li em CP P air'i n - rno u+ bi Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation Giaso CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 10, 1987 DATE SUBMI-f fED: August Planning DirectSj!:. ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE* SDR 87-15 PREVIOUS ACTION: royalp. PREPARED BY: Keith Lidei DEPT HEAD OK K REQUESTED BY: City Council LICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY. The Council decided to call up the above application for further review at a public meeting on 0/31/87. Bill Monahan has drafted a memo (attached) summarizing the Council's concerns. The meeting on 8/10/87 is intended to allow the issues to be discussed with the Council. The Director's decision, site information, and the traffic study are attached. The applicant will be available on Monday to address the items listed in Bill's memo. The review schedule of this application proceeded as follows'. July 0, 1987 — NPO No. 1 Meeting July 21, 1987 — Director's Decision and notice to property owners within 250 feet until called up July 31, 1987 — No appeal requests or comments u by Council ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Uphold or expand conditions within Director's Decision. 2. Amend Director ' s Decision by Council. 3. Public Hearing on August 31, 1987. FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative No, 1 Uphold or clarify expanded conditions under Director's Decision. cw/0389D MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Keith Liden August 4, 1987 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director, Community Development SUBJECT: Portland Fixture (SDR 87-15) The Council last night discussed the issues related to the Portland Fixture project. I would like to have you contact Paul Gram of Mercury Development to go over all of the issues contained in this memo. Following are the items that are of concern: 1 . Page 2, Agency and NPO Comments: Council was concerned about the Fire District comment that we need the Fire District to sign off on the project. 2. Also on page 2, Engineering Division Comments, Item No. 5: The two primary access points. We need to review this and convince the Council that the driveway locations which have been granted are in conformance with the State and makes sense relative to traffic circulation on Pacific Highway and signalization of Pacific Highway. 3. Landscaping and buffering. The fifteen foot wide buffer strip that will be provided along all properties that are residentially zoned. The question there is, where will the fence be? Also within that section, the staff pointed out that the buffering and fencing will have minimal effect relating to sound deflection or absorption. The Council is concerned about noise and how we will contain that noise within the commercial development. 4. Page 3, Item 2, Noise: Council is concerned about the HVAC systems. They're not comfortable with the follow up later. They want the decision nailed down now. 5. Page 4, Item 3, Trees: We need to make sure that at least the minimum landscaping is provided for. Also, we need to get assurances from the developer that the trees that will be placed will be mature enough to have a positive effect at the time of planting. 6. Page 4, Item 4, Signage: We have discussed an increase of 50 percent in size and height an increase of 25 percent. We need to clarify what we are approving and what the justification is. There is concern that the increase may not be justified due to the visibility of this site on the highway. Council has expressed that the increase may be only for commercial benefit. 0 Memo to Keith Liden Page 2 August 4, 1987 7. Page 4, Item C, Decision: The overriding theme here is that the Council wants us tc, tie down any conditions now in the process, not later. Trash pickup was noted. The Council prefers moving the trash receptacles because they feel that the restrictions are not enforceable. They questioned '-ether the dumpsters can be enclosed units that are accessed only by a oe from inside the building. The concerns related again to the wall and how it ties into the landscaping and mitigation of noise, work on the loading dock and the possible noise from it, and the overall effect of noise on the neighborhood. 8. Concerns related to 8 and 9 on page 5. Items number 10 and 11 are also concerns. The question there is when the approval by the Planning Director will take place. The Council wants these ironed out now. 9. One final item not mentioned in the Staff Report is the outside lighting. Council wants to know how the lights will be angled to prevent j adverse effect on the neighboring properties. !! r What I would like you to do, Keith, is to discuss the issues further with Paul Gram of Portland Fixture today or tomorrow. I talked with Paul his morning and advised him of these concerns and told him that a copy of would be available for him this afternoon. You should call him and set up a time to discuss them. His number is 223-2108. We'll try to get answers to all of these issues today and tomorrow so that you can advise me of where we stand sometime Wednesday afternoon. Either Wednesday or Thursday I will call Carolyn Eadon and tell her what progress we've made. We will have that work session with the Council next Monday with Portland Fixture and some i neighborhood property owners. Carolyn Eadon has suggested that we make contact to the following three people: Donna\ poss, 13555 SW Cresmire; W.L. Brennan, 13575 SW Cresmire; and, Hal and Joanne Wiggins, 13625 SW Stephens Court. Please call these three property owners and tell them what's going on and when the meeting will be scheduled on Monday. Each should have received a copy of the Final Decision mailed on July 21 as they are listed on the mailing in the file. Also pull from the file whatever materials from the prior approvals or this approval you feel will be helpful in giving the City Council members as much information as they need to evaluate this application. We'll probably send out a supplemental packet tomorrow afternoon of those ; materials. It should include a reduction of landscape plan and site plan. cs/03470 l CITY OF TIGARD NOTICE OF DECISION SDR 87-15 PORTLAND FIXTURE approval of a request by Portland Fixture Limited Partnership for a tyP zoned C-G APPLICATION: Aer and 700 feet 153,180 square foot retail ce located on the southeast side of Pacific Highway, 900 and (Commercial General) south of SW Garrett Street (WCTM 2S1 2CC tax lot 100, 200, 500, 800, 901). of Tigard DECISION: Notice is hereby given that the Planning Director for the City has APPROVED the above application subject to certain conditions. The findings and conclusions on which the Director based his decision are as noted below. A. FINDING OF FACT 1 . Background In 1982 the Tigard City Council approved a revision (Resolution erties2from the NPO 01 comprehensive PlanndCommercia1 to General a Zone Change for secommercial (CPR Commercial Professional/Generalroved subject to several conditions. 4-82/Z(: 18-92). This change was aPP rovals the Hearings Officer Three Sensitive Lands permits have been granted y from this property. M 3-82 and SL 6-85 app were valid for one year' but each expired before land June 23, was was done. The decision for the third approval, SL 87-08, granted recently and will expire 1988 if not acted upon. A Site Development Review (SDR 8-86) was submitted in March, 1986 for es- approval of a 157,000 square foot a tedr in retail center 1986s buteexpired aafterlone Approval with conditions was g year. 2. Vicinity Information The property is adjacent to Pacific Highway along the northwestern frontage and properties zoned C-G lie on the opposite side of the street. parcels zoned C-G are situated immediately to the northeast and southwest along Pacific Highway. The area to the east and south is committed to and multiple family residences. The homes to the east and single family and southeast are zoned R-4.5Residential, 3.5 units peracre) respectivelyca and R-3.5 (Single Family are the apartments along the remainder of the southern boun ary non-conforming units which are zoned C--G. 3. Site Information and Proposal Description ro except for one 4,6 44 The subject properties are presently undeveloped P s downhill toward the square foot retail arceling. A drainageway slope southern end of the p with a 153.180 The applicants are proposing ll develop the properties square foot shopping center called , drug store, restaurantast. It is intended and assorted center will contain a grocery store, 9 shops. NoraCE OF DECISION - SDR 87-15 - PORTLAND FIXTURE - PAGE 1 The site plans submitted for this project are similar to SDR 8-86 regarding building placement and site design There has been a reduction in the total building floor area and adjustments have been made in placing fewer loading and trash pick-up areas in the rear of the property near residential arras. 4. Agency and NPO Comments The State Highway Division has reviewed this proposal and state that they are familiar with this development since they have reviewed it several times. The present proposal appears fine to them. The Tualatin Rural Fire Protection District has considered the proposal and has responded that any new traffic signal to be installed must be equipped with opticom controls. They are somewhat concerned that this size of development could cause the 3000 gpm fire flow requirement to be exceeded. It is required that an automatic sprinkler protection system be incorporated into all buildings in this development. NPO #1 considered the proposal and has offered the following recommendations: 1. Fencing should be solid wood (with no gaps) or made of concrete or brick and 8 feet high. 2. There should be adequate sound deflection of heat/air conditioning systems. 3. Truck traffic in rear of buildings should be limited in their time of operation. The Engineering Division has provided the following findings: 1. Notice of Final Order SL 87-08 became final on July 6, 1987. 2. Site Development Review SDR 08-86 expired on April 21, 1987. 3. The proposed development fronts State of Oregon right-of-way, namely - SW Pacific Highway; a frontage road exists therealong. 4. An existing City 8" sanitary sewerage main-line facility and storm drainageway traverses applicant's site, both draining generally northeasterly. 5. The applicant proposes to develop a retail shopping center with two primary (signalized) access points and one right in - right out minor access point. The applicant further proposes to realign the existing public sanitary sewerage line and install a closed conduit storm sewer line, traversing the site, to enhance public operation and maintenance thereof while facilitating site structure layout. 6. Further, the applicant has acknowledged awareness of the need for (and is already participating in) action to vacate a portion of public roadway running "through" the property, to improve the portion of roadway running from the property to SW Park Street intersection NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 87-15 - PORTLAND FIXTURE - PAGE 2 (providing access to adjacent tracts), to acquire fronting surplus property from the State, to landscape the frontage, to modify an existing traffic signal and add it new traffic signal, in an endeavor to develop the site. The Building Division, Portland General Electric and the Tigard Water ; District all reviewed this proposal and have no objections to it. No other comments were received concerning this proposal. . i F B. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION 1 The proposed project is consistent with Community Development Code provisions pertaining to vehicular access, building setbacks, lot coverage, visual clearance and parking. The fo:.lowing topics warrant further discussion regarding conformance with Code requirements. 1. Landscaping and Buffering The minimum landscaping requirement for developed properties in the C—G zone is 15%. According to the Site Plan and Planting Plan provided by the applicants, this minimum requirement will be met. These plans indicate that a 15 foot wide buffer strip will be provided along all properties that are residentially zoned. As noted in the staff report SDR 8-86 concern remains whether the proposed fence will adequately deal with the potential for adverse noise impacts. The Site Plan indicates three loading and/or trash collection areas which are to be located. behind the proposed buildings and along the rear property lines. Although this number has been reduced from six such locations proposed in SDR 8-86, the potential for adverse noise impacts have not necessarily been reduced. NPO N1 suggested in SDR 8-86 that the fence should include wooden slats and that no loading or trash pick—up should occur prior to 7 AM. As proposed, the screening, buffering and fencing will have minimal effect relating to sound deflection or absorption. To better serve the intent of the Code to minimize commercial impacts spilling into residential areas and consistent with a condition of approval stated in SDR 8-86, it is recommended that a 8 foot high fence or masonry wall be situated along all residentially zoned parcels. In addition, a loading and delivery curfew between the hours of 10 PM and 6 P.M should be observed. 2. Noise A second noise issue unrelated to the mitigation of loading and trash collection impacts concerns the heating, ventilation, air and cooling (HVAC) oni.ts to be used in heating and cooling the buildings. The Site Plan has identified the proposed siting of various structures on the property but details are lacking with regard to HVAC unit placements on the buildings. Since HVAC units are sources of potentially constant and incessant noise, sound mitigation controls (such as enclosures) should be located around these units to diminish impacts on nearby residents. WTICE OF DECISION — SGR 87-15 — PORTLAND FIXTURE — PAGE 3 4 3. Trees SDR 8-86 had proposed 592 parking spaces while the current proposal provides •589. Based upon the number of parking spaces in a development, one tree for every seven spaces must be planted in or near the parking area. Because the original landscaping plan showed approximately 60 trees when 85 trees were required, once again staff would like to review this aspect of the plan since the present landscaping plan is almost identical to the original. 4. Signage No plans for signage were submitted with this application although SDR 8-86 addressed allowable signacie previously. The shopping center complex is entitled to one multi-faced, free-standing sign. Contact with the applicant revealed the desire to be considered for an increase in sign area of 50% as permitted in the Community Development Code when such a request is made during the Site Development Review process. This amount of increase allows sufficient sign area to advertise the various tenants in a new development. An increase in height of 25% may also be gained when the sign's visual appeal and overall design quality would be served. . ." It is expected 'that the shopping center will have at least six tenants and perhaps as many as ten or twelve. Therefore, staff supports justification for an increase in sign size. Since no sign designs and plans were submitted and since the applicant provides no reasons for an increase in sign height, staff finds no justification for permitting an increase in height. C. DECISION The Planning Director approves SDR 87-15 sub4ect to the following conditions: 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. 2. The design and configuration of improvements impacting SW Pacific Highway including accessways and signalization, shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Tigard and Oregon Department of Transportation. A Road Approach Permit from O.D.O.T. and a City-O.D.O.T.-Applicant signalization agreement is required prior to commencement of street improvement work. 3. Street improvements including lighting, sidewalk, curb, driveway approach, road base and surfacing, traffic and pedestrian controls including signalization, signing and pavement marking, closed conduit storm drainage and sanitary sewerage facilities and, also, general utilities, shall be installed by the applicant in conformance with City and State requirements and standards and specifications. 4. All documents relevant to the improvement (dedication, easement, etc. ,) shall be on City and State forms; and shall be reviewed and approved d` thereby prior to recording. A complete copy of the State Road Approach Permit shall be provided to the City. NOTICE OF DECISION - SDR 87-15 - PORTLAND FIXTURE - PAGE 4 5. Joint use and maintenance agreements for common driveways shall be provided by the applicant to the City for approval and shall be referenced on and become part of all applicable parcel Deeds. �T 6. The final conditions of SL 87-08 shall be considered a part hereof as though inscribed herein in full. 7. The center shall be entitled to one free—standing sign that does not exceed the allowable sign area by over 50 percent. AM 8. No deliveries or trash pick—up shall occur at the rear of the project between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM. 9. A. solid wood fence or masonry wall which is 8 feet in height shall be installed along the property line where the subject property abuts the R-3.5 and R-4.5 zoning districts. Said fence shall be constructed prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. The location and method for noise reduction for the HVAC systems shall be approved by the Planning Director. 11. The landscaping plan shall be revised to meet Code requirements for trees within parking areas. 12. This approval is valid if exercised within one year of the final decision date noted below. D. PROCEDURE 1. Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: XX The applicant & owners XX Owners of record within the required distance XX The affected Neighborhood Planning Organization XX Affected governmental agencies 2. Final Decision: THE DECISION SHALL BE FINAL ON t7 UNLESS AN APPEAL IS FILED. 3. Appeal: Any party to the decision may appeal this decision in accordance with Section 18.32.290(A) and Section 18.32.370 of the Community Development Code which provides that a written appeal must be filed with the CITY RECORDER within 10 days after notice is given and sent. The deadline for filing of an appeal is 3:30 P.M. aA 319 1`�. 4. Questions: If you have any questions, please call the City of Tigard Planning Department, Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., PO Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223, 639-4171. �. - 7-2,1- 8,7 PREPARE m Dixon, Alsis nt P ner DATE William A. Monahan, Director of Community Development DATE &PROVED offam 11 M1111 I (TD:cn/0107D) r r . .., � fir►. � I � �° 3 ■ R i.`. `� [;'" ',,•� `�' l.' • � , '�, `� .fit�n �� : �■� F�� . . � Ai ,,� art►� ��• � , .. - vall • ' ,` ~4 ' ass all VMS r .�.. �� ■/�� /soon � moi► �� .� �� , ■■■ h,:, .11 �� ■nunn � .�\ \ ,.12 ■■� " °;!' ' �� ■ _� � � �� a �� , IN am NINE/ ��►�r■ ■ �,�► �� 1 111•- �� a �'. � ,... moi■ �� .�� ■■■� ■■■�■ ��j , ;, so Mon INNX111'■ � ��Niil tll MCC ;i .. — s■■■� mass �; f 4t ) y.' ) b. _•1 � `}1 � � 4 f � � ,t � ... �t tV yl 1t•� T Lj ty- --#—iI .— 0 III ��t � (�rid b �—•_� � II I I I •` .��`' � �I I+ �. .t +�t r � =Ii �I i ISI . •;" t I I I�I � ;,••,.1. t ... I . i I t I II �4• .~ �� ' I I I I S 11 i L• �a� s, I - If:il+ -fit ti Will o En' 1f ��..eoa.is &ITE PLAN TIGARD EAST Y rwswsnre+e ..nn......1 1".�.• � w.... .•e..e aoee p • eaee.a e....e •'~ �� Mee...N.....e.e.... Q.' MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Mayor Brian and Councilor Eadon August 7, 1987 FROM: Cathy Wheatley, Deputy Recorder SUBJECT: Portland Fixture (SDR 87-15) Review Discussion Agenda Item 2.1 - Council Meeting of August 10, 1987 There were a limited amount of large maps available for the meeting of August 10 for the above-referenced agenda item. A set of these maps are available in the Planning Division or the City Recorder's Section should you wish to review the entire set of materials considered at the Council meeting. ow CA, r � A"w e 0�►�v�X� G""� --D IL (:5aae.a[zC loc. rz-( O►ti►CQ�.C_Gt$`�'✓' 1�6��1�.�W� �J�►q�L12e!"' r 10 ; 'Pho�o EYX lu � � 5 � She Dunc- i � Fmn c� 0 UaIMT "A" HGW, INC. 117$.W. TAYLOR PORTLAND. OREGON 97104 503-227-5593 August 10, 1987 Hand Delivered Tigard City Council Re: Tigard Triangle - Dartmouth LID Dear Council Members: I am the owner of 28 acres in the Tigard Triangle which will be directly involved in the proposed Dartmouth LID. I am writing to communicate that I am 1003 in favor of the proposed Dartmouth Street LID. We urge the council members to adopt whatever measures are needed to insure the immediate construction of the road as proposed. Very truly yours, Homer G. Williams HGW:sg L18104 E 9MIT "B" OVERVIEW On April 9, 1984, when Dartmouth LID 040 was formed, - traffic studies focusing on the impact of such road system had not been completed. Subsequently it has been determined by all the traffic experts involved that building a south- erly access ("South Access") out of the Tigard Triangle is necessary for the Dartmouth LID road system to function at an acceptable level of service in the future. The Oregon Department of Transportation ( "ODOT") has not determined whether such South Access is feasible or, if so, its loca- tion. Such determination must await the completion of the I-5/217 Interchange Study currently being prepared at ODOT's direction. If it is not constructed, ODOT's written position is that the LID, as designed, will create an unacceptable level of service at the intersection of Dartmouth and Pacific Highway, and therefore permits should not issue. If the LID is to proceed without assurance that the South Access will be built, the City should immediately i impose equitable limitations on the amount of development that can occur on any parcel within the boundaries of the Triangle, or at least LID #40, for the reason.that develop- ' ment consistent with existing zoning will generate so much traffic that the Dartmouth/Pacific Highway intersection will break down. Since the early 1970's the Martins have advocated that any road system in the area of the Dartmouth LID be built in one phase. In March 1984 they anticipated the findings of the traffic studies and therefore suggested that if the LID had to be built, it be done in phases, but suggesting that the LID not proceed, for a variety of reasons, to include site grades. Depending on the type of use the land is put to, site grades will vary significantly. In 1987 the Martins still believe the subject road system should be built at one time including the South Access; however, if a road system has to be begun before all the issues are addressed, they suggest phases and develop- ment restrictions so that design flexibility can be maintained for construction of the South Access and site grading. 3 i EXHIBIT C CONCLUSIONS 1. South Access. All parties concerned agree that building a southerly access ("South Access" ) out of the Tigard Triangle as part of a new roadway system connecting Interstate 5, Pacific Highway and Highway 217, may be neces- sary if future development is to occur consistent with existing zoning. (Exhibits 30, 31, and 32) . 2. Location, South Access. The location of the con- nection between the South Access and Highway 217 cannot be determined until additional transportation studies, includ- ing ODOT's I-5/Highway 217 Interchange Study, are completed. Therefore the question of whether the South Access connection can be designed into the- Highway 217 sys- tem cannot be answered at this time. ODOT has indicated that it will consider designing a South Access into its system as part of the I-5/Highway 217 Interchange Study if the City states that it supports a South Access for the Triangle. (Exhibits 30, 31, 32, and 34) . 3. Funding, South Access. If the South Access connec- tion is feasible and is incorporated into the improvements to the I-5/Highway 217 Interchange, then state funding may be available to assist in its construction. (Exhibits 27, 32, and 12) . 4. Development Density Restrictions. The City must legislate equitable limitations on density of development and trips generated by such development in the Triangle in order to anticipate the South Access not being constructed. 4 5. Design Difficulties. 5.1. Connection to Highway 217. Connecting the current LID depign to Highway 217 will interfere with the • efficient flow of traffic within the Triangle. For example, connection with the current LID design will require traffic moving westbound toward Highway 217 to make left turns across the north-south portion of Dartmouth in order to proceed toward the Highway 217 connection. (Exhibit 42) . 5.2. Built-in Obsolescence. The ATEP year 2005 forecast is apparently predicated on the addition of only 19.7 acres of new development beyond existing levels out of approximately 219 acres available for development. (Exhibit 25 at 17-20) . Based on this low buildout assumption, ATEP concludes that the Dartmouth LID will have to be altered and expanded to a five-lane road once this development occurs. In this regard, it is necessary to immediately preserve right of way for a six lane cross section at the intersec- tion of Dartmouth and Pacific Highway, although construction has already begun where such right of way should be obtaint9 and curb cuts have been established which will reduce the efficiency of the intersection. (Exhibit 25 at 13A, 13B, 13C) . 5.3. Grades. Road grades should be established after site grades have been determined. Site grade charac- teristics are critically important to a developer's efforts to attract large regional developments. Construction of the 5 p=oposed LID may prevent property owners from attracting large developments by eliminating the opportunity to meet necessary site grade requirements. Furthermore, large re- gional retail developments generate fewer total trips per acre than small retail developments. (Exhibit 59) . 5.4. Preserve Right-of-way to Highway 217. The City should preserve as much area as possible from develop- ment until it is determined where the South Access will connect to Highway 217, and where the road system will ulti- mately be located. This will allow property to develop to its best potential. 5.5 Contrast With Washington Square. Washington Square is developed on approximately 120 acres and has 15 lanes available for traffic exiting the area. (Exhibit 56 at 2) . By contrast, the Triangle, which has 333 acres available for development, will also have only 15 lanes available for traffic exiting the area if the South Access is constructed. 6. Assumption. Although the traffic consultants con- cur on the South Access, they differ markedly in their analysis. 6.1. Employment. ATEP's employment assumptions for the Triangle are significantly lower than assumptions devel- oped by Wayne Kittelson and agreed to by ODOT. Current MSD employment forecasts are consistent with Mr . Kittelson's forecasts. Employment assumptions are the analytical 6 4 f foundations for projections about future traffic in the Tri- angle. Low employment forecasts result in low traffic projections. (Exhibits 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 33, and 52) . 6.2. Potential Traffic. Traffic generating poten- tial of 25% of the land within the Triangle available for commercial development is unaccounted for by ATEP in its full development scenario. (Exhibits 52, and 33) . 6.3. Buildout. ATEP's assumptions reflect only a 25.7% commercial buildout of development for the year 2005, although the report incorrectly states such buildout to be 70%. The Kittelson Study (with which ODOT concurred) pro- jects a 55$ buildout in the year 2005. Thus, ATEP's study results in an estimated total of only 4,140 p.m. per hour vehicle trips in the Triangle versus 14,620 such p.m. peak hour vehicle trips during the year 2005 under the Kittelson/ODOT analysis. (Exhibits 9; 33; 25 at 2; 18, 20 and 57) . 6.4. Diversions of Traffic. The conclusions of the ATEP report imply that large volumes of through traffic on Pacific Highway will divert to other roadways. This diver- sion results from the green light priority necessarily given to Triangle traffic entering Pacific Highway at Dartmouth. The congestion is assumed to result in lower westbound traf- fic volumes on Pacific Highway than currently exist, despite expansion of Pacific Highway from four to six lanes. (Exhi- bits 25 at 11-12, 51 at 2-3) . 7 7. Legal Considerations. The following issues will probably have to be litigated: 7.1. Bid.. Whether the project must be let for bid prior to any assessment hearing. (Exhibits 35, 38, 39, 40, and 41) . 7.2 Taking. Whether the City's proposed condem- nation of Martin's property is an unconstitutional taking. (Exhibits 38 and 40) . 7.3. Permit. Whether the City's permit application meets the standards established by Oregon Administrative tRule. (Exhibits 5A, 11, 37, 49, 51, and 52) . I i 8 � 1• Sq 4 k ft t_ �• f t S i If f J i.+..-t'�-^ y �,p .t.4 t•.•...s..*7 .tom, •� !•.t,� •g=- v z•'t�. i. t l.' � ::. ^k :'�^1F i a.: Jam. 1: - .i s r , .•,�:. -A.�L •.'. / R Y �"' "!S .. P f S 1'. \ 1A 6i j 1.d.�^ it t'�` 'hlT�� J ,d,. -R A • f� 1 ..' .•4� y j'�I �� A• t f+...�• Ji `• 1 n.. t i Y t + �' � t � ,!� t •,.-•`i.i•-� { � .15 kVA '_'�--,...,•..._-.�—_•r--..- 't; ��.4. tai' 4.. y t� Jt 4t•A �w+y ti l.a. rt� i ik y • _� t + i t•A �•1 � ti � + r Y 1 1 1.,4't tt o •� • 't+Jkli• 0 �•J�q{ r t - ty c t.•.r n � j`� y `� f i. ` t. r } 1 7 �. � SA ' a �"; j r• t'h R, t T! 9 r ! t 4 t i L. � �• 1 f t v. .�, tThe`VIP. of Tlie Rci11��7ff Class ' ' • �4 i'x'.4 � ..7;8' .a L t :f Z i• sy 4 �:'.>1.1 x��.+t J f t i t s T .:j err r � b ct i > 4 Y • i N, .,ar. :.i ,..•a,a i. �• n:... ,.,, �, r:t:. I .•r'o, <Iv5 ... R: . Y .a�' �. .. ,. .�'Y,ar .. 0.,'Y-v. RJ-100SC is tested for water e!nre leaving the factory it -�c'tU �. �,. .n 'refuse saving valuable AOL i space! J i y ,, j:;,!.vi'h hopper r t'i;i4 The RJ-1 OOSC Ratchet Latch, unlike a conventional latch, allows the doo to hc: pulled tictht.ly aclamst the seal, effectively "scaling" thc�open, ing At the landfill, the ratchet Irl'Awsthe latch outward and downward slowly releas nq the door. NO �u ' 'No"clumsy"spring-loaded ' lid to open and close.- another distinct advantag ' for the user. :F%xN�(n •l 51 ,, I:30vottS `9 The high compression 13/,s"deep neo- The container door is designed for The separate power unit eliminates prene tailgate seal resists oil and strength with 7 ga., 5%"wide,4"deep ' possibility of costly damage during chemicals.A standard feature on formed channels. transit to and from disposal site.Two every RJ100-SC,the seal is oneThe of the uniquelyRJ shGped container portion simple-to-use hydraulic quick discon- -100SC encourages refuse piece construction with no"cut" nects couple power unit to packing corners to leak liquids. to rotate inside,filling voids and pro- head reducing the possibility of haz- viding denser compaction.The clean ardous electrical connections. lines minimize maintenance and are The weather cover for the re- pleasing to the eye—helpful in areas mote power pack(above photo) where the unit is exposed to the public. is available as an option. SPECIFICATIONS: AMk „ , Charge Box Capacity 10► pad. Cuts installation (Mfrs.Rating). ............. 1.28 Cu.Yds. costs by half over con- NSWMA Rating. . . ......... 1.12 Cu.Yds. i, ventional compaction Total Capacity. ...... ... ........ .30 Cu.Yds. system. Clear Top Opening 29”x 60" P 9. ................ Overall Length....... ...... ..... . ....22'-5" Overall Width........ ............ ........8' "Fire hose connectrzin Overall Height. . . .....................8'-B" provided on each unit. Loading Height....... ........... . .....4'-2" Weight... ..... . ........ ........ .9,7O0 lbs. "Can be fed continu- PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS: ously while unit is cycling! Cycle'rime........ .. .... ....... .45 seconds i Total Normal Force....... ........ ',70O lbs. Total Maximum Force.... ... ......4ro,200lbs. Normal Ram Face Pressure..........21.3 PSI Maximum Ram Face Pressure... . ...25.9 PSI Ram Penetration . .. . ... . 12" ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT: Electric Motor......... ........... .. 10 HP Electric Control Voltage..... . ...... . 115 VAC Panel Box Assembly UL Rated All Circuits Fused t 3 Push Button Station......... . . . .Start.Stop .r Key Operated Reverse Standardly equipped with a 285 gallon capacity HYDRAULIC EQUIPMENT: 12 GPM flour pump designed so as not to interfere with Hydraulic Pump. . ... ... . ... ... . . ... ttu!durnprng process. Normal Pressure.... .. . . . . .. . ... .. 1300 PSI Maximum Pressure.. ... . .. .... . . . . 1600 PSI 'Ava lahle double end p i,:pu;r uprtion allows unit to be picked up from eitfat, rood especially use- ful if installed perY,enrLcular to a dock Affilk --�r ! 5' I 15 \ i EA�I 7[J r t sY^ r:y ej! 1 ' 111 ,ional doghouse offers a total- The Qwik Clean Tank,standard on all RJ-100SC compactor/ !used charge box with extra containers,funnels any liquid seepage which occurs during com- je door and flush latch.The latch paction into an enclosed area underneath the charge box floor. .j available with lock if desired. This liquid is automatically discharged at the disposal site,in effect flushing the container and the area behind the ram. (See above cutaway of compactor assembly.Arrows indicate flow of liquid into container.) An access into the tank is provided for sanitizing. r This feature increases the liquid retention level on the packer end to 39%".The container and has a liquid level Jof up to 48". + RJ 00SC..The Good Housekeeping Lachine An attractive en- closure compli- ments each ` ca RJ-100SC installed here. This RJ-100SC blends in nicely with the area around One of four at this mall,the RJ-100SC accepts a the office complex where it is installed. It is able to wide variety of wastes ranging from corrugated boxes handle the surges in waste volume associated with to restaurant wastes. Key operation assures con- changing tenants, and it saves valuable parking space trolled usage. as compared to open containers. The enclosed The RJ-100SC can be customized to the user's needs container provides improved fire protection and keeps with insect and odor control devices,advance warning the area clear of windblown debris, or full container lights,and multi-key counters(each tenant pays in accordance with his usage). And its unique container not only looks great,but increases the compaction ratio! v S�-a r. ki rv" €r. -d v.S+ -K - •kYt Hospitals, such as the one which purchased this A self-contained roll-off compactor/container with a RJ-100SC, require a high degree of security and san- dumper? Yes! And it's available in either ground or itation.The RJ-100SC provides both. All wastes, in- dock level versions! Great for amusement parks, cluding used syringes. are safely stored out of the zoos, sprawling apartment complexes, malls, mobile reach of scavengers.The RJ-100SC"sealing system" homes, parks and other applications where a central- prevents spillage while in normal daily use as well as ized disposal system is needed. during removal and transport to the disposal site. This equipment conforms to all applicable ANSI 2245.1-1975 safety standards. Pictures in this brochure are illustrative only Products must be installed in conformity with ANSI Z245.1 as well as any applicable codes and regulations. Products must be used with sate practices and in accordance with said reg- ulations and standards. Ma athon's specifications are subject to change without notice in order to Am accommodate improvements to its equipment. Mar6LFlon irqupmertt CompSfiy a o P.O.Box 609A/Hwy.9 RDS Vernon,Alabama 35592 (2051695-9105 REFUSE D`.SPOSAL SYSTEMS TWX 810-748-5228 P. 0. BOX 42544 PORTLAND, OR 97242 X1981 MARATHON EQUIPMENT COMPANY TEL (503)230.1020 OP 10%10/81 I t i TI WARD EAST TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY r S.W. Pacific Highway West -t Tigard, Oregon `L I _ - I 1 Tom R. Lancaster, PE May, 1985 L_ TOM R. LANCASTER P.E. Transportation Engineering Traffic Studies 2239 Monterey Lane Planning Eugene, Oregon 97401 Safety (503) 683-4818 TIGARD EAST TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Pacific Highway West Tigard, Oregon \S�E0.Ep P RO fff�/o . �CINa� 8054 4 .y OREGON ��,cs R. tPycP —01 TOM R. LANCASTER, P.E. _ i Transportation Engineering Traffic Studies 2239 Monterey Lane Planning Eugene, Oregon 97401 Safety (503) 683-4818 i I t f TIGARD EAST TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ; I Pacific Highway West Tigard, Oregon i • I_ i `��EQEp P RO fF fX/O - � .IN c� ;f- 8054 OREGGN C 22 R. ! TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportation Enpinaenn9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 i iIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Location Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 TripGeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 r Trip Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Signal Warrants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 IIntersection Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 j Traffic Signal Progression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 !� Appendix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 I • s t i.. -1- k f r r TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportation Enpineannp i � f E f i SUMMARY r The prop tr ed Tigard East shopping center would ' consist of about 147,000 square feet, and would generate t about 9 , 800 trips per day. About 900 trips would be generated during the evening peak traffic hour. f Three access points to the Pacific Highway have beenroposed: a south access near the south end of the 1 p � . frontage , a main access near the midpoint of the frontage and a north access at the existing Park Street j intersection. This report analyzed traffic conditions I for three alternatives for the south access: (1) a full i _ intersection, (2) right turns in and out only, and (3) ' i i no access at that point. The analysis assumed that a smaller commercial center would be developed across the 1 Pacific Highway from Tigard East. E i The study indicates that for all three configur- ations of the south access , a traffic signal would be warranted at the main access but not at the south access . The study also found that the main access would operate at level of service B prior to the commercial ! development to the west of Pacific Highway, and level C -2- TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transaortabon Enginwinq t ' after the development . The north access , presently operating at level of service A, would operate at level B with Tigard East. i Because of the long signal cycle length in the t outbound signal timing program, traffic queues waiting f to exit from the main access would exceed the storage j space . Some mitigating measures are suggested in the r report. A new traffic signal at the proposed main access would not interfere with inbound or outbound signal progression programs , but would reduce progression in = f the off-peak signal timing program. I ' IC -3- r I TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportation Engmeenng r - INTRODUCTION 1 Tigard East is a proposed shopping center located on Pacific Highway West in the City of Tigard. The total building area will be about 147,000 square feet. The purpose of this study is to estimate the new I trips to be generated by the development, to determine I the effect of the trips on the adjacent highway, and to I determine traffic signal and roadway improvements that will be required to accommodate the additional traffic. Three access options will be considered, and the i . effect of a possible future commercial development I� across the highway from Tigard East will also be considered. i i r -4- C p` � R. lOCl11 FT- C o �mac_ ��, •+ •.� LF � ...e.. now_n( �1 .r ;. --ttHH-- '� `..... IL 11 r "7 1 t 1 1 ►�f.[..• 717 1 3 wugr Rim ZZ CRYS AL JOFIXpwf P-3 Fl 0 ell '•. ...• • 5......po._ r•• _ KING CITY .r„tare t• r*� I,� •O � F _ r�C • a ��-'.. 1 ��Ca Jb"J,"i.`�f 1� =1`� `•ss��• Ji- •tip" �`�"'c• 's E LJ _- nr... r u Jill `ice :•� �1 ��r.��(;.' — —J ' i � il� � cry c,,,,.. •� YK_ j J =`� �- Y r-Q • R � i TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportation Eng—nnp LOCATION DESCRIPTION i The proposed project is located in the City of Tigard on the easterly side of Pacific Highway West, south of the intersection with Park Street. The parcel i is presently vacant, except for an empty 4644 square foot retail building near the southwest corner of the ! project and, next to it, an auto repair shop which will I . be removed. Facific Highway West , which is under the jurisdiction of the Oregon State Highway Division and is signed as Oregon 99W, traverses the area in a direction from northeast to southwest. To simplify directional descriptions, the highway will be considered to run in a north-south direction for the purposes of this report. The highway is four lanes in width, with a con- tinuous center left-turn lane. The speed zone is 40 mph. There are curbs and a narrow gravel pedestrian path on both sides of the highway. Parking is prohibited on both sides . Tri-Met bus route number five has a northbound stop on the near side of the Park Street intersection, and a southbound stop near the center of the development -6- TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. J Transpona(ion Enpm"rlmC frontage (in front of the existing pizza parlor on the west side of the highway) . There is a narrow paved frontage road that runs the r length of the parcel , just to the east of the highway. The frontage road is apparently the route of the original Pacific Highway. It ends to the north at the I r Park Street intersection , and to the south in an i intersection with the highway. i To the north of the proposed development, east of the frontage road, are several small buildings which include houses, a barber shop, and an auto repair shop. To the south are apartment buildings , and to the east are single-family houses . There will be no vehicular access to the project from the east. Park Street intersects the highway from the west (the connection to the frontage road comprises the east leg of the intersection) . There is presently a three-phase fully-actuated traffic signal at the intersection. There is not a left-turn phase for the southbound left turn , and the east approach is not signalized . The Park Street approach has two lanes; a right-turn lane, and an optional through and left lane. -7- TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Tran3portation Enpineennq The east approach is unstriped, and is controlled by a STOP sign. There are Opticom detectors for the north and south approaches . There are marked crosswalks on the west and south. legs. The south crosswalk is signed as a 20 mph school crossing. Across the highway from the proposed development is an existing pizza parlor. It does not have direct access to the highway, but has access to a three-lane driveway which is apparently intended to serve a large future development on the presently vacant land surrounding the pizza parlor. Three access points are proposed for Tigard East. The main access would be near the midpoint of the parcel frontage and would have three lanes, one inbound and two outbound. This access would be signalized if warrants are met. Based on conversations with the developer, it will be assumed in this report that if the property to the west of the highway is developed at some time in the future , its main highway access will be directly opposite the proposed main access for Tigard East. A second access is proposed for the north end of the site using the frontage road and the Park Avenue -8- TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transponat-on Enpmeennp intersection . This will require that the existing traffic signal be modified to provide a southbound left-turn phase and signal indications for the east leg. • It should also involve reconstruction of the east leg to eliminate a short, steep downgrade on the intersection i approach. Because this entrance will provide convenient access to parking and loading areas in back of the store buildings , it is expected that this access will be used { by many of the store employees and delivery trucks . . However, it will probably also receive some use by store s� = customers. A third access is proposed at the south end of the parcel . This would be a minor access, and would have only one lane in and one lane out. This report considers three alternatives for this access : ( 1) a full intersection configuration, (2) right turns in and out only, and (3) no access at all at this point. As does the north access, the south access would provide access to the area behind the stores , and would probably be used by employees and delivery trucks as well as customers. -9- r EXISTItJG THREE-PiAAS£ I I TRAFFIC SIGNAL. �•p W W a � I � No scal-E 4c 0 u -i Ck �W o 13 t I IQ W Q p W } a w Z ,• 1= asnag Oo I IL u �•• own L Id ID Q J 0. '• rlI I I I I W � 4c FsC 1 I •• 7N cc I I WATKINS AlUE• �- EXISTING CONDITIONS I TIGARD EAST I TIGARD) OREGON -io- E r TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Tran3pwalion Erpineenng t �� St 2g i TRIP GENERATION The projected number of vehicle trips for Tigard c East was determined based on data in TRIP GENERATION, third edition, published by the Institute of Trans- portation Engineers. I For a shopping center with 146,590 square feet, the daily trip generation rate is estimated to be 9778 trips per day. During the PM peak hour, there would be 865 i trips , of which 415 would be entering and 450 would be leaving. Of the 865 peak hour trips generated by the development, it is estimated that about 75 percent will r be new trips added to the street system. The remaining 25 percent will be existing trips diverted from the A highway. r A manual count of traffic on the highway at the t project site was made in 1982. This count indicated 1323 i southbound and 856 northbound peak hour vehicles on the { highway. -11- TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportalion Engineering i Oregon State Highway Division traffic volume tables ! for 1982 show an average daily traffic volume of 25,200 I at a location near the site (milepost 9.84, 0.01 mile southwest of Garrett Street) . Traffic volume tables for 1983 show a volume of 26 , 700 vehicles at the same location , an increase of six percent. Assuming that j volumes have continued to increase at the rate of six 1 percent per year , the estimated weekday peak hour 1 traffic volum,.:s at the project site for 1985 would be 1561 southbound and 1010 northbound. f Manual traffic counts made on Park Street in 1982 were increased in a similar manner, assuming a six percent per year increase. � . For the purpose of analyzing the effect on traffic of the proposed future commercial development across the highway from Tigard East, it was assumed that the 7.5 acre site would be developed into about 40,000 square feet of retail space. This would result in about 577 I f trips during the peak hour, of which 288 would be entering the site and 289 would be leaving. -12- PARK STREET -� EXISTIlJ �C�3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL // /� 0 � / o A. PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGMAL l / ti SITE PLAN T I GARD EAST MO SCALE -13- s ' TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportation EnCmeennp TRIP ASSIGNMENT r- It is expected that most of the trips generated by Tigard East will have origins or destinations within a few miles of the shopping center. Based on residential development patterns in the area, it is estimated that about 50 percent of the trips will be to or from areas to the south of Tigard East on the Pacific Highway. Trips to the north on the Pacific Highway would be about 37 percent, trips to the west on Park Street would be about 10 percent, and trips to the future commercial development across the highway would be about 3 percent. The table on the following page shows the estimated percentage distribution of trips among the three access points for the four directions described in the previous paragraph. The percentage of trips for each direction was then multiplied by the percentage of those trips assigned to each access point, and then multiplied by the total number of entering or exiting trips to get the projected turning movement volumes at each access point. These volumes were then multiplied by the 75 percent "new trip" factor and added to the existing trips on the highway and Park Street . In analyzing access -14- TOM R.LANCASTER,P.E. Transportation EnGnKnnfl I ' configurations that limited turning movements at the south access , it was assumed that the prohibited movements would be diverted to the main access . In r- estimating the distributions to the accesses , it was assumed that the north and main access would be signalized, but that the south access would not be. The resulting volumes are illustrated in the traffic flow diagrams. Trip Distribution Percentages: Pacific Highway to the south: 508 Pacific Highway to the north: 378 Park Street to the west: 108 i Future development to the west: 38 ENTERING TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES South Main North Access Access Access I Pacific Hwy (south) : 408 608 08 Pacific Hwy (north) : 58 858 108 Park Street: 5% 658 308 Future development: 08 1008 08 EXITING TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES South Main North Access Access Access Pacific Hwy (south) : 58 958 08 Pacific Hwy (north) : 108 808 108 Park Street: 108 708 208 Future development: 08 100% 08 -15- • TOM R.LANCASTER.P.E. Transportation Enpin"('N For trips to and from the proposed commercial _ - development across the highway from Tigard East, it was assumed that 60 percent would be to or from the south on Pacific Highway, 37 percent would be to or from the north on Pacific Highway, and 3 percent would be to or from Tigard East. It was also assumed that there would be only one access to the development. If there were additional accesses , the volumes assumed for the main access would be reduced. i -16- pg/In 1 s� Ti rd Ea�sL Lc HCl _ in11IeT:gIII III I I I � 1; I I �� I IIIIIII 11111 11111'1 .111111 sIIIIF]_T T it "I IIIp1I-II III —t- 1 T�-'-!. -1__—i_ 1 1 1 I��f i I � I.� 0 I I,II I iII11t�I IILIII`IIIIetII11�111EIIlIollllll�Illleli1111�1II y NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED B 9 0 11 _12 DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN ' THIS NOTICE. IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DRAWING. — --__ ! _.. OtE 6Z 92 t2 92 SZ �Z EZ ZZ IZ OZ 6t 81 LI 91 51T bl EI ZI If 01 6 9 [ g 5 y g" tN111111I1111I1111IliIlII111Ii111�tlt�1115 _ 1!1('317!1{71 i MARCrr 7 . , 1999 �� L.M. - , � F fTI HARD NlcS,r,\� ARK All Pic �-- PAGI FlG HIGHWAY �WaST� O 516NAL Q N 04- 862.70 _ 8 WILD .NDLWALIL M � / LANDSCAR NG B•WJDG SIDEWALK f� _... 9o_P I .LAUDSG4niVls al-' _- .24 Ii EXJ aT(NG FUTURE FUTURE PAD RESTi $ZANT I - �' 12'BIKG I`o N 1 4,(.44 6F 4:-.-Soo SF j PAD I I I H� aac,c a . p $ 5,(OC7 5F I / N I STAT STICS 8 I - LANDAZE< 12.2A'_ = 531,41,6SFt RE410 LANo5cAp1 w. 7%2D2 84• 30, N I t- � � (1 0L0G AQEA o 1L G¢ G24 n OERy 40,761 / 2OO 0 _ it o -- -- - I 1 I'—)—' i l 3 T I I I D2uG5 30,(170 1400 i 77 Lp I m SHOPS 17,175 /400 43 o nl PADS 81144- /400 a 22 n RESTALRANT SGOO / loo 56 FUTURE LEASE_ x,000 /4O0 i 110 FUTURE LEASE Ill 1531005P 4A2 SPAZES lz='D 5F .25' 5. v 569 srACt5 PROVIDED.. _ IF d-5/1000 5F G PSA r a 24' 37'- �, 3 21' 3 ' 3 107"" 30' 1174"YL' INDIGA'=� I 37 0 �.' as "'r'� - x ¢ I r 5 - ' �.�� w l 1 a4 1 f I a4 ' i ? a r as I l zo o ¢ v b Z _— -p - co(L w _ ca• wx• Q< z� LLI •ox g1.Mp0 3F EczTY a+eNa..� C' Q[_0 Z V f ' W QLL(OR � I f F .. i d � o o 1 O GROCERY ,J.,c' ell" i r I� yJ1 Hd�G dl I 3 40.761 sF - :I ifco ? d j ? 7y Pi Q S, 12° o 30' h -- Zzem a 1 �nuGEPTUAI_ �'—G LEV�TIO� Z g r m �c~i 3m =U W W ri Z \ U ¢ m O oz ¢ >n 4. C', LANDS APIN C+ �j 9 ti CO ALL SGIlTH 4 LAST PfmPEQ7Y LINES Z G C U LL U ?� \ COMMON WI M(3L� 17S r-EN4 l'ROPPR-(`/ C I T I ,F i ' SHEET f To Be N+pJIOCD W17M FENQ ^,LREENIN( By FF[REO AS IZEOLfiRED. ............................ IIP 1P IP rP 91 qr.......... ql ql Ip 1{I yl qI I{T'"'", I m m........ ...1 I l T I 1 1 I 1 t 1 I I s•,,, Ih I@ [a!h'SG - ._:car- _.�-...•�Y..-...�...a.... ..: (' I L I I 1 I I I I I I I 'TR� I � f l�l fn9 I I!.�I I I A I�rt1I111p II�IIIIIP�lplyl�llT 11I1IggHI�IPpl1�I Ilrlgl�llg41ll Pllllllplgf •, _ ,, IF WlSxwoFruEo -- --- I 2.__I 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 !O If 12 nwlnNc IS LESS CU�n`PM THIS WTIM.IT is-T _ TIE OUAIITT OF TIE MICINN. - OB IW. _--_'___ - OE"-"62 B2 L2 92 92 ►2 62 Z2 11�2"��"��'0�2"''�''"6�'1' el "LII 91""�""41""��_I'l fl ZI 11 01 6 6 1 0 S b E 2 I— ✓II�nu6ulllu1lnulunA x�unlul�11nb111�pdu11�4N Wuu�YluWwuuu4uu11�p�llp{gWIU1�uu0uwm6tllpuhu1�114�uId16W I111W ll" MARCH 7: ;,1990 1 I.. 1 1 r i 28.5❑ �\ I 1 -L 0-411 RETAL'�ING iWALL '1 APPROX.AREA OF ADDI'TIOUAi_ ,n { . FLOa!,4-c, -ILL,I�:?His cou-r�s�cT _ TYP CRE:K / e I A / / r / / I /�/,//�//�/ /_ .,j �¢.c' � vim'✓s � rte: / , � �,. .�'9_. / > i -_ �_ - --_-�� _ _ NDT To FaGEED 4o-d' LL VEG=_Th-lon•;zoo-r7, � TOP�o._ FILTER FAHRIG /� 6 3 'YP CSI REMOVED { 1 \ _ �.. __ --_ __3-� _ -1_``� ' ..-_ %�' / Js 21L 1\.. � 13 GT _ \ __ _ F. Ju GO I- rj FLOOR Q: ?ERFORATED PIPE,12°O.D. _ CO 0. D2UV:If' j' NI:A_ 20 OP PIPE AT z� 1 \ CRLKnE✓OCK NATURAL W \ caa / --f OV_cam SnA-L BE O~ NOIR-PERORATED OpUpDWITH J Cr ;wLL ZND SPED PEI-6015,12 3 T(R CAN ON 5U5DRAIN PETAiL_ 0 Izo°Oz ooR@4o e6 - ' \ � -{--- __.__5� _.._._._T SD2 NO SCALE LU Q n M-I {PROPERTY Uwe I < 04_'- VJ �O. F-IL 45 \�\ \ R ry1� gym: , • �/ \\ ,' `'. INSURE AY SLSZP\S \ DOWN AWAY PROM \\ 3 ea ;F\, .If B \\ \BUILDING.{AT CARNER.. \\ /� P - RTAINIUG Q1, fps. '16. ! r I>C 3 6 PLAN d { 4 e S[, FIN.GRADE 0 ZOLrrH -'OP OF SIDE OF X _ WALL 42°OFIe.,N UN<FENGE ?• F1N.6RADE.C�NOF 25.'.5 SD3 251.5 - A SIDE o.F.O W SIDE OF WALL \'�0.+�1 �j.yk. ! TOP OF N,L°. 3 � ._ � r ___L 26'5 229 229 42'CE.L�.'UK� 26 227 l .._� 111111 z Y \ \ 24h ___ - __-_ _ T-- _O -,N. /'-1 TJw _'"" _.—_� .o.W. T.O.W.1 F1'.D' O c 4 � 2 4 W 243 � 2390 239.7./ ;2��__ 240.5/� i'\ 2 2.5 22S.9: __ - Y 6Z 240.5 2�O 2'2 2235 22b.5 O 21a f FIN.Go 222 9A � 2 I-5 -� 2 o 9 I { 24 y� '.__.' - g�.f'I 2,;' 2 2 9 LFFOO'fIN6 SH� _ z _ _ 31 _ BOT.of Fpp':NG 'S' _ ELEVATION Bs.BT B4 a II 9 67 95'a. -WALL r°Es =�12`� :JA_'.YP Si 43 '. s A SITE GRADING PLAN Q_ RETAINING WALL 2 P ETANII.lG WALL 10m ' r v a D2 zo-o' (Ipllplgllgl ggql,piq,gulp gllgl Iplip r rjm 9,Ig1 II II•I T 1i1{ll III Ill 111 g III Ill I�Ilyll II{IIQ111p11111111IIPIIP I1%.lIfI 111.1.j.1 "III.11117,1 1 i'i'i � f i(� 1 1 1 I I � 1 1 t NOTE: 1F T Z IIIGDFIUEO i 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 0 11 12AW OI A lW 15 IESS CLEAR THAN 1 THLG NOTIM IT IS OLE TO TIE QUALITY OF TIE MIGIML O£ 82 BZ L112 92 L2 ►2 £2 ZZ 12- OZ 6-1 81 LI 9{ Sr *1 £1 21 II 01 6 0L 9 L t' £ Z I— M11�11111111111111111111111111NIHIIIIIN�191%111%1L-1-jul I m, 24 MARCH 71, 1990 - w: I IL- 1 kr.4.c_ 7, L,y 00. 7 m4co'41-. 1 j Im IQJ 9! a,Mai— r LJ / 2&, 7 l;cr, L q "'ne" 0 "�7 J. t".c ry Z,;,i ij C-,Z ,> ,7 L c.411 'WA —6 V4 > 0 Ct lu W14 I LLJ < PAKKPIUST IQ FL�W-NW(, 'Is PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS 76- A&arS IMMEMATEEL�v PLANTING: V QT alexprri to IlIalling ind Ivric,lically d,ri,,g Lhe PI'll—W, Lo L—re-LEILng ReTev'e any debris which may be harmful E plant life. All COPSGil required for .1 LLj—jl and —loval L .,Lr 1—kvLl. will I o CD 4. planting wil provided in place by General Contractor.,The final grade will be established by General tractor. GLNING AND STAKING: LU SOIL PREPARATION FOR PLANTTW.; All trees shall be guyed from ctwo equa-distant points with#12 gal.wim or rigid Z14t, guys to stakes in the ground. Protect the cree,trunk with rubber hose or patented Apply the following tree ties. Trees shall be staked with a miniulull of 2-2"x 2"x 8'Douglas Fir E5 to the Surface after the placing of to soil and mugh stakes. Drive into ground before covering the tree nxlcs with soil. (0) grading;per 1,000 q--fee[. '1Z'Z t MULM: .t2 40 pounds 10-20-20 Organic base connercial fertilizer a Z DistributO,material in even layers and rotocill or spade cc a minimae depth of A 1ply 2"of I ire Lark tilulch,3/4"L,I"sine(avdioni)evenly distributed W 8 inches. over the—Itace of the bed. Z PIANr W11-JUAL: < I PWIMION OF I-XIMIM tf' 51.1k be hL;,Jchy,SL,AL or Federally 1-1111-CLII,dilea- d insect C-L. I-T.L�L all 1LrU,,Lurv,—1—rk,1,alaChL- Rel,air to original culdicLon to the si-and •gr.ule� LU 1- the It 1—L —1;wetl brail a,ld—1d. CraLI1S I F aMY 11-9,1,done. C—ry.o'..--ary;—I applioubl.I.......I,for And 1.height or cal 11—s1,11 be a�11L ill Lhe Awrican A-acwtion, 11-tecLio.,of LR Iebli,,a,,,I L>wi H of Nur-rj—fcanda.dts. mace oil Lo S111'JeaLions shaLl be—mved In 2 o. frata the Ce ad tihall be with M—M.11-L—lal. cc Weed— A( It < PLANrINC IlOCKENS: UI-1 coilaIll't 101--11*Lite-—rk jm.J Lill, —.,iag A'Ell,, I i-1 la,fectiun Vhc work L Planting packets haLL W tw tine's the size Of Illv rnor baLL. Wckfill Ich specified Planting edx and water LhOroughly. All-for�vVLI—lit. GLARANTEE: Soil .I.for tra-1 and shrubs: Guarantee all work and plant material for one year from date of final 70,41ofe;oLl acceptance,and replace all material so directed by the Owner. However, 20%KoLLed&-f—c or nanun, the landscape contractor willrot be held responsible for damage resulting from Acts of God,l-Crat weather conditions or improper maintenance, such Z "Agrifonlltl Plarking rabIlLS a,Iler lm1uf"cru-r':;re.....lenciati-s. 0 as insufficient waClning or over-watering by the borer. It io, MAIWENANC Provide all minLenance necessary for 30 days Fran coalpletim or until Z acceptance. U SHEET V0V1F'-l` �-AYe,4,4r WM�4 Srrb!:PLAN, VI4Wr-'r ';.Ell OF 11 I III)IIIII pill!Iljlll ply 1.1,1.11]�j Ill 1111111 yl Ili IF Tills MICWFUWD 3 4 5 6 7 0 Ot IS�SS[LEAP TRAM �15 llOTIa IT IS OLE TO ilE 9ALIT`Y OF MIGMAL SZ ;Z wi-91 o VI ZI 11 01 6 0 Z 9 S b. C a I- 92 GIIIIIIIMIIIilltl ll. I—,I Al,j I had I ImIl"'i 24AL ;1 V-'s MARCH, --- 7J21990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED, residents and neighbors of S.W. 113th ave. require road and culvert left undisturbed unless the following specific requirements are met: (privately maintained and owned dip) From the end of Westwood Construction Site on S.W. 113th to across and to the end of the dip to N.E. corner of Royal Mobile Villa - the road must be widened, blacktopped etc. to comply with all county and city specifications at no expense to existing residents. At no time can the exit or entrance be blocked - it is a dead end road, in case of heart attack, extreme emergency or fire. There must be a way out at all times and anyone concerned in this project that is blocking roadway will be held totally liable. We prefer the road remain private and not attractive to unnecessary sight- seers and traffic. We also require proper filtering, skimming and cleaning of runoff water from T.T.CENTER blacktop for environmental and human safety for quality and quantity of water. In addition, if the dip ever washes out, Westwood Corp. will be held liable! NAME ADDRESS SIGNATURE ��y .y �?t,Y�'• l�� Q.�� .�:9�7�> -S 1tJ�' %�c��b,rY�k l�✓. Qri3�,��r vu�+�r.r. i�a,�. v , . uc,.�.l c� �j k.fl-ti-,••.c�,.,, /6 7 7 u .S cam, / / 3t ,1 d 143 6 1 � IL �: �t6AOb /lO � � ,�� v 4�us7' (9�7 97; 2.2 f-I f/_1 C� 4 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY - (Local Contract Review Board) AGENDA OF: August 10, 1987 _ DATE SUBMITTED: July 29 1987 4 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Bid Award For PREVIOUS ACTION: Gaarde Street Storm Drain Project PREPARED BY: Randall R. Wooley l DEPT HEAD OK;` CITY ADMIN O � REQUESTED BY. — POLICY ISSUE Award of contract for the Gaarde Street Storm Drain project. INFORMATION SUMMARY Bid^ ware opened on July 28th for the Gaarde Street Storm Drain project. This project will build a new storm drain in the vicinity of Garde Street and t Canterbury Square as shown on the ttLachod map. This new line will correct existing problems of flooding of apartment ar•oas during heavy rains. This project was authorized in FY B5--86; it took until now to obtain all the necessary documo '. : Seven bids were received as follows: 1. Quality Rock Company Line A - $47,113.63 Line B - $11,062.45 TOTAL $58,176.00 2. Dill Page Construction Line A - $60,615.00 Linc B - $14,355.00 TOTAL - $74,970.00 3. Canby Excavating Line A - $66,804.10 Line 11 - $14,934.50 TOTAL - $81,818.60 4. Dori Watts Construction Line A - $64,357.72 Line D - $17,297.68 TOTAL - $81,822.44 S. K 6 R Plumbing Line A - $68,976.05 Line B $14,451.50 TOTAL - $83,377.55 6. C b M Construction Line A - $75,500.00 l in(, B - $14,128.75 TOTAL - $89,637.63 7. Columbia Pacific Line A - $83,717.00 Line B - $15,991.00 TOTAL - $99,708.00 Engineer's Estimate - B _ $ 0 11,062.40 TOTAL - $63,942.00 The bids provided for a Deductive Alternate One which would delete Line B. To date, we have not been successful in obtaining the easements necessary for Line e. Construction of Line A will cor,--t the most critical flooding problems. The project is still beneficial without Line B. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1, Award the contract to the low bidder. 2. Reject all bids. FISCAL IMPACT The low bid is $47,113.63 which is within the project funding shown in the Storm Drainage CIP budget. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends award of the construction contract to the low bidder, Quality Rock Company, with Deductive Alternate One deleting Line B, and requests that the City Administrator be authorized to sign the contract for the City. { i fi NU r MEMORANDUM t CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council August 7, 1987 � FROM: Loreen Wilson, City Recorder SUBJECT: Council Packet for August 10, 1987 - Item 5.1 Attached is be ded h the received foraaerial photo should ls AgendaItem5 1 concerningBidsiforut GaardeStreetmStormaDrainu Improvement. ew Attachment R i f.tt. 7 S ,r4� vj J .t J t � �:. �t v'.is�. ?'v Yi. y � .'e.n' t •,y� � 4 .1 F �-f. t �;G M ` si'7+^v�'� �i � •�� .�; „�; 1 a,rs 71: r t T i t. .1 tt � � v:J; •w ' •,... �•'. • y `' �.1 -t + y"' of r,. l y •'I t Rte. •, �,.�/ 1! �.�f �c A-7 1 t •t• r O �'n�r c 1�m..r�•n •il .fir ��. # -• � •r r„ .�•`,+.!� i / fi0" . � c;w .�L i f f� �• � 4k ',l,is ,s 7; � �' �� i,y K •i r L ♦ � � - 1 ,.:� m�� :. a 1�� ,r r+ ° 3.4 S�°� 7f h�ti ��y. ,",y_�c � •..y 1`, w I� r v:. •.� X41 �� h, •4`i rrJ i;�� l 4W2, ' � ` �1 � �:a �" •� 7,.. fir': ,.MWFTM ♦ •awf•f <' r>+v ;� ✓, I.� �'� ti to f � 3 T •t � 7.' � re o ' Je j't. � t tt• � f-i'. l r a r •:,. r '� ray �p y.' � } - v> .' rs'. A' y� . a <r ,+ y � 1 1 fb CITY OF TIGARD OkEGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY — Loca Contract Review Board AGENDA OF: 8/10/87 DATE SUBMITTED: July 31, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Bid Award for PREVIOUS ACTION: _ Genesis No. 3 Subdivision Concrete Work & As halt Pavement Overla PREPARED BY: Randy Woole DEPT HEAD OK✓ CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: !` POLICY ISSUE Award of contracts for Genesis No. 3 Subdivision Concrete Work and Asphalt Pavement Overlay. INFORMATION SUMMARY Certain street improvements were never completed in the Genesis No. 3 Subdivision. In a settlement agreement, the bonding company paid the City $40,000 and the City assumed responsibility for completing the improvements. We advertised for bids for two contracts to complete the Genesis improvements. One contract is for asphalt overlay. The other contract is for concrete work including completions of curbs, sidewalks and concrete islands. Bid results are shown on the attached sheet. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award to the low bidders. 2. Reject all bids. FISCAL IMPACT The low bids for asphalt and concrete work total $40,606.40. In FY1986-87, $45,000 was budgeted for this work. Because the work was not completed, the ending fund balance will be $45,000 higher than expected. The Finance Director will be preparing a supplemental budget resolution as soon as all ending fund balances are known. In the meantime, there is sufficient funding available in the streets CIP budget to cover this project. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends award of each contract to the low bidder and requests that the City Administrator be authorized to sign the contracts. The low bidder i for Concrete Work is Cassetta Construction. The low 'bidder for Asphalt Overlay is Oregon Asphaltic Paving Company Genesis No. 3 Subdivision Bid Results July 29, 1987 Concrete Work Two bids were received for concrete work: Cassetta Construction, Portland, $28,154.40 Sharp and Associates, Tigard 41,595.00 Engineer's Estimate 30,773.00 Asphalt Overlay Seven bids were received for Asphalt Overlay: Oregon Asphaltic Paving Co. , Portland $12,452.00 Lakeside Industries, Portland 13,200.00 K.F. Jacobsen & Co. , Portland 14,080.00 Baker Rock Crushing Co. , Beaverton 14,414.40 Parker—Northwest Paving Co. , Oregon City 16, 192.00 Cassetta Construction, Portland 16,381.20 Eagle—Elsner, Tigard 16,654.00 Engineer' s Estimate 16,940.00 br/0313D CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 10, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: August 7, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: LCRB Approval PREVIOUS ACTION: _ of Backhoe/Loader Purchase — PREPARED BY: John Roy _ DEPT HEAD OKn LI_ ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: DEPT HEAD O:KVI John Roy POLICY ISSUE Council adopted Ordinance No. 85-05 on February 11, 1985, which sets fur•th the City of Tigard Purchasing Rules. This request complies with said rules. INFORMATION SUMMARY A packet of information was submitted to the City Council on August 3, 1987 with their packet for the August 10th meeting. At that timi City Staff was unaware that the Option 1 (cab with air conditioning) would riot be able to be delivered for six months from the factory. A six--month delay would riot be satisfactory because of seasonal workload. After reviewing the bids further, staff recommends the purchase of the backhoe/loader without Option No. 1 from the lowest responsible bidder who is still Kessel Tractor and Equipment. The purchase price will be $28,250. This Item has beqn budgeted in the 1987-88 budget. __.._-._.._.__._............_................ _._.._._.._.._...__ ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1 . Award bid to the lowest responsible bidder-, Hessel Tractor & Equipment Company without Option No. 1 for $28,250. 2. Reject all bids and re-bid. ____ -- Y_________—....•-FISCAL IMPACT 1. $28,250 from the 1987-88 budget for capital outlay in Wastewater. 2. Unknown at this time; additional staff time would be required to re-bid. SUGGESTED ACTION 1. Alternative No. 1 — Motion to approve bid award; Hessel Tractor & Equipment Company without Option 1 for $28,250. cw/0394D i 1 a.• , �1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY t AGENDA OF: August 10 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: July 30 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: LCRB - Approve PREVIOUS ACTION: Purchase of Backhoe/Loader PREPARED BY: �JohnDEPT HEAD O iA � �ITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: i --------------------------------- LICY ISSUE Council adopted Ordinance No. 85-05 on February 11, 1985 which sets forth the City of Tigard purchasing rules. This request complies with said rules. ------------------------------ ---------------- INFORMATION SUMMARY x The City prepared a bi packet, in conformance with adopted purchasing rules, k for the purchase of a ackhoe/Loader. Bids were opened on July 27, 1987 at 2:00 PM. Bids were recei ed from 7 vendors, as attached. 4 After reviewing the bids eceived, staff recommends purchasing the Backhoe/ Loader with Option #1 fro the apparent lowest responsible bidder who was Hessel Tractor and Equipment for a total of $31,134. (Option #1 is a cab with air conditioning) . Although here were exceptions noted to the bid specs by . this vendor, it has been dete ined that these exceptions will not hinder the performance, productivity, or o erall quality of the unit. This item has been budgeted for n the 1987-88 budget. f' -- - -- ALTERNA IVES CONSIDERED t 1. Award bid to the lowest respons\ebidder, Hessel Tractor and Equipment a; for $31,134. 2. Reject all bids and rebid. FIST 7-88 budget for ca ital outlay in wastewater. ' 1. $31,134 from the 198 g P 2. Unknown at this time. Additional staff timelwould be required to rebid. SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative #1 - Motion to approve bid award. JR:lw/0275D VENDOR BID OPTIONS TOTAL BID Fischer Mill Supply Inc. $30,848 k 20990 S. Fischer Mill Road > Oregon City, Oregon 97045 Option #1 — Cab with air 3,245 34,093 (No exceptions noted to bid specs) Hessel Tractor & Equipment Co. $28,250 1425 NE Columbia Blvd. Portland, Oregon 972.11 , Option #1 — Cab with air 2,884 31,134 ° (5 exceptions noted to bid specs) <i z r: Halton Tractor Company $36,312 x. 4421 NE Columbia Blvd. h. Portland, Oregon 97208 Option 01 — Cab with air 2,400 38,712 (1 exceptions noted to bid specs) Metro Ford Tractor Inc.. $29,729 11955 SE Highway 212 Clackamas, Oregon 97015 Option Oil — Cab with air 6,103 35,832 (6 exceptions noted to bid specs) Case Power & Equipment $31,877 1745 NE Columbia Blvd. 4 Y Portland, Oregon 97211-0206 Option #1 — Cab with air 3,240 35,117 r (2 exceptions noted to bid specs) P G Case Power & Equipment Co. $33,145 a 3521 Franklin Blvd. r Eugene, Oregon 97403 Option 01 — Cab with air 4,805 37,950 (no exceptions noted to bid specs) } Feenaughty Machinery Co. $2.9,153 4800 NE Columbia Blvd. Portland, Oregon 972.13 Option 01 — Cab with air 3,963.47 33,116.47 (7 exceptions noted to bid specs) JR:lw/0275D j BACKHOE/LOADER BID RESPONSE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 10, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: _August 4, 1987 _ ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: LCRB - Approve PREVIOUS ACTION: Budget Authorization ( Purchase of Automatic Electric Asphalt Patch Box _ PREPARED BY: Steve Rivett DEPT HEAD OK ! _i��CITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: Steve Rivett POLICY ISSUE Council adopted Ordinance No. 85-05 on February 11, 1985 which sets forth the City of Tigard Purchasing Rules. This request complies with said rules. INFORMATION SUMMARY_ The City prepared a bid packet, in conformance with adopted Purchasing Rules, for the purchase of an Automatic Electric Asphalt Patch Box. Bids were opened on August 4 at 2:00 PM. Bids were received from the following vendors: VENDOR TOTAL. BID COLUMBIA EQUIPMENT INCORPORATED $20,455.00 4121 NE Columbia Boulevard Portland, OR 97211 (1 exception noted to bid specs. ) PROCESS HEATING COMPANY OF WASHINGTON $22,750.00 2332 Third Avenue South Seattle, WA 98134 (2 exceptions noted to bid specs. ) OLYMPIC MACHINERY, INC. $24,250.00 3626 Airport Way South ' Seattle, WA 98134 , (2 exceptions rioted to bid specs. ) VALLEY EQUIPMENT COMPANY $ 7,316.00 k' 2611 Hawthorne Avenue NE PO Box 12849 Salem, OR 97309 (14 exceptions noted to bid specs. ) The first three vendors submitted the same Automatic Electric Patch Box. The bid spec exceptions will not affect the performance or ability to do the work needed by Community Development - Street Section. The exceptions were: (1) Spec door height 68 inches submitted door height 74-1/2 inches; and (2) Demonstration of equipment - the unit presented is currently used by Washington County and the City of Beaverton. However, vendor H4 has 14 exceptions and would not meet the needs of the Street Section. Staff has reviewed all bids received and recommends purchasing the Automatic Electric Patch Box from Columbia Equipment Inc. for $20,455.00. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award bid to Columbia Equipment Inc. for $20,455. 2. Reject all bids and rebid. FISCAL IMPACT 1. $20,455 allowed for in 1987-88 budget (Streets Capital Outlay) 2. Unknown at this time. SUGGESTED ACTION Alternative #1 - Motion to approve bid award; Columbia Equipment, Inc. for $20,455• sb/0391D - L J CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 10, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: — July 30, 1987 An ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Amend PREVIOUS ACTION: Resolution 87-62._,^ Resolution 87-62 dated 5/4/87 PREPARED BY: Wayne Lowry, Finance Dir.l�G DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: Utility & Franchise Comm. _ !._._._....__.. POLICY ISSIIE In order to correct errors in o,n exhibit referenced by a resolution, the resolution must be amended. INFORMATION SUMMARY Resolution 87-•62 datred 5/4/87 was passed by Council to pass through to citizens of Tigard the increase in Metro's Dump Fees effective 4/1/87. Exhibit A of this resolution sets forth the per can and per container rates that may be charged. We have determined that Exhibit A does riot accur-ately reflect the rates to be charged for the pickup of containers of loose and compacted material. In order to reflect the correct rates in Exhibit A, Resolution 87--67 must be amended. This action does riot alter the rate increase as set fur•th in Section 1 of Resolution 87•-62. This action only corrects Exhibit A in the translation of the arpr•oved rates into the loose and compacted container rate schedule. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1 . Approve the attached Resolution to amend Resolution 87-62. 2. Disapprove. FISCAL IMPACT None SUGGESTED ACTION f L Staff and the Utility and Franchise Committee recommend approval of the attached Resolution. r ANk i i x i i t t RESOLUTION NO. 87-__ Page 1 G i _ X Il T CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON DA f COUNCIL AGENITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 10, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: July 30, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA 1ITLE: Amend Budget PREVIOUS ACTION: _Budget Adoption Resolution Resolution 87-94 Dated 6/22/87 Section A r' PREPARED BY: Wayne Lowry, Finance Dir_ DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: Department of Revenue ISSUE The Department of Revenue has requested that the resolution declaring the City's Tax Levy be amended in orderto comply with ORS 310.070. INFORMATION SUMMARY s Local budget law allows citlk?s to increase their tax base through { is computed using the Lhe sCid value of annexations. The annexation increase in the the annexed area multiplied by the Lax rate ch�+r•ged by y previous year. During the analysis of the South Metzger annexation the i assessed value of the annexation area determined by the City was $153,445,300; a however, these values were taken from theCounty' s must recent assessed value be uscad in the annexation records. In computing the assessed value to6, increase, the County requires the total assessed value as of October 1986, which was $148,043,700. t Due to this difference in assessed value, we need to amend Resolution 87-94, Section 4, to declare the levy using the County's assessed value figure of ion. As a result, the tax$148,843,700 in the annexation increase computat ncil should be $2.087,349 rather than $2,095o954. base levy as declared by Cou The difference of $8,605 may be addedto the Debt Service Levy increasing it to $129,092. The aggregate 'Tax Levy remains unchanged at $2,216,441, only the j allocation between the general fund and the Debt Service Fund must be adjusted. "s ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Approve attached resolution amending Resolution, 87-94. FISCAL IMPACT c The aggregate Tax Levy remains unchanged. 3 r SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. E sb/0301D Ll CITY OF TIGARD OREGON IfTE�-O��ARY COUNCIL FlUt-1141 ITEM — *� 1987 FED: 87 DATE SUBMIT st 4 AGENDA OF: — ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: _Ln.&mDerfv1" PREVIOUS ACTION: -N/A City Hall Lease Agreement Jill Monle CS-D.0ct ir0r -�-R E-PA[�E D 8 Y REQUESTED BY: MIEN OK CITY AD DEPT HEAD OK CITY CITY ADMIN OK LICY ISSUE Shall the City continue to lease the Old City Hall to the Tigard Chamber of Commerce or shall we attempt to market the property now? INFORMATION SUMMARY on a month-to-month Chamber's original lease has expired but continues now The Cham which areas are lot, joint use, and basis. The new lease clarifies Oxactly long-range plan remains purchase, but available for City Use. The Chamber' s that is not currently feasible. The Chamber has s basic been a gconditood teinant and Lheir occupancy has maintained or improved the building' on. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED basis and place back on market for sale, 1 . Continue on a month-to-month o work towards a years, giving them timet 2. Lease to Chamber for two to sell open in two purchase proposal and still leaving the City's option years. FISCAL IMPACT s, and operating costs while The lease payments cover basic maintenance, tRxe protecting the City' s equity ownership. SUGGESTED ACTION sign the attached two year lease. Authorize Mayor (Pro-Tem) to sb/0357D i . � l iF LEASE TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ITEM (1) Lessee's Acceptance of Lease 2 (2) Use of Premises 2 (3) Utilities 3 (4) Property Taxes 3 (5) Repairs and Improvements 3 (6) Lessor's Right of. Entry 4 (7) Right of Assignment 4 (8) Termination of Lease 4 (9) Liens 4 (10) Ice, Snow, Debris 5 (11) Overloading of Floors 5 (12) Advertising Signs 5 (13) Liability and Property Insurance 6 (14) Fixtures 6 (15) Light and Air 6 (16) Damage by Fire or Other Casualty 6 (17) Waiver of Subrogation Rights 7 (18) Eminent Domain 7 (19) For sale and For Rent Signs 7 (20) Delivering Up Premises on Termination 8 (i) - INDEX - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. (21) Additional Covenants 8 } (22) Attachment, Bankrupt, Default 8 (23) Holding Over 9 (24) Attorney Fees and Court Costs 10 t (25) Waiver 10 (26) Notices 10 27 Heirs and Assigns 10 1 (28) Use of Language in Lease 11 4 {i k f INDEX - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC, i lllisimillillillini SEMI t X- GG 4. l LEASE z THIS LEASE, made and entered into this 1st day of July, 1987, by and between the City of Tigard, a municipal { corporation, hereinafter called the Lessor, and the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, Inc. , a private, non-profit Oregon 4 corporation, hereinafter called the Lessee. WITNESSETH: In consideration of the covenants, agreements and stipulations herein contained on the part of the Lessee to be paid, kept and faithfully performed, the Lessor does hereby lease, demise and let unto said Lessee those certain premises, as is, situated in the City of } Tigard, County of Washington and State of Oregon, known and described as follows: Approximately 1050 square feet (more specifically set forth as Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by this reference herein as areas numbered 1 t through 8 together with the common areas !; numbered 9 through 12 & 16) of that office building located at 12420 SW Main Street and further described as Tax Lot t #04400, Map: 2512AB. To Have and Hold the said described premises unto the said Lessee for a period of time commencing with the 1st day of July, 1987, and ending at midnight on the 30th day of June, 1989, at and for a rental of $7,200.00 for the whole of the said term payable in lawful money of the United k States at the Tigard Civic Center, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, City of Tigard, State of Oregon 97223, to be paid at the rate of $300.00 per month, payable on or before the fifth day of each month. a Lessor warrants that the premises subject to this lease are not required for public use within the period of the lease. t In consideration of the leasing of said premises and of s the mutual agreements herein contained, each party hereto does hereby expressly covenant and agree to and with the other, as follows: i i 1 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. (1) LESSEE'S ACCEPTANCE OF LEASE. s The Lessee accepts said letting and agrees to pay to the order of the Lessor the rental above stated for the full term of this lease, in the manner aforesaid. f: (2) USE OF PREMISES. The Lessee shall use said demised premises during the term of this lease for the conduct of the following business: operation of the Tigard Area Chamber of commerce and related activities and for no other purpose whatsoever without the Lessor's written consent. The Lessee will not make any unlawful, improper or offensive use of said premises; it will not suffer, strip or waste thereof; it will not permit any objectionable noise or odor to escape or to be admitted from said premises or do anything or permit anything to be done upon or about said premises in any way tending to create a nuisance; it will not sell or permit to be sold any alcoholic beverages on or about said premises. The Lessee will not allow the leased premises at any time to fall into such a state of repair or disorder a--, to increase the fire hazard thereon; it shall not instal]. any power machinery on said premises except under the supervision and with written consent of the Lessor; it shall not store gasoline or other highly combustible materials on said premises at any time; it will not use said premises in such a way or for such a purpose that the fire insurance rate on the building in which said premises are located is thereby increased or that would prevent the Lessor from taking advantage of any rulings of any agency of the state in which said leased premises are situated or its t successors, which would allow the Lessor to obtain reduced premium rates for long term fire insurance policies. The Lessee shall comply at Lessee's own expense with all laws and regulations of any municipal, county, F state, federal or other public authority respecting the use of said premises. ! The Lessee shall regularly occupy and use the demised premises for the conduct of Lessee's business, and shall not abandon or vacate the premises for more than ten E (10) days without written approval of Lessor. a 2 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. i t- (3) UTILITIES. The Lessor shall pay for all water, sewage charges and garbage collection. The Lessee shall pay for all other services or utilities used in the above demised premises during the term of this lease. (4) PROPERTY TAXES. The Lessor shall pay for any property taxes assessed during the term of this lease. (5) REPAIRS A14D IMPROVEMENTS. The Lessor shall not be required to make any repairs, alterations, additions or improvements to or upon said premises during the term of this lease, except only those hereinafter specifically provided for; the Lessee hereby agrees to maintain and keep said leased premises including all interior and exterior doors, heating, ventilating and cooling systems, interior wiring, plumbing and drain pipes to sewers or septic tank, in good order and repair during the entire term of this lease at Lessee's own cost and expense, and to replace all glass which may be broken or damaged during the term hereof and the windows and doors of said premises with glass of as good or better quality as that now used; Lessee further agrees that it will make no alterations, additions or improvements to or upon said premises without the written consent of the Lessor first being obtained. The Lessor agrees to maintain in good order and repair during the term of this lease the exterior walls, roof, gutters, down spouts and foundations of the building in which the demised premises are situated and the sidewalks thereabouts. It is understood and agreed that the Lessor reserves and at any and all times shall have the right to alter, repair or improve the building of which said demised premises are a part, or to add thereto and for that purpose at any time may erect scaffolding and all other necessary structures about and upon the demised premises and Lessor and Lessor's representatives, contractors and workmen for that purpose may enter in or about the said demised premises with such materials as Lessor may deem necessary therefor, and Lessee waives any claim to damages, including loss of business resulting therefrom. In the event Lessee alters, repairs or improves the premises and thereby increases the value of the premises, 3 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. w i said increased value shall not be a factor in computing the sales price of the premises should Lessee subsequently agree to purchase and Lessor subsequently agrees to sell the n premises. �. (6) LESSOR'S RIGHT OF ENTRY. It shall be lawful for the Lessor, his agents and representatives, at any reasonable time to enter into or ;. upon said demised premises for the purpose of examining into the condition thereof or any other lawful purpose. (7) RIGHT OF ASSIGNMENT. The Lessee will not assign, transfer, pledge, surrender or dispose of this lease, or any interest herein, sublet or permit any other person or persons whomsoever to occupy the demised premises without the written consent of the Lessor being first obtained in writing; this lease is personal to said Lessee; Lessee's interest, in whole or in part, cannot be sold, assigned, transferred, seized or taken by operation at law, or under or by virtue of any execution or legal process, attachment or proceedings instituted against the Lessee, or under or by virtue of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings had in regard to the Lessee, or in any other manner, except as above mentioned. said lease is specific to Lessee for beneficial community and charitable purposes. { (8) TERMINATION OF LEASE. If at any time during the term of this lease the Lessee shall use the premises for other than the intended purposes as outlined in Paragraph (2) above, the Lessor may, upon ten (10) days notice to the Lessee, terminate the lease x and require that the Lessee vacate the premises. Lessee shall have the right to appeal any adverse decision by the City Administrator to the City Council by filing a written request with the City Recorder, describing with particularity the decision of the city Administrator from which the Lessee appeals. The decision of the council, as determined by a majority of the members voting, shall be final. (9) LIENS. The Lessee will not permit any lien of any kind, type or description "to be placed or imposed upon the building in which said leased premises are situated, or arty part thereof, or the real estate on which it stands. 4 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAI4BER OF COMMERCE, INC. I s ii I (10) ICE SNOW, DEBRIS. If the premises herein leased are located at street level, then at all times Lessee shall keep the sidewalks in front of the demised premises free and clear of ice, snow, rubbish, debris and obstruction; and if the Lessee occupies the entire building, it will not permit rubbish, debris, ice or snow to accumulate on the roof of said building so as to stop up or obstruct gutters or down spouts or cause damage to said roof, and will save harmless and protect the Lessor against any injury whether to Lessor or to Lessor's property or to any other person or property caused by its failure in that regard. (11) OVERLOADING OF FIAORS. The Lessee will not overload the floors of said premises in such a way as to cause any undue or serious stress or strain upon the building in which said demised premises are located, or any part thereof, and the Lessor shall have the right, at any time, to call upon any competent engineer or architect whom the Lessor may choose, to decide whether or not the floors of said premises, or any part thereof, are being overloaded so as to cause any undue or serious stress or strain on said building, or any part thereof, and the decision of said engineer or architect shall be final and binding upon the Lessee; and in the event that the engineer or architect so called upon shall decide- that ecidethat in his opinion the stress or strain is such as to endanger or injure said building, or any part thereof, then and in that event the Lessee agrees immediately to relieve said stress or strain either by reinforcing the building or by lightening the load which causes such stress or strain in a manner satisfactory to the Lessor. (12) ADVERTISING SIGNS. The Lessee will not use the outside walls of said premises, or allow signs or devices of any kind to be attached thereto or suspended therefrom, for advertising or displaying the name or business of the Lessee or for any purpose whatsoever without the written consent of the Lessor; however, the Lessee may make use of the windows of said leased premises to display Lessee's name and business when the workmanship of such signs shall be of good quality and permanent nature; provided further that the Lessee may 5 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. F E 'a F. not suspend or place within said windows or paint thereon s ' any banners, signs, sign-boards or other devices in violation of the intent and meaning of this section. E (13) LIABILITY AND PROPERTY INSURANCE. The Lessee further agrees at all times during the term hereof, at its own expense, to maintain, keep in effect, furnish and deliver to the Lessor insurance policies in form and with an insurer satisfactory to the Lessor, } insuring both the Lessor and the Lessee against all liability for damages to person or property in or about said leased premises and for property damage arising out of or related to Lessee's use of the premises and/or the Lessee's F covenants herein contained; the amount of said liability R insurance shall not be less than $100,000 for injury to one } person, $300,000 for injuries arising out of any one accident and not less than $100,000 for property damage, and the amount of said property insurance shall be not less than $50,000. Lessee agrees and shall indemnify and hold Lessor harmless against any and all claims and demands arising from } the negligence of the Lessee, his officers, agents, invitees and/or employees, as well as those arising from Lessee's failure to comply with any covenant of this lease on its part to be performed, and shall at its own expense defend the Lessor against any and all suits or actions arising out of said negligence, actual or alleged, and all appeals g therefrom and shall satisfy and discharge any judgment which may be awarded against Lessor in any such suit or action. i (14) FIXTURES. All partitions, plumbing, electrical wiring, additions to or improvements upon said leased premises, whether installed by the Lessor or Lessee, shall be and became a part of the building as soon as installed and the P property of the Lessor unless otherwise herein provided. (15) LIGHT AND AIR.. a This lease doss not grant any rights of access to light and air over the property. (16) DAMAGE BY FIRE OR OTHER CASUALTY. In the event of the destruction of the building in which said leased premises are located by fire or other casualty, either party hereto may terminate this lease as of the date of said fire or casualty. t 6 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. tt4 6 f I I (17) WAIVER OF SUBROGATION RIGHTS. Neither the Lessor nor the Lessee shall be liable to the other for loss arising out of damage to or destruction of the leased premises, or the building or improvement of which the leased premises, or the .building or improvement of which the leased premises are a part or with which they are connected, or the contents of any thereof, when such loss is caused by any of the perils which are or could be included within or insured against by a standard form of fire insurance with extended coverage, including sprinkler leakage insurance, if any. All such claims for any and all loss, however caused, hereby are waived. Such absence of liability shall exist whether or not the damage or destruction is caused by the negligence of either Lessor or Lessee or by any of their respective agents, servants, or employees. It is the intention and agreement of the Lessor and the Lessee that the rentals reserved by this lease have been fixed in contemplation that each party shall fully provide its own insurance protection at its own expense, and that each party shall look to its respective insurance carriers for reimbursement of any such loss, and further, that the insurance carriers involved shall not be entitled to subrogation under any circumstances against any party to this lease. Neither the Lessor nor the Lessee shall have any interest or claim in the other's insurance policy or policies, or the proceeds thereof, unless specifically covered therein as a joint assured. (18) EMINENT DOMAIN. In case of the condemnation or purchase of all or any substantial part of the said demised premises by any public or private corporation with the power of condemnation this lease may be terminated, effective on the date possession is taken, by either party hereto on written notice to the other and in that case the Lessee shall not be liable for any rent after the termination date. Lessee shall not be entitled to and hereby expressly waives any right to any part of the condemnation award or purchase price. (19) FOR SALE AND: FOR RENT SIGNS. In the event Lessee does not exercise its option to renew this lease, the Lessor may, during the period of 90 7 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. days prior to the date above fixed for the termination of said lease, post on said premises or in the windows thereof signs of moderate size notifying the public that the premises are "for sale" or "for lease". (20) DELIVERING UP PREMISES ON TERMINATION. At the expiration of said term or upon any sooner termination, the Lessee will quit and deliver up said leased premises and all further erections jr additions to or upon the same to the Lessor or those having Lessor's estate in the premises, peaceably, quietly, and in as good order and condition, reasonable use and wear thereof, damage by fire, unavoidable casualty and the elements alone excepted, as the same or now in or hereafter may be put in by the Lessor. (21) ADDITIONAL COVENANTS. 1. Lessor shall maintain the three ( 3 ) parking spaces immediately in front of the demised premises as 15 minute maximum parking. 2. Lessee shall be entitled to incidental use in common with other tenants, if any, of all common areas , such as conference room, kitchen, restroom, etc. (22) ATTACHMENT BANKRUPT DEFAULT. PROVIDED, ALWAYS, and these presents are upon these conditions, that (1) if the lessee shall be in arrears in the payment of said rent for a period of ten (10) days after the same becomes due, or (2) if the lessee shall fail or neglect to do, keep, perform or observe any of the covenants and agreements contained herein on lessee's part to be done, kept, performed and observed and such default shall continue for ten (10) days or more after written notice of such failure or neglect shall be given to lessee, or (3) if the lessee shall be declared bankrupt or insolvent according to law, or (4) if any assignment of lessee's property shall be made for the benefit of creditors, or (5) if on the expiration of this lease, lessee fails to surrender possession of said leased premises, then and in either or any of said 1cases or events, the Lessor or those having Lessor's estate in the premises, may terminate this lease and, lawfully, at his or their option immediately or at any time thereafter, without demand or notice, may enter 8 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. into and upon said demised premises and every part thereof and repossess the same as of Lessor's former estate, and expel said Lessee and those claiming by, through and under Lessee and remove Lessee's effects at Lessee's expense, forcibly if necessary and store the same, all without being deemed guilty of trespass and without prejudice to any remedy which otherwise might be used for arrears of rent or preceding breach of covenant. Neither the termination of this lease by forfeiture nor the taking or recovery of possession of the premises shall deprive Lessor or any other action, right, or remedy against Lessee for possession, rent or damages, nor shall any omission by Lessor to enforce any forfeiture, right or remedy to which Lessor may be entitled be deemed a waiver by Lessor of the right to enforce the performance of all terms and conditions of this lease by Lessee. In the event of any re-entry by Lessor, Lessor may lease or relet the premises in whole or in part to any tenant or tenants who may be satisfactory to Lessor, for any duration, and for the best rent, terms and conditions as Lessor may reasonably obtain. Lessor shall apply the rent received from any new tenant first to the cost of retaking and reletting the premises, including remodeling required to obtain any new tenant, and then to any arrears of rent and future rent payable under this lease and any other damages to which the Lessor may be entitled hereunder. Any property which Lessee leaves on the premises after abandonment or expiration of the lease, or for more than ten (10) days after any termination of the lease by landlord, shall be deemed to have been abandoned, and Lessor may remove and sell said property at public or private sale as Lessor sees fit, without being liable for any prosecution therefor or for damages by reason thereof, and the net proceeds of said sale shall be applied toward the expenses of landlord and rent as aforesaid, and the balance of such amounts, if any, shall be held for and paid to the Lessee. (23) HOLDING OVER. In the event the Lessee for any reason shall hold over after the expiration of this lease, such holding over shall not be deemed to operate as a renewal or extension of this lease, but shall only create a tenancy from month to month which may be terminated at will at any time by the Lessor. ` 9 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. (24) ATTORNEY FEES AND COURT COSTS. In case any action is instituted to enforce compliance with any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this lease, or to collect the rental which may become due hereunder, or any portion thereof, the losing party agrees to pay such sum as the trial court may adjudge reasonable as attorney's fees to be allowed the prevailing party in such action and in the event any appeal is taken from any judgment in such action, the losing party agrees to pay such further sum as the appellate court shall adjudge reasonable as prevailing party's attorney's fees on such appeal. The Lessee agrees to pay and discharge all Lessor's costs and expenses, including Lessor's reasonable attorney's fees that shall arise from enforcing any provision or covenants of this lease even though no action is instituted. (25) WAIVER. Any waiver by the Lessor of any breach of any covenant herein contained to be kept and performed by the Lessee shall not be deemed or considered as a continuing waiver, and shall not operate to bar or prevent the Lessor from declaring a forfeiture for any succeeding breach, either of the same condition or covenant or otherwise. (26) NOTICES. Any notice required by the terms of this lease to be given by one party hereto to the other or desired so to be given, shall be sufficient if in writing contained in a sealed envelope, deposited in the U.S. Registered Mails with postage fully prepaid, and if intended for the Lessor herein then if addressed to said Lessor at Tigard Civic Center 13125 SW Hall, Tigard, Oregon 97223, and if intended for the Lessee, then if addressed to the Lessee at 12420 SW Main Street, Tigard, Oregon 97223. Any such notice shall be deemed conclusively to have been delivered to the addressee thereof forty-eight (48) hours after the deposit thereof in said U.S. Registered Mails. (27) HEIRS AND ASSIGNS. All rights, remedies and liabilities herein given to or imposed upon either of the parties hereto shall extend to, inure to the benefit of and bind, as the circumstances may require, the heirs, executors, administrators, 10 - LEASE - TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. successors and, so far as this lease is assignable by the term hereof, to the assigns of such parties. (28) USE OF LANGUAGE IN LEASE. In construing this lease, it is understood that the Lessor or the Lessee may be more than one person; that if the context so requires, the singular pronoun shall be taken to mean and include the plural, the masculine, the feminine and the neuter, and that generally all grammatical changes shall be made, assumed and implied to make the provisions hereof apply equally to corporations and to individuals. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the respective parties have executed this instrument in duplicate on this, the day and year first hereinabove written, any corporation signature being by authority of its Board of Directors. Lessor: C OF TIGARD Lessee: TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE i i By: By Gerald R. Edwards Jo . Schwab _ Council President Pr ident i 11 — LEASE — TIGARD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC. t I Dt-) ►� Y 07 s �f 3 - io .J�OrQ`'�- a J 5 T i EXHIBIT A MEMORANDUM � ANDUM r CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON � r -s TO: Members of the City Council July 30, 1987 FROM: William A. Monahan, Director, Community Development SUBJECT: August 3 Council Meeting We have rescheduled the Dartmouth LID hearing from August 3 to August 10. The delay was prompted by a request from Attorney Douglas Van Dyk representing the Martin family. I conferred with Mayor Brian and Tim Ramis before rescheduling the hearing. We determined that it was to our advantage to honor the request and accommodate a new date in August rather than wait until September. Since there is time available on August 3 to discuss other items, I will be prepared to discuss the Tigard Water District issue bring the memo from your Jul 27 with you. You may want to July packet regarding this issue. c3/0299D i i i DUNN, CARNEY. ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L PALMOU1tT RosERT W.RANOOLH MIu.cR R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW L ALLEN JOHN L CAALAN ROOCRT 0S1 S.W.(111TH AVENU[,SUITE 1100 RUSSELL,R.KIU(CN NY JOHN J.HIGGINS PACIFIC FIRST FCOCRAL SUILOING HELLE ROOF THOMAS—TONGUE TCLCCOPICR 10031 224.7334 OEORGC J.COOPER.III MANAMA MURRAY•L1J W ClJ CHARLES 0.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DONALD t. VAN O ooGuf V..vwn OYK ROOCRT K.WINGER TELEPHONE(303)224.6440 SALLY R.LEISURE 0.KENNETH 0HIROISH1• SHANNON 1,fKOPIL' GILBERT C.PARKER.JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F.NUOLLMAN •. JOAN O'NCIL-P.C.• JONATHAN A.OCNNCTT 709 N.W.WALL OTR[ET.SUITE 103 ROOCRT L.NASH" ANDREW f,CRAIG SENO.OREGON 97701 BRAOLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE 45031302-2t 14`CL'V ED WILLIAM H.MowwlsoN JACK O.HOFFMAN1 T 1987 1 July MICHAEL J.FRANCIS u ly 24, RALPH R.BAILEY 11103.15741 .JUL 141987 'ADMITTEO IN ORCOON JACK H.OUNN •, ANO WASHINOTON JAMES G.SMITH "RCSIOCf1T PARTNER B[N 0 OFFICE NATHAN 1.COHEN OF COUNSEL BAND DELIVERED Mr. Timothy Ramis 1727 NW Hoyt Portland, OR 97209 RE: Dartmouth LID -- Public Hearing on August 3, 1987 Dear Tim: On behatlf .Of ths+ iMartLhs#: xe would like to request a reset of the hearing currently schelduled on Monday, August 3, 1987. The Martins will .be in the midst of their harvest on that date. In addition, Chuck Ruttan of our offices has a conflict with another matter scheduled during the same week. We would ask, then, that the hearing be rescheduled for either the week of August 10 or August 17. The Martins have offered to pay the cost of mailing a new notice to property owners reflecting the changed hearing date if necessary. We appreciate your consideration in this regard. Very truly yours, C�'-' - Douglas V. Van �,fk CDR:lko cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin July 29, 1987 C11YOFTIFARD ®REGON 25 Yeors of SeMce 19'61-1986 Dear Property Owner: On July 21, Randall Wooley, Tigard City Engineer, sent you notice that the Tigard City Council planned to hold public hearing on Monday, August 3, 1987, to take testimony regarding the Dartmouth Street Improvement District # 40. At the request of the Martin family, affected property owners, the Council is expected .to reschedule the hearing to Monday, August 10, 1987, at the Tigard Civic Center, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon at 7:30 PM. Since public notice as given of the August 3rd meeting, Council must open the hearing and -continue to a date certain. I fully expect that the hearing will 'be held-an.August 10th. I`hope' that this delay does not present problemo to you. Sincerely, William A. Monahan, Director Community Development ce/0296D . 13125 SW Hall Blvd.P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-417l l �i►1 t�E ACITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 3, 1987 DATE SUBMITTED: July 17, 1987 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Dartmouth PREVIOUS ACTION: Street LID — Public Hearing PREPARED BY: Randall R. Woole DEPT HEAD OK14W CITY ADMIN 0 REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Public hearing on Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Council has set August 3rd as the date for a public hearing on the LID. The attached notice explains the purpose of the hearing. Also attached is a draft of a possible revision to the engineer's report. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FISCAL IMPACT SUGGESTED ACTION Hold the public hearing as scheduled. After testimony has been heard, the City Attorney will be available to advise what additional actions, if any, are t needed. 3401P P i Q s f�a�ngs Rd• 1 Cio ` � f �j i 4 /l��Rl kuse k/4 Y NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING DARTMOUTH STREET L.I.D. Notice is hereby given that the Tigard City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, August 3, 1987, at 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon, at 7:30 p.m., to take public testimony regarding Dartmouth Street Improvement -_ District #40. This local improvement district was established by the Tigard City Council in April of 1984. Both the formation of the district and the assessment formula established by the City to pay for the improvements were challenged in court. In February of 1986, the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the formation of the district, but set aside the assessment. The assessment was found to be void because it included the cost of the proposed improvement of S.W. Dartmouth Street between S.W. 68th and S.W. 69th Avenues, and that improvement was outside the LID boundary. The City Council has received several comments and questions about the status of this local improvement district. The Council has called the August 3rd hearing to allow all those with an interest in this local improvement district to present their concerns and suggestions to the Council. In addition, the City Council also needs to determine whether it will hold a hearing as provided by the City code for the purpose of curing the defect that caused the Court of Appeals to declare the assessment void. If such a hearing is to be held, the City Council will need to decide upon the issues that it will consider at the hearing and the scope of review of those issues. Publish July 23, 1987 3401P CITY OF TIGARD OREGON DK'*hAFT ENGINEERS REPORT ON DARTMOUTH EXTENSION STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROfFs�i ,GCY 10.`9 February 8, 1984 (Revised July 23, 1987 ) Prepared by R. A. WRIGHT ENGINEERING, INC. Consulting Engineers 1340 S. W. Bertha Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97219 (503 ) 246-4293 786.11/200.35 ENGINEERS REpOF`r es of under matelY 32 atitionecres City of INITIATION resenting Trp angle I improvement greed ict to arty owners in the Tigarstreet locaz orisi on an tion °f an prop land of a uth E pre this develd for formation the Da the City in Based upon Tigard Tiga �onstructlon rred by roject. the City of tion for cost ince the P terest► for prepara ht the ort on owner in ineers A• Wri9 pay engineer tion of property froO sultingald neers reP°rtand Retained o0 the City soughtt Pemons as pb l i Y osals s as ys le t n9 Sery ices. of fe w Eng viae the► required engineer PrO ose street p,REA d or gITED a PtoP ss DESCRIPTION OF BENE benefitedthat# by dlrect achaving c direct be s are edged to all Parcel uous parcel an ublic The area judged a contig street imp another P improvement with d shown on ose by. ownership the prop served L.I.D. is of T,1S ► connect to and better common con propose- section 36 accessr uous with. of the P in County. not conti The boundary is located ashington street. The Proj 1W► Exhib t N$ection 1 of T.2S ► R. R.1W of a 44-foot TS on 10-foot wide PROPOSED IMPROMEN includes cowrthin a p0 from S' W' et basic improve curbed street ely 3 ,250 Xisting •Dar Souk s The and rox the wit�nt► W ide paved extendin teroection witintersectio em the right-of- Y at its of improvstub for ue at its in hway the stre` signal- 69th ignal 69th Av to pacific z8Ladition to 200-foot street storm Street ue. Ino include to the Souteet lightser9round AVen and projwill al extension hway ► sa other tion within project ut re streeton pacific Bigsewers► and excava be ants_ eSrsanitary ize future es will iti Tigard inP drain" as wags required u hl Extede�elopment of fforhthe arthe utilities of Dart ultimate lannl g roadwayof the Pavement rvethe existing P roa will be d sized to s conformance beyond the sewer ng the Prop Triangle in d Sanitary s along and W ill be ex Sion. . ting dwelling and ten is t that Dare d a h to serve ex t to property ercial ucoe ad7acen IlLida comm or► DartmOUth extended xt Ex 11 onet at ly be cons oThis w°u dthe inc P oposed Sidewalks will he res��ntial Property is already ents on estab]. Bighway and t pacific Stewart. ge g pg6.11/200_36 i } jt S C, 7 COST ESTIMATE } An estimate of the probable cost of the street and related z utility improvements is as follows: Move-in and insurance $ 15,000 Clearing and earthwork 79,800 Grading and paving 341,900 a. 43,800 Curbs and sidewalks f Traffic signal improvements ,000 27 Street Lights 27,000 Storm drainage 140,100 Waterlines 119,700 Sanitary sewers 134 ,200 Construction contingency, 58 47 ,600 € Construction Subtotal $999,100 1 Technical Services, 158 149,900 Administrative Services, 5% 50 ,000 Land Acquisition 796 ,700 } Project Total $1,995,700 The above costs are not guaranteed, but represent the Engineers best estimate of the prices that can be expected and the amounts that should be budgeted. t METHOD OF ASSESSMENT P This report recommends that the project costs be divided among benefited properties within the limits of the local improvement district in accordance with the following conditions: 1. Properties on existing streets and future streets ' designated by the City master plan shall not be subjected to double assessment for street improvements. Assessment areas for the Dartmouth Extension shall not extend beyond a dividing line midway between the Dartmouth Extension and any existing or proposed street. Streets that are judged to be subject to this condition are as follows: $ 1. S. W. 69th Avenue 2. S. W. 72nd Avenue 3. A future street that will extend south along the west line of the Martin property i t 786.11/200.36 { -2- Hill I C F } 4. A future street that will enter the Williams property from the drive-in theater property to the northwest -s 5. Pacific Highway S. W. 70th Avenue has only a 30-foot right-of-way and is i not proposed for future improvement. Land along this existing street is, therefore , not proposed for exclusion from assessment. 2. Land that is subject to assessment shall be divided into three zones controlled by distance from the right-of-way line of the proposed street improvement. Zone A will include all land that is from 0 to 150 feet from the l right-of-way line. Zone B will be all land from 150 s feet to 300 feet, and Zone C will be all land between 300 and 450 feet from the proposed right right -owilly.not Land be beyond 450 feet m assessed. Assessment rates for land within each of the zones shall be stepped such that Zone A is assessed at three times the rate of Zone C, and Zone B is assessed at two times the rate of Zone C. The land included in each of the three assessment zones is shown in Exhibit A. ASSESSMENT RATES Based on the assessment conditions described above , f land is subject to assessment, 1,511,300 square feet o including 787,300 square feet in Zone A, 540,000 square feet in Zone B, and 184,000 square feet in Zone C. The unit assessment rates required to raise $1,995,700 from the assessable land areas are $1 . 65/sq. ft. for Zone A , F $1.10/sq.ft. for Zone B, and $0.55/sq.ft. for Zone C. These assessment rates are approximate. The actual : assessment will be based upon the final project costs and actual assessed areas. a OUTSTANDING ASSESSMENTS There are no outstanding City of Tigard assessments against 3 the properties to be included in the proposed L.I .D. i i r 786.11/200.36 -3- HGW, INC. II'] S.W. TAYLOR CPORTLAND, OREGON 97204 503-227-6593 August 10, 1987 Hand Delivered Tigard City Council Re: Tigard Triangle - Dartmouth LID Dear Council Members: I am the owner of 28 acres in the Tigard Triangle which will be directly involved in the proposed Dartmouth LID. I am writing to communicate that I am 100% in favor of the proposed Dartmouth Street LID. We urge the council members to adopt whatever measures are needed to insure the immediate construction of the road as proposed. Very truly yours, Homer G. Williams HGW:sg C L/8/04 MEMORANDUM f CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council August 10, 198 FROM: Cathy Wheatley, Deputy Recorder SUBJECT: Public Hearing - Dartmouth LID August 10, 1987 Council Meeting Enclosed are letters which have been received to date on the above-referenced agenda item. Please remember to bring to 'che August 10 meeting the materials distributed in your August 3 packet concerning the Dartmouth LID. (This was Agenda Item No. 6 at that meeting as well.) ow Enclosures I i t the o indal �i il company I Kristin Square• 9500 S.W.Barbur Blvd. •Suite 300• Portland,Oregon 97219• (52 } Teellee x tt360551 60557 ' F i l August 3, 1987 t The Honorable Tom Brian and Members of the City Council Tigard City Hall 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. F Tigard, Oregon 97223 f Re: Dartmouth Extension L.I.D. } Mayor Brian and Members of the City Council: a The Robert Randall Company is owner of Tax Lot 1S136D2200, which is included in the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District. The Company has a substantial interest in the project since our net assessment pursuarcent to the original assessment roll represented about 25 pe of the estimated project cost. We wish to express our support for the project as proposed. As stated in a letter to Mayor Brian, dated April 14, 1987, we are anxious to proceed with development of our property, but that is dependent upon the Dartmouth Street improvements. We urge you to proceed with the project as planned. Very truly yours, Marilyri' R. Bishop Attorney ITEM 6 August 3, 1987 Agenda Dartmouth Extension. Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council: my name is Qeraldine L. Ball, aka G. L. Ball, 11515 S. V. 91st Avenue, Tigard. I have no objection to the formation of the Dartmouth Extension LID providing tke boundaries remain as shown on Exhibit A obtained this 3rd day of August, 1987• i i DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L. PALMOUIST' ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ROBERT L.ALLEN JOHN J. HIGGINS 831 S.W. SIXTH AVENUE,SUITE 1300 JOHN C.CAHALKE THOMAS H.TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY TELECOPIER 13031 224-7324 HELLE RODE GEORGE J.COOPER,111 MARSHA MURRAY-LUSBY CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DONALD E.TEMPLETON' ROBERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE (503) 224.6440 DOUGLAS V.VAN DYK G.KENNETH SHIROISHV SALLY R.LEISURE GILBERT E.PARKER,JR. SHANNON 1.SKOPIL' JOAN O'NEILL P.C.' CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F.NUDELMAN ROBERT L.NASH' 709 N.W.WALL STREET,SUITE 103 JONATHAN A. BENNETT ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND,OREGON 97701 BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(503)382-9241 JACK D. HOFFMAN (� WILLIAM H. MORRISON MICHAEL J.FRANCIS July 24 , 1987 I18 97.19831 (7 RALPH BAILEY 11902-19741 19741 JACK H.DUNN -ADMITTED IN OREGON JAMES G.SMITH AND WASHINGTON "RESIDENT PARTNER, NATHAN L.COHEN BEND OFFICE OF COUNSEL Mr. Randall R. Wooley City Engineer City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Dartmouth Street LID: Your letter dated June 15, 1987 in response to our lette- date May 27, 1987 Dear Randy: Our letter of May 27 discusses the impact that traffic generated outside the Triangle will have on traffic circulation within the Triangle. Traffic moving from I-5 to Highway 217 and Hall Boulevard presently utilizes either the I-5/Highway 217 Interchange, or the cut-across from I-5 to Highway 217 via Pacific Highway. It is this traffic which may bypass Pacific Highway and pass through the Triangle. Studies to date have not adequately considered the impact that this traffic will have on the Triangle traffic circulation system. The Tualatin/Sherwood bypass recommended in the Southwest Corridor Study is not intended to accommodate this traffic movement. In addition, traffic projections in Southwest Corridor Study "Scenario 2052" identify Pacific Highway as functioning at capacity in the year 2005 with six lanes. As a result, if the southerly access out of the Triangle is constructed, then westbound traffic moving from I-5 to Highway 217 and Hall Boulevard may utilize Dartmouth Street instead of Pacific Highway to avoid traffic jamming that will exist when Pacific Highway is at full capacity. Regarding the possibility of connecting Dartmouth Street to Highway 217, the question for public officials is not whether a future connection is "precluded" by the proposed LID, Page 2 Mr. Randall R. Wooley July 24, 1987 t but rather, whether the proposed connection will optimize the use of Triangle property, as well as 150 acres of industrial for the benefit of both the City of property south of Hunziker , Tigard and property owners. According to MSD travel forecasts, traffic moving out of the Triangle will be oriented in a northwesterly direction. Traffic will move toward the Dartmouth Street/Highway 217 interchange to avoid jamming that will occur at the Dartmouth/Pacific Highway intersection. A Dartmouth Street/Highway 217 interchange will provide traffic capacity far in excess of the Dartmouth/99W intersection. Therefore, the primary traffic movement out of the Triangle will be westbound towards the Highway 217 interchange rather than 99W if the Highway 217 interchange is constructed. i However, if a connection with Highway 217 in the form of a "stub road" off of the current LID design is built, it will require such westbound traffic on Dartmouth Street to make a left turn in order to reach the interchange with Highway 217. Such a left turn movement will greatly reduce the efficiency of the Triangle traffic circulation system by forcing westbound traffic to queue up in left turn lanes on Dartmouth Street in order to make the turn necessary to reach Highway 217. As suggested by Tom Schwab in his letter dated December 7, 1984, traffic volume assignments, projecting both traffic volumes and general traffic direction, are essential to evaluate the design and workability of any road system. Such traffic assignments will soon be available from the I-5/217 interchange study. This will allow the City to coordinate the final design and construction of the Dartmouth LID with the State's Study and improvements. t pig i Page 3 Mr. Randall R. Wooley July 24, 1987 t In part, Washington Square 's success is directly related to the superior access it has due to its two separate access points on Highway 217. The City of Tigard should design such superior access for the Triangle. truly y�ou�rs, �V /Charles D. Ruttan CDR:lko cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin Tom Schwab Rick Keuhn The Honorable Tom Brian Timothy Ramis �J DARTMOUTH LID TRAFFIC CONCERNS AND RELATED ISSUES vcikm I Submitted by: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS b TONGUE Charles D. Ruttan Douglas V. Van Dyk Attorneys for Gordon R. Martin and Gordon S. Martin ' TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I Page Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 1 Summary of Exhibits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Exhibits Logan letter (3/29/68) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Bothman letter (2/14/79) . .lA Howard letter (7/23/79) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1B Bothman letter (5/4/79) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Kittelson letter (3/7/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 Schwab letter (3/14/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3A G. R. Martin letter (3/29/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Kittelson letter (4/12/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Hardt letter (4/30/85) . . . . .5A Schwab letter (5/6/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 G. S. Martin letter ( 5/8/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 MSD Memo (5/16/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Kittelson Traffic Study (8/20/85) . • • • . • • . • . . .9 ODOT Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Hardt letter (9/4/85) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Pollock Letter (1/20/86) . . .11A Tyler letter (2/5/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 G. S. Martin letter (2/10/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 ATEP Memo ( 4/14/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Kittelson letter (5/13/86) . . . .15 G. S. Martin letter ( 5/22/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Kittelson letter (7/18/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 G. S. Martin letter (5/22/86) . . . . .16 Kittelson letter (7/18/81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 City Staff letter (6/24/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Tyler letter (7/21/86) . . . . .19 City Staff letter (7/22/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 G. S. Martin letter (8/12/86) . . . . . . .21 Jack E. Leisch & Assoc. letter (8/20/86) . . . .22 Ruttan letter (9/16/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23 G. S. Martin letter (10/21/86) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 VOLUME II ATEPStudy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Agenda Item Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 ORS 366.507 (Highway Funding) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 ATEP 2005 P.M. Peak-hour Traffic at Pacific Highway/Dartmouth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Current P.M. Peak-hour Traffic at Pacific Highway/78th Avenuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . .28A i I I I ODOT 2005 P.M. Peak-hour Traffic at ( Pacific Highway/ Dartmouth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28B { Kittelson 2005 P.M. Peak-hour Traffic at Pacific Highway/Dartmouth. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .28C Ruttan letter (3/3/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 Woelk/Kittelson letter (3/16/87) . . . . . . . . . . . .30 Memo, City Staff (3/16/87) . . . . . . : : : : : : : : : : : .31 Kuehn letter (3/16/87) . . •32 Kittelson Analysis of ATEP�Study. . . . . . . . . . . .33 City Staff letter (3/30/87) : : : : : : : : : : : : : : .34 Ruttan letter (4/1/87) . .35 Ruttan letter (4/17/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 t Ruttan letter (4/22/87) . . . . . . . . : : : : : : : : : : : .37 1{ Ruttan/Van Dyk letter (4/21/87) . .38 Ramis letter (4/24/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39 Ramis letter (5/4/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 [ Ramis letter (5/5/87) . . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : .41 i Ruttan letter (5/27/87) . . . . .42 Ruttan letter (5/29/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 Schwab letter (6/1/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Ruttan letter (6/12/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 ' Schwab letter (6/12/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 City Staff letter (6/15/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 MSD Staff letter (6/18/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : .48 Schwab letter (7/9/87) . . . . .49 Ruttan letter (7/24/87) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Ruttan letter (8/6/87) . : : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : •51 Ruttan letter (8/6/87) . .52 Kittelson Intersection Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Wright's Intersection Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Survey of Dartmouth/Pacific Highway. . . . . . . . .55 Maps: Triangle and Washington Square. . . . . . .56 ATEPTriangle Trips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57 Martin v. City of Tigard: Excerpts of Opening Brief. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Harrier Consultants letter (8/6/87) . . . . . . . . .59 i I i . l � i 2 1 _ 1 ff OVERVIEW 1 ' On April 9, 1984, when Dartmouth LID #40 was formed, traffic studies focusing on the impact of such road system had not been completed. Subsequently it has been determined by all the traffic experts involved that building a south- erly access ( "South Access" ) out of the Tigard Triangle is necessary for the Dartmouth LID road system to function at an acceptable level of service in the future. The Oregon Department of Transportation ( "ODOT") has not determined whether such South Access is feasible or, if so, its loca- tion. Such determination must await the completion of the I-5/217 Interchange Study currently being prepared at ODOT' s direction. 1 If it is not constructed, ODOT's written position is that the LID, as designed, will create an unacceptable level F of service at the intersection of Dartmouth and Pacific Highway, and therefore permits should not issue. If the LID is to proceed without assurance that the South Access will be built, the City should immediately impose equitable limitations on the amount of development that can occur on any parcel within the boundaries of the Triangle, or at least LID #40, for the reason that develop- ment consistent with existing zoning will generate so much traffic that the Dartmouth/Pacific Highway intersection will break down. C{ Since the early 1970 's the Martins have advocated that any road system in the area of the Dartmouth LID be built in one phase. In March 1984 they anticipated the findings of the traffic studies and therefore suggested that if the LID had to be built, it be done in phases, but suggesting that r the LID not proceed, for a variety of reasons, to include 11 site grades. Depending on the type of use the land is put to, site grades will vary significantly. In 1987 the Martins still believe the subject road system should be built at one time including the South Access; however, if a road system to be begun before all ( the issues are addressed, they suggest phases and develop- ment restrictions so that design flexibility can be maintained for construction of the South Access and site grading. I I 3 i 1 I f I f ` CONCLUSIONS i 1. South Access. All parties concerned agree that i building a southerly access ("South Access" ) out of the Tigard Triangle as part of a new roadway system connecting t Interstate 5, Pacific Highway and Highway 217, may be neces- sary if future development is to occur consistent with existing zoning. (Exhibits 30, 31, and 32) . F 2. Location, South Access. The location of the con- nection between the South Access and Highway 217 cannot be determined until additional transportation studies, includ- ing ODOT's I-5/Highway 217 Interchange Study, are completed. Therefore the question of whether the South ` Access connection can be designed into the. Highway 217 sys- tem cannot be answered at this time. ODOT has indicated that it will consider designing a South Access into its system as part of the I-5/Highway 217 Interchange Study if the City states that it supports a South Access for the Triangle. (Exhibits 30, 31, 32, and 34) . 3. Funding, South Access. If the South Access connec- tion is feasible and is incorporated into the improvements to the I-5/Highway 217 Interchange, then state funding may be available to assist in its construction. (Exhibits 27, 32, and 12) . 1 4. Development Density Restrictions. The City must legislate equitable limitations on density of development �f and trips generated by such development in the Triangle in order to anticipate the South Access not being constructed. 4 r f i i i l 5. Design Difficulties. 5.1. Connection to Highway 217. Connecting the current LID design to Highway 217 will interfere with the f efficient flow of traffic within the Triangle. For example, l connection with the current LID design will require traffic moving westbound toward Highway 217 to make left turns across the north-south portion of Dartmouth in order to proceed toward the Highway 217 connection. (Exhibit 42) . 5.2. Built-in obsolescence. The ATEP year 2005 forecast is apparently predicated on the addition of only 19.7 acres of new development beyond existing levels out of approximately 219 acres available for development. (Exhibit 25 at 17-20) . Based on this low buildout assumption, ATEP concludes that the Dartmouth LID will have to be altered and F expanded to a five-lane road once this development occurs. r In this regard, it is necessary to immediately preserve lright of way for a six lane cross section at the intersec- tion of Dartmouth and Pacific Highway, although construction has already begun where such right of way should be obtained and curb cuts have been established which will reduce the efficiency of the intersection. (Exhibit 25 at 13A, 13B, 13C) . 5.3. Grades. Road grades should be established. after site grades have been determined. Site grade charac- teristics are critically important to a developer 's efforts to attract large regional developments. Construction of the I 5 f \ proposed LID may prevent property owners from attracting large developments by eliminating the opportunity to meet { necessary site grade requirements. Furthermore, large re- gional retail developments generate fewer total trips per acre than small retail developments. (Exhibit 59) . 5.4. Preserve Right-of-way to Highway 217. The City should preserve as much area as possible from develop- ment until it is determined where the South Access will connect to Highway 217, and where the road system will ulti- mately be located. This will allow property to develop to [ its best potential. i 5. 5 Contrast With Washington Square. Washington Square is developed on approximately 120 acres and has 15 lanes available for traffic exiting the area. (Exhibit 56 tat 2) . By contrast, the Triangle, which has 333 acres available for development, will also have only 15 lanes available for traffic exiting the area if the South Access j is constructed. t 6. Assumption. Although the traffic consultants con- cur on the South Access, they differ markedly in their analysis. 6.1. Employment. ATEP's employment assumptions for the Triangle are significantly lower than assumptions devel- oped by Wayne Kittelson and agreed to by ODOT. Current MSD employment forecasts are consistent with Mr. Kittelson's forecasts. Employment assumptions are the analytical i 6 i I I i foundations for projections about future traffic in the Tri- angle. Low employment forecasts result in low traffic projections. (Exhibits 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 33, and 52) . 6.2. Potential Traffic. Traffic generating poten- tial of 25% of the land within the Triangle available for i commercial development is unaccounted for by ATEP in its full development scenario. (Exhibits 52, and 33) . 6.3. Buildout. ATEP's assumptions reflect only a 25.7% commercial buildout of development for the year 2005, although the report incorrectly states such buildout to be f I70%. The Kittelson Study (with which ODOT concurred) pro- jects a 55% buildout in the year 2005. Thus, ATEP' s study results in an estimated total of only 4, 140 p.m. per hour t vehicle trips in the Triangle versus 14,620 such p.m. peak hour vehicle trips during the year 2005 under the Kittelson/ODOT L analysis. (Exhibits 9; 33; 25 at 2; 18, 20 r and 57) . , 6 6.4. Diversions of Traffic. The conclusions of the ATEP report imply that large volumes of through traffic on k Pacific Highway will divert to other roadways. This diver- sion results from the green light priority necessarily given b to Triangle traffic entering Pacific Highway at Dartmouth. The congestion is assumed to result in lower westbound traf- fic volumes on Pacific Highway than currently exist, despite expansion of Pacific Highway from four to six lanes. (Exhi- bits 25 at 11-12, 51 at 2-3) . j 7 i I I 7. Legal Considerations. The following issues will probably have to be litigated: 7.1. Bid. Whether the project must be let for bid prior to any assessment hearing. (Exhibits 35, 38, 39, 40, and 41) . 7.2 Taking. Whether the City's proposed condem- nation of Martin's property is an unconstitutional taking. (Exhibits 38 and 40) . 7.3. Permit. Whether the City's permit application meets the standards established by Oregon Administrative Rule. (Exhibits 5A, 11, 37, 49, 51, and 52) . I f f 8 I f SUMMARY OF EXHIBITS t i 1 I. E Introduction t This document is a summary of the critical concerns confronting the City of Tigard in deciding whether to pro- ceed with the Dartmouth LID. A significant percentage of Tigard's total developable retail and office property lies I within the Triangle le area. Efficient and maximum economic ndent on a road network capable returns to the City are depea i of handling, at a reasonable level of service, all traffic j generated. t The design of such road network should include: (1) a it south Access out of the Triangle connecting Dartmouth Street So k to Highway 217; (2) a five-lane arterial collector running f ass at High- from Interstate 5 to Highway 217; (3) an overpass way 217; (4) a three-lane major -art-er3aY�1% collector g, i y yh connecting Dartmouth Street to Pacific Highway, expanded to six lanes at the intersection of 78th and Dartmouth; and (h �r 217 to Hall (5) a three-lane -�-tf�a� collector from Highway i Boulevard to service the 150 acres of industrial land south of Hunziker. If the road network is designed to incorporate these characteristics, sufficient traffic capacity would exist in f the Triangle to develop Triangle property to its full eco- nomic potential. 9 i I II. The Traffic Issue: The First Step is to Develop Accurate Employment Assumptions for the Triangle The Martins have studied the traffic issues associated with development of the Triangle since 1968. (Exhibit 1) . When zoning in the Triangle changed from industrial and residential to commercial designations, it became apparent i ` that the road would not provide sufficient traffic capacity to allow the Triangle to fully develop and maximize its V potential. In January of 1985, CH2M Hill engineer Wayne Kittelson i began studying the Dartmouth LID to determine whether it would be adequate to service future traffic demand in the Triangle. The first step in such a review is to analyze ` land use designations to determine the kind of development expected to occur in the Triangle area. Based on these land use designations, Mr. Kittelson began formulating employment assumptions for the Triangle. The assumptions focused on projected levels of development, or on percentage "buildout" i in the year 2005. From these employment assumptions, Mr. Kittelson could make projections about the amount of i traffic that would be generated by the Triangle. It should be noted that Mr. Kittelson could not use MSD employment forecasts because those forecasts had not been updated to reflect changes in zoning from industrial to retail and residential to office. (Exhibit 8) . I 10 I Elli i Mr. Kittelson coordinated the development of his as- sumptions with professionals at the Oregon Department of Transportation. ( "ODOT") . (Exhibit 5) . After much discus- sion, ODOT agreed to the key assumptions to be used by Mr. Kittelson for a traffic analysis of the Triangle. (Ex- hibits 3, 3A, 5, 5A and 6) . Based on these assumptions, Gordon R. Martin agreed to hire Mr. Kittelson to prepare a thorough study of traffic issues connected with Triangle development. (Exhibit 4) . ODOT, meanwhile, informed the City of Tigard that a permit would not issue for access to Pacific if such access would "create undue traffic problems on 99W" . (Exhibit 5A) . III . The Kittelson Traffic Study: Severe Operational Problems Will Result If the Dartmouth LID is Constructed as Planned Mr. Kittelson's study, set forth in its entirety as Exhibit 9, concluded that the Dartmouth LID would result in i severe traffic problems for the Triangle: " (N]o reasonable design of the Dartmouth Drive Extension/Pacific Highway intersection will accom- modate the expected 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic demands without substantial changes in the LID road { system. * * * Operational problems will begin to appear before the year 2000, and could become sig- nificantly worse than is indicated in this report if actual buildout of the Tigard Triangle exceeds our assumption" . j (Exhibit 9 at 1) . Mr. Kittelson's conclusions were reviewed by ODOT and they concurred with the findings. (Exhibit 9 3 at 1; Exhibit 11) . Indeed, the professional staff at ODOT 11 f r performed their own analysis and came to the same conclu- sions as Mr. Kittelson. (Exhibit 10) . As a result of Mr. Kittelson's study, the Department of Transportation notified the City by letter that "the Dart- mouth connection, as currently conceived, would result in an undesirable level of service on 99W" . (Exhibit 11) . Ed Hardt, ODOT's Regional Engineer, further stated as follows: "My analysis is that two major areas need to + be addressed: t "The first is for the City to de- velop a local circulation system within the Tigard Triangle to minimize transpor- tation problems within the area itself. This should include the consideration of major north/south and/or east/west trans- portation spines. 4 "The second major need to be ad- dressed is to identify with the Metropolitan Service District and other jurisdictions the necessary improvements to the major state highways in order to i serve the Triangle area. g "Based on the information I have to date, I I have come to two conclusions: "(1) The proposed Dartmouth connec- tion to 99W (plans which have not been formally presented to us) will cause an unacceptable level of service for that intersection, so the Dartmouth Street connection plan needs to be reconsidered by the City. What is needed is a local circulation plan for the entire [T]ri- angle, which should be developed by the City. 11 (2) The broader issue of how the r Tigard Triangle is to be accessed in the 12 t future needs to be addressed. This ac- cess requires an adequate internal circulation plan by the City, as well as coordination with the Metropolitan Ser- vice District and ODOT to develop proposals for the improvements needed to the highway and road systems serving the Triangle area" . (Exhibit 11) . Thus, the Department of Transportation con- firmed not only the accuracy of the Kittelson study, it also plainly established that the Dartmouth LID would not service the traffic demands of the Triangle. IV. The A7 Study: Even With UnreasonablyLow Assum tions, I The Dartmouth Pacific Highway Intersection Will Cause "Intolerable Delays' The City funded its own study of Triangle traffic ,T issues. The study was performed by Associated Transpor- tation Engineers & Planners, Inc. (ATEP) . In an effort to develop consistent methodologies and assumptions between the stud and the Kittelson/ODOT analysis, a preliminary ATEP y xanalysis of the assumptions and methodology utilized in the s report was released on April 14, 1986. (Exhibit 14) . After reviewing these assumptions, Mr. Kittelson and the Martins of ATEP and City staff several brought to the attention c. concerns. (Exhibit 15, 16, 17) . As a result, it was shown that ATEP's analysis was "underestimating future employment levels within the Tigard Triangle area", and that "applying MSD's employee density figures in combination with (ATEP's) 13 E 1 I employment projections suggests that only 12 additional acres will be developed into retail activities and only 29 additional acres will be developed into office activities by [the year] 2005" although there are 219 acres of property available for development. (Exhibit 17 at 4) . City staff, however, took the position that " [p]redicting future employ- ment levels is really not a critical part of the [ATEP] study" . (Exhibit 18) . Yet, as Mr. Kittelson pointed out, "developing an accurate estimate of total future employment within the Tigard Triangle is a critical component of any traffic study for this area, since employment levels are highly correlated with vehicle trip-making potential" . (Exhibit 17 at 2) . Failure to accurately project population I employment levels in the Triangle is now one of the prin- cipal flaws in the ATEP study. ATEP's inventory of developable land was also incor- rect. In defense of ATEP, City staff argued that, because the Tigard comprehensive plan assumed that certain areas are not buildable due to the presence of slopes, drainage ways, and other restrictions, ATEP's land inventory was accurate. (Exhibit 18) . As explained by Mr. Kittelson: "[M]ost new developments do not even come close to full lot coverage. Today's developer must meet minimum City requirements with respect to such elements as surface parking, landscaping, open space, and buffer areas. These requirements can be and often are met through use of on-site sensitive lands without sacrificing the overall densities that are normally achieved. " 14 i (Exhibit 17 at 2) . On this point, city staff suggested that the Martins contact senior planner Elizabeth Newton at City i Hall. Mr. Kittelson contacted Ms. Newton, who echoed his belief that such land should be included in the land use inventory. According to Mr. Kittelson, Ms. Newton stated i ts are able to achieve maximum that "many Tigard developmen allowable densities without constructing on secisitive or ' otherwise unbuildable lands" . Exhibit 17 at 3) . The ATEP report was submitted to the City Council on November 7, 1986. The full report is set forth as Exhibit 25.1 ATEP's "target for evaluating and planning for the street system" is an "E" level of service, which describes an "unstable flow, congestion, intolerable delay [and] [d]uring peak periods, there will be long queues of vehicles and delays may be great" . (Exhibit 25 at 2, 8) . An "E" level of service is slightly better than an "F" level of service, which describes a road system that has "basically broKen down" . (Exhibit 25 at 8) . ODOT' s stan- dard for evaluating level of service is "D" and above. (Exhibit 33 at 4) . The ATEP report concluded that the intersection of Dartmouth and 99W would function at an "E" level of service from the year 1995 on through full buildout [1] Pages have been consecutively numbered for ease of refer- ence. ATEP's map of Traffic Analysis Zones has been added on at a final page to the exhibit in order to make references to such zones in the ATEP report more understandable. 15 of the Triangle with or without intersection improvements. (Exhibit 25 at 10-11) . To maintain this "E" level of ser- vice throughout the development of the Triangle, ATEP had to assume that exiting traffic would have green light priority f which would cause through traffic on Pacific Highway to "divert * * * to alternative routes" in order to avoid de- lays and jamming at the intersection of Dartmouth and Pacific Highway. (Exhibit 25 at 11-12) . Nevertheless, the report made the following recommendation: "The City [should] explore the possibility of an additional route providing access to the Tri- angle and oriented to employee trips. This may involve a new overcrossing of Highway 217 and con- nection to an appropriate street south of 217 such as Hunziker. The determination of an appropriate route was not considered as part of this study since its location will depend greatly on the Ore- gon Department of Transportation improvements to the [Highway] 217/I-5/Lake Oswego interchange" . [ (Exhibit 25 at 12) . Thus, while the report concluded that ' development of the Tigard Triangle would not "create an unacceptable level of service" , it also made it apparent ' that the system would result in "intolerable delays" in the t Triangle area unless changes were made to the circulation [ i plan for the Triangle. (Exhibit 25 at 11) . Yet even these dire conclusions were based on very low, inadequate assumptions utilized in the report. (Exhibit 33) . Mr. Kittelson submitted a detailed review of the ATEP `• study, stating: " [T]he [ATEP] report underestimates the traf- fic generation potential of the Tigard Triangle. 16 4 i i This is very significant because the assumed trip generation characteristics represent the basis for the entire traffic analysis. Also, the report does not identify a number of significant bottlenecks and points of peak hour congestion, nor does it describe a future internal street circulation sys- tem capable of accommodating the expected future i travel demands". (Exhibit 33 at 1) . After describing numerous errors relating to the inventory of land available for development, j Mr. Kittelson states: i "In summary, the ATEP report errs in its esti- mate of the total amount of land available within the Tigard Triangle. It also errs °n its estimate of the total amount of land within the Tigard Tri- angle that is already developed. Finally, it errs ( in its calculation of the percent buildout para- meter. If only the errors of fact identified thus far are taken into account, then the following effect can be seen: ATEP Corrected { Estimate Estimate k. 72.3% 35.9% Current buildout of the Tigard Triangle ( ( including commercial i and residential land areas) 78.0% 41.3% 2005 buildout of the Tigard Triangle ( in- cluding commercial and residential land areas) "The effect of the errors thus far identified is shown in the above table. Clearly, the ATEP report predicts much less potential for additional traffic into and out of the Tigard Triangle than is actually the case". (Exhibit 33 at 4) . Equally striking is the fact that the ATEP report actu- ally projected a decrease in traffic volume on Pacific r i 17 f t Highway in the future, even though ATEP projected that Paci- fic Highway would be widened from a four-lane to a six- or (� i seven-lane road. (Exhibit 33 at 6) . By reducing traffic 1 i t below even current levels, ATEP was able to conclude that the intersection of Dartmouth/Pacific Highway would operate at an "E" level of service under the 2005 buildout sce- nario. As stated by Mr. Kittelson, such "projections should { z I be considered highly suspect" , and "a more reasonable esti- i E mate of the turning movement volumes at this location would cause an intersection to operate in a forced flow mode ( i.e. , at an "F" LOS) " . (Exhibit 33 at 6) . Additionally, Mr. Kittelson found that the ATEP report "assumes that the peak hour trip generation rate for commer- cial properties inside the Tigard Triangle drops about 60% * * * between 2005 and the time that full buildout condi- x tions are reached. " (Exhibit 33 at 7) . There is no explanation for this change in the number of vehicle trips. As stated by Mr. Kittelson: "There is no reason to i assume that trip generation rates will change significantly over time for land uses located within the Triangle, and s certainly not by the magnitude identified above" . (Exhibit 33 at 7) . The deficiencies of the ATEP report may be placed in stark relief by comparing one of the more inexplicable as- sumptions with ODOT's and Mr. Kittelson's assumptions. As stated in a letter to ODOT: 18 � i Jill ii - 1 i i E "It is clear that traffic moving west and making the left turn from 99W to Dartmouth Street is severely underestimated in the ATEP study. The ATEP study identifies 57 such left turns under 2005 i p.m. peak hour conditions, based on a 38% buildout [see Exhibit 25 at 20, 341 . However, both the ! Kittelson study, which assessed the same left turns at this intersection to be 440 cars during the 2005 p.m. peak hour based on a 55% buildout [Exhibit 9 at 1, 9] , and [ODOT's] analysis which identifies these p.m. peak hour traffic movements at 305 cars based on a 39% buildout, refute ATEP's contention f (Exhibit 37) . Thus, in this one turning movement, ODOT estimated over five times as many cars as ATEP based on approximately the same amount of buildout. Also, since the ATEP report was completed, Washington County has done a thorough review of the land use assump- tions for the Triangle area. These assumptions are contained in the 1987 Washington County Transportation Plan Update. They vary dramatically from assumptions utilized by r ATEP for the same traffic zones: {! 1987 Washington County Transaction Plan Update ( 2005 Employment Growth Retail Office Traffic Zone 129 693 -80 Traffic Zone 226 375 4,164 1,068 4,084 i 19 R { I t f ATEP 2005 Employment Growth Retail Office Traffic Zone 129 320 418 Traffic Zone 226 36 1 ,631 68u 2,049 l (Exhibit 52 at 2) . Thus, ATEP differs in employment growth projections by more than 308 retail employees and 2,035 office employees from the most recent analysis of employment growth projections for the Triangle area. V. All of the Professional Analysts Agree, Including ATEP, That the Dartmouth LID is Inadequate to Meet Future Traffic Demand The ATEP engineers met with Kittelson, MOT and the City of Tigard to discuss the ATEP analysis. After this t meeting, ATEP acknowledged in a letter to the Tigard City f Council that: "Given current allowable development levels within the Tigard Triangle, a collector/distributor f road that only connects I-5 and Pacific Highway will not be sufficient to accommodate future travel demands into and out of the Tigard Triangle at a significant percentage of buildout. It is neces- sary to provide at least one additional major entry/exit point to the Triangle area. The precise location of this new access point is not yet clear; however, projected traffic flow patterns show a need for an additional connection and/or crossing of Highway 217 by the new collector/distributor . "The specific location and design specifi- cations of such a collector/distributor is dependent in part on the results of the I-5/Kruse Way interchange study. Therefore, the appropriate steps should be taken to preserve the right-of-way and flexibility necessary in completing this in- ternal system" . 20 (Exhibit 30) . Thus, after consultation with other profes- sionals, ATEP is acknowledging that, given current Triangle zoning, the Dartmouth LID will be inadequate to meet future traffic demands in the Triangle. In a letter to the Honorable Tom Brian, the regional engineer for ODOT, Mr. Richard Kuehn, stated: " [T]he Triangle area will most likely need access within the southerly portion. How this southerly access will be provided is still the open question that will not be answered until our I-5/217 Interchange Study is completed and the City j of Tigard does additional looking at the circu- lation pattern for the Triangle. Our interchange study comes into play because it will most likely revise the 72nd Avenue/217 interchange" . (Exhibit 32) . City staff concurred in this position. (Exhibit 31) . As suggested by Mr. Kuehn, the I-5/217 Interchange Study may show that a southerly access out of the Triangle is needed due to changes made to the 72nd Street onramp. If that is the case, State funding will be available for its i construction. The Martins have also consulted with a nationally- recognized traffic engineering firm in Illinois, Jack E. Leisch & Associates, in order to assist in developing a traffic circulation plan for the Triangle area. (Exhibit 22) . Representatives of this engineering firm met with the Martins, ODOT, CH2M and interested property owners, including a representative from HGW, Inc. , on September 4, 21 i s i 1986. After the meeting, it was acknowledged between ODOT and the Martins that "Mr. Leisch' s design proposal for the Tigard Triangle interchange is one of several designs alter- natives that can be tied into ODOT' s current plans to ` reconstruct the I-5 and Pacific Highway interchanges that intersect Highway 217, thereby mitigating costs" . (Exhi- bit 23) . Mr . Leisch acknowledged at the meeting that ` connecting the Tigard Triangle to Highway 217 will help ` solve several current regional transportation problems asso- ciated with I-5, Pacific Highway, and Highway 217. (Exhibit 23) . VI. There are Serious Le al Problems With the Current LID Which Must be Addressed Before Proceeding With the Project The following is a list of objections to the legality of this LID which must be addressed before this project can 1 proceed: A. As currently conceived, the LID will result in a 1 condemnation of a portion of Martins' property and transfer of that portion to another Triangle property owner . This I plan constitutes a taking of property for a private rather than a public purpose, which is unconstitutional. (Exhibit 38 at 1; Exhibit 58 at 6) . B. The Tigard Municipal Code requires that this pro- ject be let out to bid prior to assessment. (Exhibit 58 at i t 2; Exhibits 35, 39, 40 and 41) . 22 i t C. No consideration has been given to the differences f in special benefits to be derived by the different property I owners. (Exhibit 58 at 6) . D. In error, four properties have been removed from the proposed assessment roll on a challenged finding of "no Ebenefit" . (Exhibit 58 at 6) . E. No consideration was given to the special benefits to be derived by the City and different property owners due to the fact that much of the land area within the Triangle fis designated for commercial office development. Therefore, I traffic generated from office and residential development in S the Triangle will provide benefit to the City as a whole. f (Exhibit 58 at 6; Exhibit 57) . ' t F. Petitioner had understood that it was collectively agreed among the City and the Dartmouth LID property owners i that the LID would not proceed to assessment unless and 9 until a consensus was reached on the alignment of S. W. Dartmouth Street and the assessment plan. (Exhibit 58 at 5) . 4 r 4 ![t G. The proposed assessment scheme has, to this date, been based upon the city engineer 's preliminary feasibility study and engineering report. These plans, specifications, { and gross cost estimates were wholly inadequate for assess- ment purposes. (Exhibit 58 at 6) . a H. The City must establish that the Dartmouth LID will 1 not unduly interfere with the surrounding highway system 23 ELM t_ fbefore a permit will be granted for access to Pacific High- way. In view of the fact that the Dartmouth LID must cause the diversion of large amounts of traffic off of Pacific Highway in order to maintain an "E" level of service at the Dartmouth/Pacific Highway intersection, it is very likely ! that such interference will occur. (Exhibit 25 at 11) . 1 These and other legal issues must be addressed before I this project can proceed. 1 I E I i i t I . 24 I UMMSIXIM CITE' OF TIGARD " ® 12420 5. W. Main 5troet TIGARD, OREGON l+7Z23 E March 29, 1968 F Mr. Gordon Martin ! 12265 S. W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 i Dear Mr. Martin: w 1 This is in response to our conversation concerning your property located in the vicinity of S. W. 72nd Avenue. This property, as you are aware, is located in the triangle ` A area formed by the Tigard-Beaverton Expressway, I-5, and j 1 99W. The City of Tigard considers this entire area to be k commercial and has it so designated on its long range master plan for land use. Some of the area now includes residential uses, but it is our feeling that this use is transitional and that ultimately, single family residential uses will cease to exist. ' The City of Tigard is quite concerned over the street system to be built in this area. It is Staff feeling that S. W. Clinton Street should be extended from I-5 to 72nd Avenue, and perhaps further to the west. This, we feel, will be a very important terminus from I-5. In addition, S. W. Clinton will serve as a secondary exit from I-5 to Tigard. The City of Tigard is also concerned about improvement to S. W. 72nd ` Avenue. As you are aware, this road is under county jurisdiction and the City has recommended to the county that it be included in the Federal Aid secondary system for eventual widening to either two large lanes or four lanes. Please be assured the City of Tigard stands ready to be of any assistance possible in assisting you with your project. if additional questions arise please do not hesitate in calling on me. Si erely, � " R bert K. Logan City Administrator _ RKL/dl E PAGE 7 L.` } Department of Transportation METROP®LITAPJ BRANCOREGON 97213 5821 N.E. GLISAN, PORTLA"40' Telephone 238-8226 February 14, 1979 c s F Gordon R. Martin 12265 Southwest 72nd Avenue + Tigard, OR 97223 It is appropriate to follow up our discussions and finalize my response to your proposal to developadditionalaccess to Highway 217 G between Southwest 72nd Avenue and9VI sal om a It has not been possible outfalloodvaluate handle one the volumesrof traffic s geometric standpoint without 9 { I to s you ble involved. It doesappear appeometric�standpointstrpependingaupon the have proposed from 9 volume of ry traffic, it m►a-thboundbe cbetweent72ndvAvenuenand x99W,awhich F I lane, or third lane, no is not now included in the 72nd Avenue interchange redesign.217, an � With the overload projecteduor,allowing vehicles aquicker aaccess rtoange ramp would have the effect il nificant. the highway, causing additiona generated, thesimpactsHshould notowever if be ( peak hour volumes are ge The ramps would have the effect of reducing traffic on 99W an A 72nd Avenue. E In reviewing your proposal , we do have a major concern with the r near Pfaffle Road. The connection is undesirable, connection to 99W � as you have proposed, and would urnaconflicts attboth elocations. s 99W which would result re left t intersection. Pfaffle Road should be realigned to provide a four way The alternatives shown in the +igard comprehensive plan would appear tto satisfy these requirements. ' It can be anticipated that thesofftrampial cost the onlramp,be itherstructures r to provide the ahe n iary to separate the northbound do 99W,aand providethe theGolden necessaryTriangle ignalization the northbound off-ramp you have described. rouwhich,istaogood assumption soince theld e ld borne by the developer, Department has no funds available. out The Department is giving serious aonsimetering1systemon oonhh ramps metropolitan regio Pr ovidingthe freeways. This has the effect of limiting the access to the freeway from any given point, allowing the freeways to operate at t EXHIBIT J-L A PAGE Letter to Gordon R. Martin February 14, 1979 �. page 2 a satisfactory level of service. With the increasing demand on the freeways and without additional freeways planned, this seems to be the only way to maintain a reasonable level of service. With the anticipated overload of Highway 217, there certainly is some question in my mind whether it is reasonable to consider additional access where there is current access to the property via Haines Road connection to I-5 and Pfaffle connection to 99W. I do understand your frustration in dealing successfully with the city of Tigard, Washington County, and the state of Oregon. As I suggested at our last discussion, it would seem appropriate that you meeJt-);ollectively with the participants from the three juris- dictioYifrvolved w as DEQ and MSD. R. N. Bothman Metropolitan Administrator RNB/ke cc: F. B. Klaboe J. H. Versteeg E. L. ,ardt John Crockett Raeldon Barker William Ockert William Young C EXHIBIT PAGE 4 6 ho�W— CITY OF T'IGARD P.O.Box 23397 12420 S.W.Main Tigard,Oregon 97223 -July 23, 1979 i i rr_:ar Property Ownet: 1 ::e Tigard City Council ;,t a Stv y semsio% on July 15, 1979, heard a pre-;ente.ti•Jn tv mc- conc-'rn- il1T . prono-arl ='•��f ?'SE('t.L.7^. r:t: T�^1.�.� Ffl�}L.�� !('a: . and Pfaffle. This iter, wtz brought- to Ccunc I's artention followir,a rcceirt of a letter to me. `rort Mr. Gordon Martin. !ail-. Msrtin x••ish:s to devalop a large portion of land South 9.)W and East of Fighwav 211. Neichborhoot; Planning organ is:ati.on #.'. (13r1- �4) through ti-e Plan- ning Co:n^►ission and the City Council, a -.-try encr<il pian for -:sects through the area. The realign^w_nt of Dartmcuth from I-5 Ws:st through NPO f4 then :5_-:h to Pfrffle across 99V" is !tie;*cated on the plan and we no,., nee:d to resol•.t• the alignment issue. Several thing> lin ve %ap;lenc d: mr. vuirtin's deve:l,.pmer.t has tat:cn Sha.e, 71he Rol-'rt Randall Corrpany Las proposed to purcha.S2 pron:.zty from t Mrs. Niearson, marine Lumh::i i.s fcrr..aliziny plans to re-ci!velore their and mr. hler.3nder of Burger. Boy has brco.tte ittvolved ill this issue. The Oreg,�n De artlrent of Transportation (:.DOT) will regues: hills for tl:e Transrortation System Xanrcemnt (T:'M) pro;^ct ir. August. This prr3j0cwill inv�Ivs• the irr-prow:meat of 99W ft ono 54th Avenel-: to Bull Mountain Poad :pit?1 realignr-ent of ce-train st_eeLs, installation of signal lights, installaLion cf a signal synchronizing system, etc. The cost is estinEited to be in emcc:rs of one million dollars. ► what does all this mean to you? ODOT has told us that any majur $.i-valop- mrit along 99:5 will have: to 11a?just" to this r.er _•m sysL . This "arljost:^ent" that 1 .. � 1 �• �. • r a' II:C�1:..; .it b�•y.. de"iG 7j�atr+L:.a Lu.�- u7..va= .Gvi:a:btS�c ... .b b-•eE. s.tiu.�i •.. t•i." blems. 99W is carrying 35,000 cars per Aay r,c�+ and ir.r relst�] c��valmrer.: in Sherwood, Tigard, and points: s:,uth will continua to cauze us all problems, i With this in .rind, anal knowintt t.hac we must all conperata? to resolve mutual problems, I woule like to weet with you •1'hlrsea/, T.uwst 2, 1979, her^ at Citj hall at 9:00 P.M. At. 'that tit.- we will briefly outline. tlr- TS:: olar., outline proposed d(":e lopntent irl the arc a, the NPU "d Dian, and - - to resolve this iusuc. If jou are unabl^ tc attend p1e4 r alvise. If you net-6 inforrtrtior. or voulh li}:r to ask please call m: at 6.,9-4171. You ' AldiE ;:a:aa:r (•leaning Direct•.: 'AIn ExNIBIT 4. e PAGE ��, .K(a`l Department of Transportation r METROPOLITAN BRANCH xur W.SIRAUS 5821 N.E. GLISAN, PORTLAND, OREGON 97213 May 4, 1979 Telephone 238-8226 Charles D. Ruttan Attorney at Law 1700 Standard Plaza ' Portland OR 97201 l I have further reviewed your proposal to develop and signalize the Pfaffle/Dartmouth intersection on Highway 99E, as shown on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. My understanding is that your proposal is to develop and signalize this alternative in phases: the first phase consisting of an extension of Dartmouth Road, which will result in a signalized T intersection with 99E, approval of this connection to 99E to be allowed providing the Tigard Comprehensive Plan continues to provide for the full intersection u Pfaffle and Dartmouth at this location. i It is understood that other parties will eventually cause the realign- ment of Pfaffle Road and the full development of the intersection. A signal at the Pfaffle/Dartmouth connection, operating together with a signal at the Pfaffle connection-, could function properly and not cause problems on 99W. The traffic entering from the two side streets would have to be limited to approximately 20 per cent of the total. green time available from the two signals and, therefore, would iaccommodate approximately 300 vehicles per hour, with the two signals in operation. With the high volume of traffic on 99W,+a minimum amount of traffic from the Dartmouth connection would cause a conflict volume, which would require the -installation of a signal . Therefore, it would appear prudent that the Department require a firm commitment to the installation of the signal at the time it approves the Dartmouth connection. The completion of the Pfaffle/Dartmouth intersection as shown on the Tigard Comprehensive Plan would be required when the left turn traffic volume from 99W to Dartmouth Road reached 250 vehicles per hour, because of the offset intersection with Pfaffle Road. In order to permit the connection to Dartmouth, the Department should have some type of definite commitment from some other party or parties that the completion of the Pfaffle/Dartmouth intersection would be accomplished when these volumes were reached. i I EXHIBIT PAGE -Z-- Fw"73&3122 Letter to Charles D. Ruttan i May 4, 1979 page 2 A major, public investment is currently being made to improve the flow of traffic on 99W through the city of Tigard. The project also includes the solving of several , substantial safety problems, as well as improving the access to existing areas along the facility. The purpose of this discussion is simply to ensure that the conditions that are being corrected in the current, major improvement are not allowed to reoccur and cause future problems. Therefore, it appears that the Department should obtain a definite commitment for the signal , as well as a reasonable commitm -:,' for the completion of the Pfaffle/ i Dartmouth intersection. R. N. Bothman Metropolitan Administrator I RNB:ke cc: F. B. Klaboe E. L. Hardt John Crockett Raeldon Barker William Ockert f i . EXHOT I r, Engineers . Planners ? Economists Scientists .BArch 7, 1985 P19259.AO Mr. Thomas H. Schwab Transportation Analysis Manager Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 Dear Tom: The purpose of this letter is to present to you the set of assumptions that we propose to use in the analysis of future (Year 2000) p.m. peak hour traffic conditions for critical state facility intersections in the vicinity of the Tigard Triangle. We do not intend for this analysis to be a com- prehensive and detailed subarea analysis of the Tigard Tri- angle and its vicinity. However, we also recognize that the analysis must be detailed enough so that you and your staff are able to determine whether or not the currently planned road system is likely to result in unacceptable levels of service at one or more intersections. It was agreed at our February 25th meeting that Ed Hardt, Oregon Department of Transportation, will not allow the connection of the Dartmouth Extension LID to Pacific Highway if unacceptable levels of service are identified at one or more intersections. However, the Dartmouth connection may be allowed after acceptable alternatives are identified and implemented (i.e. , the construction of an additional inter- change connection to Highway 217 to work in conjunction with the Dartmouth Extension) . Therefore, we would appreciate it if you would review these assumptions with this objective in i mind, and advise us of any changes or modifications that you think may be necessary. t f Assumptions Related to Future Development i 1. By the Year 2000, the Tigard Triangle area will be built out to 80 percent of its capacity in accor- dance with current zone designations for the area, We believe that this is a conservative assumption, CH2M HILL PNC. PorPPond office 2020 S.W.Fourlh Avenue 2nd Noor.PoNf cnd.Oregon 07201 503-2249190 PDC438.007.1 EXHIBIT 3 _ TELEX 3W103CH2MPTL PACE C I Mr. Thomas H. Schwab Page 2 . March 7, 1985 ( l P19259.AO I given the Triangle's very good access to regional itransportation facilities and its proximity to the Portland metropolitan area. This assumption is also consistent with current planning efforts being conducted by Washington County in the Tualatin Valley Highway, 185th Avenue, and Sunset Highway Corridors. 2. Background traffic volumes on I-5, Highway 217, Pacific Highway, and other major area facilities will be assumed to be represented by Year 2000 projections that have been prepared by the Metro- politan Service District (MSD) . This assumption is supported by the very low Year 2000 growth pro- jections forecast by MSD for the Tigard Triangle area. In particular, MSD's projections indicate that only about 1,100 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips will be produced by the Tigard Triangle area, and about 750 vehicle trips will be attracted. These low numbers represent virtually no change over existing conditions. Therefore, MSD's Year 2000 projections can bafely be assumed to represent "base case" conditions in which no additional growth has occurred within the Tigard Triangle area. 3. Assumed trip generation rates for each major land use type within the Tigard Triangle area will be based on the average rates given in ITE' s Trip Generation Manual (Third Edition) , and then mod- ie as follows: o Trip generation rates for retail-related ac- tivities will be reduced by 20 percent to account for the effect of linked and diverted trips. No adjustment will be made for transit usage (i.e. , it will be assumed that transit usage is negligible for retail activities) . o Trip generation rates for office-related ac- tivities will be adjusted downward by 10 per- cent to account for the effect of transit usage. No adjustment will be made for linked or diverted trips (i.e. , it will be assumed that all p.m. peak hour office-generated trips are new vehicle trips for the road system) . t PDC438.007.2 :. f r Mr. Thomas H. Schwab Page 3 March 7, 1985 ! ( P19259.AO Assumptions Related to Future Trip Distribution Patterns I 4. It will be assumed that trips generated by and attracted to the Tigard Triangle area will be _ b distributed among the various feeder routes and ! major serving roadways in the same proportions projected by MSD as part of their Year 2000 traffic volume forecast. In lieu of better in- formation, this assumption is at least consistent with other analyses being conducted throughout the Portland metropolitan area. Assumptions Related to Level of Service Calculations 5. All level of service calculations for signalized intersections will be performed in accordance with the "Critical Movement Analysis" procedures set f forth in Trans ortation Research Circular 212. i This is a standard procedure that has been f5und to give reasonable projections of level of service for signalized urban intersections. 6. As part of the level of service analysis procedure, it will be assumed that truck traffic makes up approximately 2 percent of the background traffic volume for each approach movement and that a peak hour factor (PHF) of 0.95 applies to every inter- section that is analyzed. Therefore, the analysis will be based on the peak 15-minute flow volume of the p.m. peak hour for every intersection that is investigated. Based on this analysis approach, an acceptable level of service will be considered to exist whenever the resulting calculated degree of saturation for the intersection is found to be equal to or less than 0.94. i 7. An assumption inherent to the Critical Movement Analysis procedure is that all approaches to each signalized intersection operate at approximately equal levels of service. However, because this procedure does not explicitly account for minimum pedestrian crossing times, a separate analysis will be conducted to ensure teat pedestrians are accommodated. I I f \ PDC438.O07.3 EXHISIr 3 PAGE I Mr. Thomas H. Schwab Page 4 . i March 7, 1985 ( P19259.AO Thank you in advance for your timely review of these assump- tions. If you agree with the terms and assumptions described herein, please indicate your approval by signing in the space provided below and return one copy to us. As soon as we ( receive your approval, we will begin our analysis. If, in I the meantime, you have any comments or questions that I may be able to answer, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Wayne K. Kittelson Transportation Engineer jApproved: Thomas H. Schwab, Traffic Systems Analyst fDate: 1 y l I I f i PDC438.007.4 EXHIBIT PAGE ._ i l Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION l Metro Region 8002 SE.McLOUGHUN®LVD..MILWAUKIE.OREGON 57222 PHONE 853-3030 March 14. 1985 aft iyFAJWTe oar wo.: CH2 M Hill I Attn: Wayne K. Kittelson 2020 S.W. Fourth Avenue, 2nd Floor r Portland, Oregon 97201 Subject: Tigard Triangle Traffic Analysis i I have reviewed your letter of March 7, 1985 relating to the assumptions to be used for analysis of future (year 2000) trips generated by develop- ment of the Tigard Triangle. As stated, the analysis to be performed should be of a level of detail sufficient to determine how well the cur- rently planned road system will serve this future development. I must clarify the comment relating to "The Oregon Department of Trans- portation will not allow the connection of the Dartmouth Extension LID to Pacific Highway if unacceptable levels of service are identified at �• one or more intersection". This statement was not made by Ed Hardt. What was stated. was-that ODOT would evaluate the results of this analysis and if problems occurred at this or other intersections, ODOT would seek a solution to the problem. A request for a road connection to a State High- way must be granted, however, ODOT does have the responsibility to review and -require a design to provide maximum efficiency and safety to the system. This design would be worked out with the local agency requesting r the road connection. I also need to comment on the "Assumption Related to Future Development". The assumption of 80 percent build out by the year 2000 is very ambitious for this area. I have reviewed the MSD forecast for the year 2000 and offer the following comments. The MSD forecast far the Tigard Triangle which is ap;roximately represented by MSD Zone 307, displays the following forecast data for 1980 and 2000 year. Also, the following table shows this zone in relationship to Washing- ton County and the region as a whole. KTA�:� _ eArtol�xr 1920 taosf '� t000 '—` JAL TOTAL 24ovlow TIm- 2400 1e"e 707 1.340 2.350 2.040 5.040 1.120 1.250 2.430 3.250 6.190 1.590 NO am Chose 1459 M log 349 503 1 thshl"Itm Co. 245,570 702.510 40.524 811.690 22.200 78.360 44.745 77.60 101.160 107.370 1xav t CAea" us 102E 779 739 849 @094M 3 COW4 1032.720 142TA24 253.530 406.160 97.7910 130.020 207.770 702.900 559.600 047.160 M 679 4a9 1 143 31: EXHIBIT_-3 - -:• PAGE (cont'd) - 2 - As shown by the previous table, the forecast employment growth for the �. Tigard Triangle is lower than the Washington County growth, we find the Tigard area consistent with the Region wide growth. Population growth for Zone 307 is much greater than in Washington County or the Regional Growth. The 80 percent build-out appears extremely high when comparing to other areas. If a higher growth than the MSD forecast is assummed for the Tigard Triangle, which areas are to be reduced since the MSD region con- tains a statewide growth allocation forecast for the year 2000? Based upon data provided at our February 25 meeting, I suggest a build- out of 35 to AO percent for the 333. acres. In developing traffic data from this assumption, background traffic on I-5, Hwy 217 and Pacific Highway, may be obtained from MSD 2000 year forecast however, the MSD forecast traffic representing Zone 307 must be backed out of the assignment before adding in the assumed development level traffic. ' The remainder of the process described in your letter provides a reasonable approach to the analysis of traffic impact as a result of development ex- pected in the 15 year growth period. TOM SCHWAB i Transportation Analysis Manager TS:pm i i i i f ' t i EXHIBIT PAGE 2 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 March 29, 1985 Mr. Ed Hardt Oregon Department of Transportatlon Highway Division- Metro Region 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. Milwaukee, Oregon 97222 { Re: Tom Schwab's March 14th letter to Wayne Kittelson received March 25th. 1 Dear Ed, The following comments are in response to the subject letter. I have agreed to fund a traffic study for the Tigard Triangle when Tom and Wayne agree on the assumptions to be uses. The primary purpose of the study is to determine whether or not the connection of the Dartmouth Extension to Pacific Highway should be allowed as proposed. i You have agreed that the study's findings would determine whether or not you would allow the connection as proposed. Discussion with the Attorney General's office and legal analysis indicate that you have the authority to carry out the above. My goal is not to hinder development, but rather to focus attention on the traffic flow problems associated with development of the Triangle•in order that they can i be resolved in the best manner possible. As copied in Tom's letter you will notice MSD projections for zone 307 project a 105% population growth for the year 2000. Furthermore, the lastest MSD population projection for the year 2005 is 177%. .Both projections are much higher than the county or region as a whole. However, there is no undeveloped residential property in the zone nor does the 1984 Comprehensive Plan approved by LCDC suggest an increase in size or density for existing residential areas. (Incidently, MSD's latest growth projections were apparently developed after adoption of the existing zoning and Comprehensive Plan for zone 307.) We have called MSD's Dick Bolen's attention to this inconsistency. I It appears that MSD methodology fails to sufficiently correlate past growth within a zone to availability of land to sustain continued growth in that zone. As to MSD's low employment projections for zone 307, they again are not consistent with reality. They are based on past growth rates for employment during a time of unsettled city boundries, undecided zoning, lack of on site sewer, and lack of commercial grade streets and interchanges. Also much of the land presently zoned for business use was zoned for residential use during the base ' period used in projecting employment. EXHIBIT PAGE y Mr. Ed Hardt Page 2 March 29, 1985 With the completion of the 72nd-Hwy 217 Interchange, 68th Avenue, the Hanes Interchange, and some form of a Dartmouth extension; plus the fact that all other development matters are basically settled--the triangle is now the primary area available for employment growth in the Tigard area. However, MSD misses this fact and assign: y !ower employment growth than In the county as a whole. � Even though our P.M. traffic counts for traffic moving out of the Triangle contain vehicles passing through it--the number presently being produced appears to exceed MSD's year 2000 projections for trip production. MSD's zone 307 projections are obviously in error and cannot reasonably be used in determining the percentage build-out for the year 2000. Incidently, the area of the a Triangle represents only approximately 45% of zone 307. As to what percent build-out for the year 2000 should be used for the study, the important point is not an expected percentage of build-out for a given year. Rather, it is whether or not traffic problems will emerge as development proceeds, and if they will—what roadway improvements needed to reduce these problems must be built now or at least provided for now to preclude the loss of their future feasibility. However, since the engineers require a percent, I suggest that 80% at the year 2000 as suggested by Wayne is as logical as any—and is much more realistic than a lower percentage derived on the basis of the badly flawed MSD projections. iThat is, the development of approximately 80 acres of presently available, ready to develop, zoned land west of 72nd Avenue for general commercial use would Increase the existing 27% build-out to approximately 51%. 1 or someone else could do this in as little as three years. Certainly, someone will do it in the next fifteen. i This leaves approximately 29% to be developed for office use east of 72nd Avenue over a period of fifteen years to reach the 80% level at year 2000. This would r. require six and one-half acres per year of office development. Since more than seven acres of office development is already planned for this year, and since the general commercial will surely be developed in fifteen years because very little other general commercial exists in the Tigard area, I believe an 80% total build-out can be reasonably expected for the year 2000. E With the above in mind, I feel that Wayne's March 7th letter lists adequate assumptions and should be approved so the study can be timely completed. Sincerely, Gordon Martin Sr. i C CC: Tom Schwab Wayne Kittelson EXHIBIT Chuck Ruttan PAGE i .KKIT TELSON & ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 512 S.W.BROADWAY • PORTLAND.OREGON 97205 • (503)228-5230 f1 April 12, 1985 1.03 Mr. Thomas H. Schwab Transportation Analysis Manager Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Boulevard Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 Dear Tom: i The purpose of this letter is to confirm the set of assumptions that we have mutually agreed to use in the analysis of future (Years 2000 and 2005) p.m. peak hour traffic conditions for critical State facility intersections In the vicinity of the Tigard Triangle. I Reference is made to my letter to you dated March T, in which I presented an initial set of assumptions for your review. Based upon your response letter dated March 14, and on the [ results of our personal meeting on April 10, I have revised l Assumption Number 1 as follows: We will assume that, by Year 2000, the Tigard Triangle area will be 60 percent built-out and will contain 1,855 employees in the retail sector, 4,519 employees 3n the office sector, and 100 single family dwelling units. We will also assume that by the Year 2005, the Tigard Triangle area will be 70 percent built-out and will contain i 2, 103 employees in the retail sector, 5,123 employees in the office sector, and 100 single family dwelling units. With respect to Assumption dumber 2, we concur with you that If MSD Year 2000 traffic volume forecasts are used to estimate background traffic volumes on I-5, Iiighway 217 and Pacific Highway, all traffic originating in or destined to the Tigard Triangle must be backed out of the assignment before adding in the assumed development level traffic. I EXHIBIT i l I � PAGE -L - Mr. Thomas K. Schwab April 12, 1985 Page Two All other assumptions described in my March 7 letter to you will remain unchanged. If you feel that this revised set of assumptions contains any unreasonable elements, please contact me immediately. Otherwise, I will proceed with our analysis t using this revised set of assumptions as a base. Sincerely, K. Kittelson, P.E. Pri cipal I f f EXHIBIT - ( 'AGB f I A� - or Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION { w�-.•• � Metro Region ( M 9002 SE.McLOUGH LIN BLVD., MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 6): ..JC90 4 in April 30, 1985 Foe 1. �t��, -- Foe nJ Robert Jean ( City of Tigard )dministrator I City Hall Tigard, OR 97223 I This will confirm a conversation I had with you and Frank Currie ion April 18th regarding the City's plans for a new connection of i Dartmouth Street to Highway 9914. I said that as a condition of the State granting a permit for this new connection that we would I have to see a traffic circulation plan showing that the new con- nection would not create undue traffic problems on 9914. It is my understanding that in order to produce this study that you are considering hiring a traffic consultant. As I mentioned on the 18th, this study should be coordinated with traffic and land use projections from the Metropolitan Service District and the param- eters of the study should be coordinated with Tom Schwab, of my Ioffice. Edward L. Hardt Metrc, Region Engineer i - .. cc Chuck *Ruttan CAR�EY i FXHIBIT-5-19 f PAGE � i Department of Transportation HIGHWAY( DIVISION VC*«R A"Y" Metro Region 9002 SE.McLOUGHLIN BLVD.,MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 f May 6, 1985 In Reply Rotor To FlM No.: Kittleson & Associates 512 S.W. Broadway [ Portland,OR 97205 I Subject: Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Analysis Forecast Traffic I have received your letter dated April 12, 1985 in which you describe the revised set of assumptions to be used for the traffic circulation analysis of the Tigard Triangle area. This letter is to confirm our agreed upon 60 percent buildout for year 2000 and a ( 70 percent buildout for the 2005 year travel forecast. i The population and employment associated with these two forecast years are assummed to be: YEAR RETAIL EMPLOYMENT OFFICE DEWELLING UNIT f 2000 1855 4519 100 (( 2005 2103 5123 100 l I would welcome an early review during the various stages of your analysis. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to call . 1 - e 70M WAB Transportation Analysis Manager TS:pm cc: Edward Hardt 1 f T3e.,tSO EXHIBIT PAGE e/r 1 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 May 8, 1985 HAND T)ELIVERED Mr. Dick Walker ' Metropolitan Service District 527 S.W. Hall Portland, Oregon 97205 Re: Tigard Triangle employment and transportation forecasts. Dear nick: This letter is to confirm our recent conversation concerning employment and traffic forecasts for the Tigard Triangle, which is represented in zone 307. Please find the enclosed letters from Mr. Wayne Kittelson and Mr. Thomas H. Schwab confirming the year 2005 build-out and employment growth forecasts for the Tigard Triangle. As discussed in past conversations, part of the land use designations for the Tigard Triangle that are used in MSD's October 1984 forecasts are not consistent with the City of Tigard's designations. Adjustments are necessary to accurately represent the Triangle's year 2005 growth forecasts. MSD's year 2005 population forecasts for zone 307 shows a 177% increase in the base census population of 1,363 to a year 2005 population of 3,777. nick Bolen has f informed me that this population increase was primarly designated for the Triangle in a 40 units per acre zone. It is my understanding that previous Comprehensive Plans designated approximately 40 acres of A-40 zone in the Triangle. Presently, s, there is no undeveloped residential property in zone 307 nor does the 1984 Comprehensive Plan designate any A-40 zone or suggest an increase in size or density for existing residential areas. MSD also based part of the employment forecasts for zone 307 on approximately 90 acres of Industrial land in the Triangle. This land use designation is inconsistent with the City of Tigard's present designation of Commercial General. Adjustments for the above land use designations in addition to several other factors increase the employment growth potential of the Tigard Triangle. Mr. Thomas H. a' Schwab of the Oregon Department of Transportation, has recommended for traffic t" analysis purposes a 70% build-out by the year 2005. This percentage build-out will result in 123 acres of Commercial General development with approximately 2,103 retail employees, and 109 acres of Commercial Professional development with approximately 5,123 office employees. There are 333 total acres in the Triangle. 8 Preliminary traffic trip generation estimates by Mr. Wayne Kittelson indicate that approximately 84,045 daily trip ends (one way trips) will be generated at 70% build out. i E I f r EXHISiT " PAGE .. Mr. Dick Walker ?age 2 May 8, 1985 ( I hope this additional information will assist you in accurately representing the Tigard Triangle in future forecasts and in the Southwest Corridor Study. Thanks for your courtesies in this matter. If there are any questions, please call me at 620-2477. i Sincerely, Gordon S. Martin I ' Enclosures, ` cc: Dick Bolen James Gieseking Wayne Kittelson Chuck Ruttan f EXHIBF PAGE main 4 I . C MOM W meml) ill METROPOL?AN SERVICE DISTRICT 527 S W HALL ST..PORTL4ND.OREGON 97201 503 W-1646 Providing Zoo.Tm sMUbon,Solid Waste and odw RogvrW Saw=s Date: May 16, 1985 To: Southwest Technical Advisory Committee From: Dick Bolen, Senior Data Analyst Regarding: Tigard Triangle Population/Employment Forecast This memo addresses concerns raised by Mr. Gordon Martin in the enclosed letter dated May 8, 1985. Our examination of the population/employment database for the Tigard Triangle substantiates Mr. Martin's concerns regarding inconsistency with the updated city of Tigard comprehensive plan. In particular, the current plan' E conversion of 40 acres of high density residential land (40 d.u./acre) to Commercial Professional and 90 acres of industrially designated vacant land to Commercial General development from that version of the comprehensive plan used in our original forecast. Given these changes in the land use plan impacts on the 2005 population/employment forecast must be determined. Population Forecast The potential of any population growth from 1983 to 2005 in the Triangle and census tract 307 is virtually nil, given Tigard' s current comprehensive plan. Therefore, it seems appropriate that no population growth be allocated to this census tract. Employment Forecast Examination of the following table indicates that an adequate level of employment growth has been allocated to c.t. 307 but not to the traffic zones encompassing the Tigard Triangle. For example, nearly 5,800 office employees (@ 75 percent of other employment) are expected to be employed in the census tract by 2005. Mr. Rittleson indicates that 5,123 should be located within the Triangle, putting 88 percent of tract 307' s office employment in that area. Given that most of the land outside the Triangle but inside c.t. 307 is zoned for industry, this may be a reasonable prediction. EXHIBIT_ Fj -`4 PAGE -� Memorandum May 16, 1985 Page 2 l ' The retail situation is similar -- adequate retail employment growth has been allocated to the census tract but appears low in the Triangle. In this case, however, Mr. gittleson s fore- cast of 2,103 retail employees appears high, absorbing all of the retail employment growth allocated to c.t. 307 plus an additional 400 employees from adjacent tracts. (One of District 12's tracts includes Washington Square and its adjacent re'.::.il development, stiff competition for retail growth.) Conclusion a I suggest that adjustments be made within c.t. 307 to allocate larger shares of retail and other (office) employment growth to the traffic zones comprising the Tigard Triangle but that the total employment allocation to this census tract not be increased to the levels of Mr. Kittleson' s forecast for retail employment. On the population side, the growth allocated to c.t. 307 should be redistributed to the other census tracts in District 12 using the workshop allocation methodology. DB/srs 3577C/413-2 05/16/85 t f � t lEXHOT PAGE 2 Jun 30 16:03 1986 pr.®artin Page 1 S I _ tin RETAIL OTHER WESTSIDE 1983 1985 -2005 2005 2005 1983 1985 2005 2005 ZONE 5/85 6/86 ODOT* 5/85 6/86 5/85 6/86 ODOT* 5/85 6/86 atz 129 765 751 812 868 868 1139 1513 �5,r7�5 1529 1529 Satz 226 99 105 742 285 741 223 323 2981 1651 2956 TOTAL 864 856 1554 1153 1609 1362 •1445— -a;L% 3180 4485 i 8�6 It531 i ODaT nv...hQrS AroVided by Coto 0„ J"la/��✓1 f I 1 I - i i FACE 3 s4, .1 P d , 1 • i. •_ r I • ` .1 too •r �• � t�� 111 . � 1 �•� � F 10 • r r � r 1 r,• C Engineers Planners r Economists Scientists f i August 20, 1985 P19259 .A0 f Mr. Edward L. Hardt Metro Region Engineer . Oregon Department of Transportation Highway Division 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. ' Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 SUBJECT: Tigard Triangle Traffic Analysis Dear Mr. Hardt: As you know, we have recently completed a transportation ' analysis of expected future (Year 2005) traffic conditions within the Tigard Triangle area. This analysis was conducted at the request of Mr. Gordon S. Martin, who is concerned that the existing and currently-planned roadway system will not be able to accommodate travel demands generated by even the partial area buildout that is expected to occur by 2005. Based upon the results of the attached analysis, which we have previously reviewed with you, it is concluded that no reasonable design of the Dartmouth Drive Extension/Pacific Highway intersection will accommodate the expected 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic demands without substantial changes in the j LID road system. We have reviewed our analysis procedure and conclusions with Mr. Tom Schwab of your staff, and he concurs with our findings. Operational problems will probably begin to appear before the Year 2000, and could become significantly worse than is indicated in this report if actual buildout of the Tigard Triangle exceeds our assumption. i i c r CH2M HILL MY-' Ftxfkmd Ofrr_e 2020 SW Fourth Avmnum 2nd Floor,Fomma.Oregon 97201 W3224.9190 TELEX 360103 cH2M PTL PAGE _ ..� r-- Mr. Edward L. Hardt ( August 20, 1985 ( Page Two The attachment to this letter describes in more detail the analysis assumptions, methodology, and conclusions. If, after reviewing this information, you have additional questions or comments that we may be able to address, please do not hesitate to call . From our meeting of last week, I understand that you will be advising Tigard City officials of these findings and conclusions. Sincerely, K. Kittelson i Traf is Engineer i Attachment C cc: Mr. Gordon S. Martin Mr. Charles Ruttan i I i i { 1 1 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR THE TIGARD TRIANGLE AREA INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to describe the results of a traffic analysis that was conducted of expected Year 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic conditions within the vicinity of the Tigard Triangle. More specifically, this report focuses on the expected operational characteristics of the Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway intersection upon partial buildout of the I Tigard Triangle, assuming that only existing and currently-planned roadways are in place by 2005. It is found that even a partial buildout of the Tigard Triangle area will result in a serious capacity deficiency at this intersection. I ASSUMPTIONS This analysis began with the hypothesis that the system of roads currently proposed to serve the Tigard Triangle area is I inadequate when compared with future traffic demands. The most effective way to test the validity of this hypothesis is to develop a set of conservative assumptions that collectively "stack the deck" against this conclusion, and then to determine if the analysis results still support the hypothesis. Therefore, a great deal of effort was invested at the outset of this analysis to ensure that all assumptions were reasonably conservative, and that they were acceptable to ODOT staff members who would be reviewing the analysis results. As a result of this effort, the following set of assumptions was ( developed: i) By the Year 2005, the Tigard Triangle area will contain 2 , 103 retail employees and 5, 123 office employees. This represents only about a 55 percent buildout of the Tigard Triangle area by 2005 (The current build-out for this area is between 25 and 30 percent) . In a letter to Mr. Wayne Kittelson dated May 6, Mr. Tom Schwab confirmed the reasonableness of this assumption. 2) Under the currently planned roadway configuration, 60 percent of all future inbound and outbound vehicle trip ends associated with the Tigard Triangle area will be oriented toward Pacific Highway. The remaining 40 percent will be oriented toward Highway 217 and I-5 via the 72nd Avenue/Highway 217 interchange and/or the Haines Road/I-5 interchange. This assumption is ( consistent with the most recent trip distribution ( projections prepared by the Metropolitan Service District (MSD) for the Tigard Triangle area. EXHIEUT IC/ PAGE 3 C C 3) Of all Tigard Triangle vehicle trip ends that are oriented toward Pacific Highway, one-third will use the proposed Dartmouth Drive extension to travel into and out of the area, one-third will use an improved 72nd Avenue/Pacific Highway intersection, and one-third will E use a new 69th Avenue/Pacific Highway intersection. This is a conservative assumption, since it is doubtful that the internal road system and land development patterns will encourage such an even distribution of these vehicle trips. Furthermore, existing and possible future physical constraints wake it questionable whether an improved 72nd Avenue/Pacific Highway intersection can be constructed. Finally, it is doubtful that an even distribution among the three tavailable access points onto Pacific Highway would occur for northbound-to-westbound left-turning traffic out of the Tigard Triangle: many of these left-turning vehicles would probably save considerable out-of-direction travel by using the proposed Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway intersection instead. 4) For all vehicle trip ends from the Tigard Triangle that use Pacific Highway, 60 percent are assumed to travel to and from the west , and 40 percent are assumed to travel to and from the east . This assumption is consistent with the most recent trip assignment projections prepared by MSD for the Tigard Triangle area. x 5) The estimated 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic volumes on Pacific Highway between the proposed Dartmouth Drive Extension and Highway 217 under MSD "Build" assumptions is 2, 250 westbound vehicles and 1 ,890 eastbound s vehicles. 6) All existing land uses within the Tigard Triangle that have frontage on Pacific Highway will continue to have direct access to Pacific Highway. Therefore, none of r the trips generated by these land uses are assumed to z use the proposed Dartmouth Drive extension, 72nd j Avenue, or 69th Avenue. 7) Future retail developments in the Tigard Triangle area will reflect an extension of existing retail land uses along Pacific Highway, and will also support the surrounding office/residential developments. The size of any shopping centers developed within the Tigard Triangle area will generally be less than 50,000 gross square feet. 's EM-"FEIT `7 'AGE `�!w \• Ci 1 8) Of all vehicle trips attracted to new retail developments within the Tigard Triangle, 30 percent will be generated from within the Tigard Triangle; the remaining TO percent will come from outside the Tigard Triangle area. 9) Currently, commercial retail establishments within the Tigard Triangle area provide approximately 515 gross square feet per employee, and approximately 25 percent of the total existing retail floor space consists of r restaurant facilities. In the future, restaurants will require only about 15 percent of the total available retail floor space, and so for all new retail ldevelopment there will be about 580 gross square feet per employee. 10) During the p.m. peak hour, 10 percent of all foffice-related employees will use transit . This is probably a conservative assumption, since Tri-Met has no current plans to provide transit service in the Tigard Triangle area. • Together, these assumptions represent a conservative yet reasonable basis for estimating the 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic conditions at the proposed Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway Intersection. ANALYSIS PROCEDURE Based on the assumptions described above, the following analysis procedure was used. Trip Generation PTrip generation characteristics for the anticipated office and retail development within the Tigard Triangle area were estimated on the basis of information contained in a nationally-used document prepared by the Institute of t Transportation Engineers entitled, Trip Generation Manual (3rd Edition: 1983) . For office land uses, p.m. peak hour vehicle trip ends were estimated on a per-employee basis, using the following rates: Inbound vehicle trips: 0. 14 veh/employee Outbound vehicle trips: 0.43 veh/employee The number of p.m. peak hour vehicle trip ends estimated on this basis was then adjusted downward to account for the assumed 10 percent transit usage by office employees. i EXHIBIT .y PAGE i 1 4 Existing and new retail land uses were assumed to generate p.m. peak hour vehicle trip ends equivalent to the rates associated with a shopping center containing less than 50,000 gross square I feet. These rates are: Inbound vehicle trips: 7. 19 veh/1 ,000 GSF Outbound vehicle trips: 7.23 veh/1 ,000 GSF Estimates of the amount of gross retail space were developed on square fee the basis of 515 gross sq t per employee for existingr retail establishments and 580 gross square feet per employee for future retail developments. The resulting estimates of to vehicle trip ends were then adjusted downward ki g percent account for patronage by persons living or working within the ` Tigard Triangle area. Trip Distribution and Assignment The estimated number of net additional vehicle trip ends generated by the Tigard Triangle area was distributed among the primary routes serving the area (including Pacific Highway, Highway 217 , and I-5) in accordance with the assumptions described previously, which are based on the most recent trip s distribution projections prepared for the Tigard Triangle by { MSD. Specifically, 60 percent of the net additional vehicle trip ends generated by the Tigard Triangle area were assumed to travel to and/or from Pacific Highway during the 2005 p.m. peak } hour. t ` The assignment of vehicle trips to the currently proposed road system was accomplishedchvolumes wererough a es of estimatedrbylsubtracting First, background traffic be generated by the Tigard the traffic assumed by MSD Triangle area from the total 2005 P.M. peak hour traffic volume { projections. Then the vehicle trip ends expected to be generated by the Tigard Triangle were added to this background ` volume as follows: ( 1) Vehicle trip ends generated by existing retail activities were assigned to the currently-proposed street system. 2) Vehicle trip ends generated by expected future retail development were assigned to the currently-prop osed street system. 3) Vehicle trip ends generated by existing and future office employees were assigned to the currently-proposed street system. 4 EXHIBIT- PAGE �� r � rocedure, estimated 2005 p.m. peak hour As a result of this p p ro osed turning movement volumes were developed for the proposedese turning Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway movement volumes are shown schematically in Figure 1. Intersection Level of Service Com utations Level of Service (LOS) is a concept developed to quantify the degree of comfort (including such elements as travelitime,impedances number of stops, total amount of stopped caused by other vehicles) afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or roadway segment. As originally defined within the 1965 Highway Capacity Manual s x grades are used to denote the various LOS, i�hisegenerallysix es are shown in Table I . Using this definition, is the minimum acceptable for an urban agreed that a "D" LOS area. I � A number of different procedures have been developed or estimating the LOS at signalized intersections . For this analysis, a relatively sophisticated procedure was employed that involved the use of a computerized simulation and that optimization program called SOAP. (SOAP is an acThismprogram, t stands for Signal Operations Analysis Program. ) assistance of FHWA, is capable of providing a detailed analysis and optimization of the operation developed through the of individual signalized intersections, whether they are I operating in an undersaturaroachted rlane rconfigurationdandon. The program is sensitive to app traffic volumes , utilization, observed saturation flow rates, type of peak flow rates, lost time and effective green time, type and controller, pedestrian crossing time requirements, phasing phase sequencing. The program is capable of providing Information on green time requirements, opa optimum signal timing, degree of saturation (by approachlso or the intersection as a whole) , average vehicle delay, percent stopped vehicles, estimated total fuel consumption, aching andes . A estimated annual operating costs for app detailed discussion of the methodology underlying this ned in a report entitled, Sianal procedure is contai O eration Anal sis Pby the University uofrnFloridaTransportation which was published by 1983. Research Center in January For the purposes of this analysis, the assumed relationship between the calculated volume/capacity ratio for the intersection and the associated LOS is given in Table 2. All LOS analyses described in this report were performed in es described above. Copies of the accordance with the procedur in the Appendix to this report . analysis forms are contained EXHIBIT 9 f PAGE ANALYSIS RESULTS For the partial build scenario that was investigated in this analysis, it was found that the proposed Dartmouth fDrive/Pacific Highway intersection will operate at an unacceptable "F" LOS during the 2005 p.m. peak hour, with an Intersection volume/capacity ratio of 2.01 . This finding is ( based upon an assumption of dual left turn lanes from Dartmouth Drive onto Pacific Highway, and a .five-lane cross-section for Pacific Highway. Furthermore, It was found that assuming an { expanded seven-lane cross-section for Pacific Highway would still result in an unacceptable "F" LOS, with an intersection volume/capacity ratio of 1 .59. A key reason for this identified capacity deficiency seems to be the high volume of Tigard Triangle traffic that is expected to use Pacific Highway in order to gain access to either Highway 217 or to that portion of Tigard south of Pacific Highway and west of Highway 217. If this traffic could be provided with an acceptable alternate route that would not require travel on Pacific Highway, then a significant Improvement in LOS at the Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway Intersection eight result. CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of this analysis, it is concluded that the road system currently proposed to serve the Tigard Triangle area will not be adequate to accommodate the expected 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic demands associated with the partial buildout scenario that was investigated. Operational problems will probably begin to appear before the year 2000, and could become significantly worse than is indicated in this report if actual buildout of the Tigard Triangle exceeds our assumption. I [ t t _ EXHIBIT PAGE C i f I i ( t IMF- 4 Table 1 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS (SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS) Level of Service Traffic Flow Characteristics ------- ------------------------------------------- ------- A A Average overall travel speeds of 30 MPH or more. I Free-flowing with no congestion. No signal cycle failures. B Average overall travel speeds of 25-30 MPH. Very few signal cycle failures and little or no congestion. IC Average overall travel speeds of 20-25 MPH. Occasional signal cycle failures and associated congestion. D Average overall travel speeds of 15-20 MPH. Frequent signal cycle failures and associated congestion. E Average overall travel speeds of about 15 MPH. Unstable flow which includes almost continuous signal cycle failures and backups on approaches to the intersections. This represents the theoretical capacity of the facility. F Forced flow, with average overall travel speeds of below 15 MPH. Continuous signal cycle failure with backup on approaches going through upstream intersections in some cases. ------------------------ Note: A signal cycle failure is considered to occur when one or more vehicles are forced to wait through more than one green signal Indication for a particular approach. C � EXHIBIT ` PACE l : r � C t Table 2 RELATIONSHIP OF LEVEL OF SERVICE TO VOLUME/CAPAI:ITY RATIO Maximum LOS V/C 1 B 0.7 C 0.8 D 0.9 E 1 .0 F (any value) f € t i (( ]E HOT l . . . ..... , . .... . . . .. .. .... . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . �/ .. . ... . . . 5x;vans, :m.a © +t ~/ © m w° - y - ^ r .. \ ' : xa < - APPENDIX f Signalized Intersections: (t Level of Service Calculations i i t r 1 i I i i I� ff fl l EXHIBIT_ 9 I PAGE J-2 C C KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES SOAP/M SIGNAL TIMING DESIGN �- DARTMOUTH EXT.& PACIFIC HIGHWAY 2005 PM PK HR -- CURRENT PLAN E !INPUT! (NB) (SB) (EB) (WB) ----- THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT VOLUMES (VPH) 0 830 0 300 3430 250 3530 440 SAT FLOW (VPHG OR *LANES) 1 1 .8 1 1 2 1 2 1 HEADWAY (SEC) 2 .2 2.5 2.2 2.5 2.2 2 .5 2. 2 2.5 PCF (#-RED/TOTAL) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GREEN/MOV (SEC) 0 26 0 26 23 0 23 0 TRUCKS (%) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 fLEFT TURNS (LEFT/CYCLE) 0 0 0 0 LEFT TURN PROTECTION: REST REST REST REST SEQUENCE: L-?-T L-?-T PHF: .95 CONTROLLER TYPE: ACTUATED CYCLE LENGTH: 120.0 SECONDS LOST TIME: 3. 5 SEC/PHASE CHANGE -------------------------- !SIGNAL TIMING CALCULATIONS ! -------------------------- (NB) (SB) (EB) (WB) THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT VOLUME/CAPACITY 0 .34 0 . 22 1 . 11 . 18 1 . 15 .32 VOLUME: (VPH) 0 839 0 303 3471 253 3572 445 SAT FLOW: (VPHG) 1636 2592 1636 1440 3273 1440 3273 1440 LEFT TURN SATURATION: (VPHG) 1400 1400 0 0 GREEN TIME/MOVEMENT AVAILABLE: (SEC) 10.5 23.7 3.5 16.6 69.8 14 .4 78 . 2 22 . 8 SPECIFIED MINIMUM: (SEC) 0 26 0 26 23 0 23 0 #. REQUIRED: (SEC) 0 44.3 0 30. 1 37 . 1 25. 6 141 42 . 5 f 6 PHASE OPERATION (SEC) DEGREE OF SATURATION NB&SB LEFT 16.7 13.9 NORTH/SOUTH: 34 .0 % NB THRU&LEFT: 7. 1 5.9 EAST/WEST: 143. 8 % NB&SB THRU 3.5 2.9 TOTAL: 177.8 A; EB&WB LEFT 14 .5 12. 1 WB THRU&LEFT: 8.4 7.0 TOTAL LOST TIME: 14 .0 (SEC) EB&WB THRU 69.9 58. 3 CYCLE LENGTH: 120.0 (SEC) ALL RED TIME: 0.0 (SEC) i EXHIBIT I PAGE 1.3 _r KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES SOAP/M SIGNAL TIMING DESIGN DARTMOUTH EXT.& PACIFIC HIGHWAY 2005 PM PK HR -- 7-LANES ON PACIFIC HIGHWAY !INPUT! (NB) (SB) (EB) (WB) ---- THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT VOLUMES (VPH) 0 830 0 300 3430 250 3530 440 SAT FLOW (VPHG OR #LANES) 1 1 .8 1 1 3 1 3 1 HEADWAY (SEC) 2 .2 2 .5 2 .2 2. 5 2.2 2 .5 2 .2 2 . 5 PCF (#-RED/TOTAL) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 GREEN/MOV (SEC) 0 26 0 26 23 0 23 0 TRUCKS M 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 LEFT TURNS (LEFT/CYCLE) 0 0 0 0 LEFT TURN PROTECTION: REST REST REST REST SEQUENCE: L-?-T L-?-T PHF: .95 CONTROLLER TYPE: ACTUATED CYCLE LENGTH: 120.0 SECONDS LOST TIME: 3. 5 SEC/PHASE CHANGE -------------------------- !SIGNAL TIMING CALCULATIONS! ---------------------- (NB) (SB) (EB) (WB) THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT THRU LEFT F VOLUME/CAPACITY 0 .34 0 . 22 .74 . 18 .76 .32 VOLUME: (VPH) 0 839 0 303 3471 253 3572 445 SAT FLOW: (VPHG) 1636 2592 1636 1440 4909 1440 4909 1440 EFT TURN SATURATION: (VPHG) 1400 1400 0 0 GREEN TIME/MOVEMENT AVAILABLE: (SEC) 12.4 29. 1 3.5 20. 1 59.4 17 .3 69 .9 27.9 SPECIFIED MINIMUM: (SEC) 0 26 0 26 23 0 23 0 r REQUIRED: (SEC) 0 44 .3 0 30. 1 92 .6 25.6 95 . 2 42.5 3. i F 6 PHASE OPERATION (SEC) M DEGREE OF SATURATION ? NB&SB LEFT 20. 2 16.8 NORTH/SOUTH: 34.0 % NB THRU&LEFT: 9.0 7.5 EAST/WEST: 106.7 HB&SB THRU 3.5 2.9 TOTAL: 140.7 % EB&WB LEFT 17.4 34.5 WB THRU&LEFT: 10.6 8.8 TOTAL LOST TIME:* 14 .0 (SEC) EB&WB THRU 59.4 49.5 CYCLE LENGTH: 120.0 (SEC) w ALL RED TIME: 0.0 (SEC) I EXHIBIT PAGE L/ -- arm HIKE -7-76,-12D -[7 A^fGLE ✓y i/7C91'Cet�f{. �jt�',[/L�/` .C�JG �/E�r�r•a4�-�' W � Yui , wi 1 7'"r:Yd�=7y/e a r i9Jr ' f r 40 Z • �.�7%11 L ��:�t. G•'f�/►�,�__i�/T rq ( "ts pee i - 3.9 [ . r EXHIBIT PAGE -� G L �ETAJL£MPDY OTHE Y zoNE' �ia�lz9 -- 802 40� lsst' r'7S 2oAr� ��y�,Zz� X42 74Z Z9s/ 115-0 3 7sv t ��n e �o-y ees X s8a c sF�,e..��eyee = ((O 7000 GSF I PM )Cba/G /four• 7;-/p i O v7T � p,-�� T�iP.r - •¢8zo� x0.7 = 3375� 79sx ©, 7 = 335 o�rs1 , f o.ut 336Z,,,co,(a= '2 040f 70- 7 SZ) a u T i - 7sa ,c o /4 4.3 =/�!�: T�•P��0., Sx 0.9 = x¢73 Tr'r,;o e /Z x o. 9 /4s -= �7T,P c.�r � x o,� �G, ,4�.3,� �& - ,28Tripe--4 TQ P afro A4 l rii ;Y_ 4G PAGE - �_. C. C/�C /ME"; r OF NEl�/7�ipiO✓ p wo�,. F 26 Ne 1.29 7a-5'x—A17-2 co _ 3 2 3 �23x�avl - �8� 24-70, 2 oO PM ptgicGCN.c�z.oMAW O V 7- - 7,•Z 37c 24 7. x: 17 9'7 7.19 x 247.2 = /777 1'? "i T �c 0 ,7= 1244 1787x o.7 = 12-V Z.447C -75-0 X93 �c o� t4CL111 793xo,43 lit x 0.6 64Ixo,� t 2aS HW y . '� T> RtiVrwAY TRIPS t 4 E lIS h"L S O C FZ rrC 21 A o-F 76,45' O F /2C r/7 [. /S PASS Ry TRAe:'F�c 0 V T t '. O FFic Gtr 280 zoo les 870 X 6 5 7sa z o2,- S" 12-75- 7410 Polo 1270 , EXHIBIT I& PAGE -3 _ 4 ps�cti'�C k G PAC t Fic. Hwy 1-1&--->o, cPf7 I l L .F�'.1'Tl�ov�vo /340'PNt P,f.Qnc yo-ff- +�av .►�- /�c'�eal c G�ulr-tet � o��.20c7 f Oiso x/.2�p� f iESTl30v AWO �4��5-f o•3� Iz-rsJo.b = 63o vpti. 4.3 —10' '..-.r t�A� l/o/u• !r .2 Z,,� o r o•�� ?ola e e �p•-.......�i'��-.-a�. f EXHBIT LN C � i MAx i M uNt 7-2f9p-o L uM,C S J77/1,1.00'TAr- MUS r ZT.0 AS Fonws 2o�u� DOS XlW ooe oCo1e C,09 *7- MSO ,T'(GARD TR/A"GI.0 C? HAKGC RLM,4 L of R CT OFC-, 77-5— 7-/Z z9e l /,50 3750 ,2103 -J-12 3 gso f�s�s &'N £R,09 77 0,,f O F' Al/rkl Ree,.-� 0 ci 7- 3 3 98'3,c o.7_ X788 .Z773xOr� _ ;z7S8,Ko,4 . i �o vPk 5G0 Sero 4 r b C -C i 1375— Xie y-ceJ Z,.-/ c�� 137S� 6,14-= 192- 7" .S7/ 77-4P4' (9Z A 0,9 173 ,�/x o.9= 5732- f i � { EXHISIT PACE S t a t, f TZ) G'©a/N�CT/1,/G ROADS 70 f (��?c) ." ioC�ya OT !�G°t�1 k'F Tti.•'� �r/�/ Pp/7'�D w �.f f t 7'"�G ��J � Ms0 f�SS/GNM�t�vr �f ( D/sra�t�cr�-�o.v Ica�FrPoNr p�c�<-�� ,y/GHw�y f t ?.0103 19zO �tzao) DOS] +2o E i I t I ��iSgT l0 - PAGE � i � L,30 0 SID os-ow 9Zp' --1 64o W) qzo � '-'1770 I 3 s IGob 0.37 ` fJa bc� t �QSS l r3 L Or 1-4 eoNc-/G 4fl?W70W o4�-,/4 _ �� CONF G(l7L�ilT' 0 ,37 1� r'4ao Q„ZO -✓ = 0, 17 S'bc 300 �—-- 9z -f a, o6 EXHIBIT PAGE 4 oy .iT_. �--✓ Department of Transportation $Sig HIGHWAY DIVISION Metro Region i 9002 SE.McLOUGHLIN BLVD.,MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 September 4, 1985 BE d, VE M Reofy Rote,To Robert Je-S—n `"No City•Administror SEP G 198; City Of Tigard P. .o. Box 23397 Myhi, CARNEY ( Tigar-d, i3R 97223 � You may recall a visit I had in Yourseveral about Tigard's proposed Dartmouth Extensions connection tos99W. At that time I indicated that we would have to see a traffic circulation plan showing that the new construction w create undue traffic problems on 99W before a cold not permit issued. So far, the City has not submitted a plan. could be � Under date of August 20, 1985 I received K�ttleson, traffic engineer engagedby GordonreMa tinortfromI have j attached a co ben re and the assumptions agreedY Of that to to theort. Thismembers Ofreort hasmy estaff viewed conclusion of this report is that the Dartmouth connection. Tas ( currently conceived, would result in an undesirable level of 1 service on 99W. It appears to me that providing suitable access to the Tigard Triangle, assuming either build-out conditions or even a significant percent of build-out, will be very difficult given the fact that all three state highways principally involved are r! presently, or soon will be, operating at capacity levels. Highways 217 and 99W are experiencing current roblems and are to have much more severe traffic p ob ems in the efutected ure. j Interstate 5, both north and south of the Haines section, is II anticipated to experience increasing difficulties, as well. My analysis is that two major areas need to be addressed: � The first need is for the city to develop a local circulation system within the Tigard Triangle to minimize transportation problems within the area itself. This and/or east/west transportation spines. should include the consideration of major north/south The second major need to be addressed isntif with the Metropolitan ServiceDistrict Land deother Jurisdictions the necessary improvements state highways in order to serve the Triangle the major g area. .K•..• 'EXHIBIT (over) i • Robert Jean Page 2 1 September 4, 1985 IBased on the information I have to date. I have come to two conclusions: (1) The proposed Dartmouth connection to 99W (plans which have not been formally presented to us) will cause an unacceptable level of service for that p intersection, so the Dartmouth Street connection plan i needs to be reconsidered by the city. What is needed is a local circulation plan for the entire triangle, which should be developed by the city. (2) The broader issue of how the Tigard Triangle is to be accessed in the future needs to be addressed. This access requires an adequate internal circulation plan by the city, as well as coordination with the Metropolitan Service District and ODOT to develop proposals for the improvements needed to the highway and road systems serving the Triangle area. I would suggest that Ted Spence, from my office. Andy Cotugno, from the Metropolitan Service District, and someone from your office get together to discuss how this problem is to be approached, both in terms of developing an internal circulation system, as well as defining the regional transportation i requirements. Possibly, work on the Southwest Corridor study could address the overall major question of the regional system and related needs in the Tigard Triangle area. M,•�.�. Sir.1�E " Cn-x 4- Edward L. Hardt Metro Region Engineer r g Attachment c Chuck Ruttan Andy Cotugno Ted Spence PAUL z CC Donald E. Pollock INVLS I IVIILN I•'> 1 IU21I !>.VV. boiUm LM%d 1.UZA ( 1101(land. 91219 f (5WI 1115 2.18! i .Jrnuaty 20 1986 Jean City Qdwtnistratgr of Tigard P.O. Bpi Tigard :QR 97223 : , a. 4.:.- Dear Mr. Jesn: As you may know I own approximately ten acres in the Tigard TFiang1Q1 Vhich lies within the Dartmouth L.I.D. i - -About •twa.4eeks ago I was informed of a transportation pro- { poatsl for the Tigard Triangle which was later presented to _ the'��g,Z �Transpoitatiop Committee by Gordon Martin on : ; "'� ' '_• :IanuaxyiQ� 1986,"'I•have determined that this proposal would 4'-0,?;;c pmarty than the pvrfgnt Dartmouth L.J.D. " 1• I would like to see this proposal further investigated and im- plemented in lieu of the Dartmouth L.I.D. Furthermore. I agree with E4Vgrd Hardt's (Metro Region Engineer for O.D.O.T.) con- clusione apd recommendations in his Seplemher 4. 1985 letter to •`::' z•'� : Robert Jean and his comments made to Cordon Martin that this proposal. •"Has merit and should be given further consideration". •I"' ; It should be noted that when my property is combined with the Martin's the total represents more than 50'/• of the property and right of way in the Dartmouth L.I.D. I alsp feel that this proposal serves the region and should be finsnce4 through a Regional Highway Improvement program rather that ��.D. ayade up of individual property owners. Donald . Vollock t gc; _ Gordon martin s�_• :. . • 1.14 '.!! - .'Y. .Y• : x .{J►'•1• I C Gordon S. Martin 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 January 17, 1986 i i Mr. Donald Pollock 10211 S.W. Barbur Blvd. #202 Portland Oregon 97219 Dear Don, I have enclosed for your review a copy of the traffic engineer's report prepared by CH2M Hill, and the State Highway Department's letter to Robert Jean, outlining their conclusions drawn from the report. I have also enclosed an (on loan) aerial photo map designating both the "major east/west transportation spines" and "necessary improvements to the major state highways" Edward Hardt makes reference to in his September 4, 1985 letter. I hope you have a chance to review this material and discuss It with me before my presentation to the City Staff on January 27, at 3:00 P.M.. Your support for this plan may be instrumental in convincing the City Staff to accept Edward Hardt's invitation to discuss my proposal with his staff. With no L help from the city, I have already taken this plan quite a ways by getting the state to take a position. In my view, getting the city to support the plan is one of the last the major hurdles to getting the plan on the Oregon Department of Transportation's Six Year Highway Improvement Program. Sincerely, i Gordon S. Martin Enclosure H + JACK•H. GUNN Dukk CARNEY. ALLEN, HIGGINS & SaGUE ROBERT R. CARNET ATTORNEYS AT LAW WILLIAM N. MORRISON(1997-1967) ROS ERT L.ALLEN RALPH 9L 6AlLET(I00E-1970 JOHN J. HIGGINS 661 S.W.SINTN AVENUC.SUIT[ 1500 THOMAS H. TONGUE GEORGE J. COOPER,= TACIIIC ►IRST /cOERAL BUILDING CHARLES D. RUTTAN ROBERT K.WINGER PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 JAMES G.SMITH O. KENNETH SHIROISHI• NATHAN L.Conk" OILB CRT C. PARKER,JR. Tt LtA�ONL(507)99�-BAAO /. •BOER MILLER JOAN O'NCILL. R C. O/COUNSEL ANDREW S. CRAIG T[L[COPICR(807)i24-7794 BRADLEY O. BAKER •AOM1TTtO 1N OREGON. 1 JACK D. NOPrMAN CALI/ORN1A AND WASNINGTON MIC'41 rc EL L.PALMOUIST MICHAEL J. H MIL S February 5, 1986 9•ADMITTED IN OREGON MI STANC PH MILLER AMC w SNINGTGN CONSTANCE K BLOCK JOHN C.CAHAL/AN JOHN RCROWLLL99 FRED KGRANUM GARY L. TYLER RUSSELL R. KILKCNNY H[LLE ROD[ HAND DELIVERED MARSHA M R BY / ANN[ WHITELEY PETER R. SGO RO.JR.JR Mr. Timothy V. Ra '. Attorney at La i 1727 N.W. yt Street E>Lafrd, Oregon 97209 Re: Tigard Triangle Transportation Development Plan Dear Tim: am writing to summarize my recent telephone conversation with you concerning the Tigard Triangle Transportation Development Plan proposed by the Martins, and associated concerns which the Martins have. t Based upon the traffic study conducted by Wayne Kittelson, and the response of the Oregon Department of Transportation, it appears the connection of the Dartmouth L.1.D. to 99W will result in an unacceptable level of service on Highway 99W, and thus the State will not grant a permit to construct the intersection with Highway 99W. The Martins have met with Metro Region Engineer, Edward Hart and staff, with the Oregon Department of Transportation, and conceptualized a plan, which Gordon Martin recently presented to the City staff and which, according to Edward Hart, has merit and should be considered. The Martin plan would allow for maximum development of the Tigard Triangle, while meeting regional transportation needs which the State suggests mL---t be included in any plan for development of the Tigard I Triangle. s ' In September of 1985, the State invited the City of Tigard to meet with the State for the purposes of developing an internal circulation system for the triangle which would tie in with a regional transportation plan. Conceptually, the Martin plan would do both. On February 27, 1986, 1 understand a hearing will be conducted by the Oregon Department of Transportation for the purpose of updating the ( Six Year Highway Improvement Program. As I mentioned to you earlier, it s € seems prudent that the City at least contact the State prior to that hearing date, and explore the possibility of placing a local/regional transportation } plan for the Tigard Triangle on the agenda for discussion, The Martin plan has at least piqued the State's interest, whereas the Dartmouth L. I.D., / according to the State, will not work in its present form. t ` ppr;r -�- I Mr. Timothy V. Ramis February 5, 1986 Page 2 Time is of the essence in this matter. 1• suggest City to immediately contact the State usine the g the Martin plan as focus for discussion, and exploring the possibility that development of a transportation plan for the Tigard Triangle be included in the Six Year Highway Improvement Program. The City should immediately begin discussions with the State and not loose the opportunity, should one exist, for Possible state funding of all or a portion of the ultimate transportation plan for the Tigard Triangle. The City need not commit to any particular plan at this time, but simply begin discussions with the State. { Based upon the data available, it appears an interchange with Highway 217 and major east/west arterial will be necessary. In any plan for development of the Tigard Triangle the question is, who will pay for it. It seems prudent to discuss that question with the State. Property in the area of the only site for a Highway 217 interchange may soon be committed to incompatible uses which could either prevent future construction of a Highway 217 interchange or substantially Increase the cost of land acquisition. The Martins feel that if the City does not immediately contact the State and at least discuss the possibility of a local/regional transportation plan, then the possibility of State involvement and financing of the project may be lost. Should that occur, the result may be severe limitation to build- out potential of the Tigard Triangle with resultant damages to property owners in the area. iVery truly yours, _ GARY L. TYLER Of Attorneys for G. Martin GLT.mfn - cc: Gpriffon Martin, Sr. ,Gordon Martin, Jr. t � PAGE 2 Gordon S. Martin 12265.S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 i February 10, 1986 E HAND DELIVERED Mayor and City Council City of Tigard 12755 S.W. Ash Street Tigard, Oregon 97223 RE: Proposed transportation plan for the Tigard Triangle and surrounding region Honorable Mayor and City Council: In the past month I have presented to the Tigard transportation committee, City of Tigard Staff, and NPO #4 a regional transportation plan that was developed with the assistance of Torn Schwab, the Transportation Analysis Manager for the Oregon j Department of Transportation (ODOT). This plan will help alleviate traffic problems on Pacific Highway (99W), and provide an optimum traffic circulation system for the Tigard Triangle. I would like to summarize the merits of this { proposal and reinforce the concerns I have pertaining to the development of the Tigard Triangle transportation system. i A State funded regional transportation project that incorporates the local transportation needs of the Tigard Triangle would be far superior to a local only transportation project in the Triangle. Edward Hardt, Metro Region Engineer for ODOT, has reviewed this transportation plan and has stated that it has merit and should be considered. In Edward Hardt's letter to Robert Jean dated September 4, 1985, he recommends that the following two major areas need to be addressed in the development of a transportation plan for this region: (1) consideration of major north/south and/or east/west transportation spines, and (2) identify necessary improvements to the major state highways to serve the Triangle area. The letter also extended an invitation to the City of Tigard to meet with ODOT for the purposes of developing an internal traffic circulation system for the Tigard Triangle which would be incorporated into a plan that addresses regional transportation requirements. ( Due to the recent developments regarding the possibility of a regional [ transportation project, more than 50% of the property ownership in the Dartmouth L.I.D. district desire a regional approach in developing the traffic circulation system for the Tigard Triangle. Therefore, it seems reasonable for the City of Tigard to support property owners by encouraging ODOT to further investigate and implement a regional transportation plan such as the one I have presented to the (� City of Tigard Staff. EXHIBIT____ 1 PAGE .__�___ . Mayor and City CouncC February 10, 1986 Page 2 i The traffic study conducted by Wayne Kittelson, traffic engineer consultant for r CH2M Hill, concluded that the road system currently proposed to serve the Tigard Triangle area by the Dartmouth L.I.D. will not be adequate to accommodate the expected Year 2005 p.m. peak hour traffic demands. Specifically, the partial buildout scenario that was investigated in the traffic analysis found that the proposed Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway intersection will operate at an unacceptable "F" level of service during the Year 2005 p.m. peak hour. Tom Schwab has reviewed the analysis procedure and conclusions of this traffic study and concurs with its findings. Edward Hardt also concurs with the conclusions p drawn f rom the study. The twenty year analysis period required by ODOT is to ensure that all new transportation improvements connecting to State facilities have an acceptable service life of at least 20 years. According to the traffic engineering report, the Dartmouth L.I.D. design for the Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway intersection will experience operational problems before the Year 2000, and will have a volume/capacity ratio of 2.01 in the Year 2005, which is more than 100% over capacity. Although S.W. 69th and 72nd Avenues already have connections to Pacific Highway, they will also experience operational problems before the Year 2000. i Pacific Highway is the most important consideration in developing a workable transportation plan for the Tigard Triangle and surrounding region. The traffic study indicates that under the currently planned roadway configuration, 60% of all future inbound and outbound vehicle trip ends associated with the Tigard Triangle 4 area will be oriented toward Pacific Highway. The Year 2005 vehicle trip i projections are based on a 55% buildout estimate of the Triangle. The actual vehicle count translates into approximately 4,140 total vehicles traveling out of the Triangle onto Pacific Highway, and 3,300 vehicles traveling from Pacific { Highway into the Triangle during the p.m. peak hour. In the traffic study, 2,480 t (1/3 of the total) vehicles were assigned to the Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway Intersection. fAny acceptable transportation plan for the Tigard Triangle and surrounding region must address capacity level traffic demand on Pacific Highway. Pacific Highway is currently operating near capacity levels, therefore, it will be impossible to maintain an acceptable level of service on it if any large traffic volumes are added to it from the Tigard Triangle. For any plan to work it must reduce the projected Tigard Triangle traffic demand and through traffic volumes on Pacific Highway. Traffic demand on Pacific Highway can be reduced with two major road improvements: (1) The construction of a major overpass/interchange with Highway 217 approximately 1,600 feet south of Pacific Highway. (2) The construction of a major east/west arterial from I-5 at the Hains exit to Hall Boi!evard at McDonald street. A major overpass/interchange reduces Triangle traffic demand on Pacific Highway by providing a direct route to and from Highway 217 for Triangle traffic that would 1 normally require travel on Pacific Highway to access Highway 217 or the Triangle. A major east/west arterial reduces Triangle traffic demand and through traffic volumes on Pacific Highway by providing an alternate route for Triangle traffic in route to and from southwest Tigard and Pacific Highway through traffic . Y PAGE a _ Mayor and City Cc.uncc, �. February 10, 1986 Page 3 l _ { The Development of a internal traffic circulation system for the Tigard Triangle in conjunction with addressing regional transportation requirements is a very difficult and involved process. Construction of a stub-road and ramp connection to Highway 217 off the currently proposed Dartmouth L.I.D. and/or limiting buildout of the Tigard Triangle to 45%, is a short term approach to the Triangle's transportation problems. The goal should be to concentrate on developing a transportation plan that will adequately service the traffic generated by a 100% Triangle buildout. This goal would require a regional approach in developing the Triangle's traffic circulation system. On February 27, 1986, a hearing will be conducted by ODOT for the purpose of r updating the Six Year Highway Improvement Program. If a regional transportation plan that incorporates the local traffic needs of the Tigard Triangle is not presented at this hearing, the opportunity for essential State funding may be lost for another 3 years. It is evident that a overpass/interchange with Highway 217 and a major east/west arterial from I-5 to southwest Tigard will be necessary to provide an optimum level of service on Pacific Highway In addition to acceptable access to the Tigard I Triangle area. However, without ODOT and State funding, the cost associated with a regional transportation project will be prohibitive, and necessary right-of-way west of Highway 217 may be lost which further prevents the possibility of implementing a regional transportation project. The construction of a local road design such as the Dartmouth L.I.D., will eliminate I the possibility of ODOT involvement in helping to solve the Triangle's local I transportation problems. A long term comprehensive transportation plan for the Tigard Triangle and surrounding region will never take place unless the local needs ( of the Triangle are incorporated into a regional transportation plan that ODOT may i be willing to implement. One of the ten major goals of the City of Tigard is the development of the Tigard I Triangle Transportation system. It seems reasonable for the City to contact ODOT as soon as possible in order to pursue a regional transportation plan that provides for the local traffic needs of the Triangle. Support from the City of Tigard at the February 27, 1986, public hearing is imperative to the acceptance of a transportation plan into the Six Year Highway Improvement Program. The City of Tigard has everything to gain if a transportation plan is accepted into the program, but if the possibility of State involvement is lost, the transportation options and development potential of the Tigard Triangle will be greatly limited. Very truly yours, Gordon S. Martin 1r. { Enclosure: cc: Gary L. Tyler Timothy V. Ramis Bill Monahan Wayne Kittelson EXHIBIT 13 PAGE i i M E M O R A N D U M To: Dick Woelk'� From: David Prat Date: April 14 , 1986 Subj : Tigard Triangle Transportation arid Traffic Modeling Assumptions and Methodology t The in\ ent of this memorandum is to provide information that was requeste3 by Tom Schwab and Ron Failmezger in our meeting of April 10th. As I recall, they wanted information on the assump- tions behind the Traffic projections that were made as the result the using TRANPLAN, specifically the population and employment distributions by target year. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC MODELING METHODOLOGY i The TRANPLAN software pac)tage was used to develop a traffic simulation model that would provide a representation of existing i � projected traffic volumes lumes within the Tigard Triangle . A cursory land use/parking survey (tire results of which can be found in Table 4 ) was conducted to assist in determining popu- j lation/employment distribution within the study area. The survey ( was used in conjunction with the 1983 and projected 2005 popula- tion/employment. data provided by METRO and aerial photographs w)rich were made available by the City of Tigard. Calibration of the Tigard Triangle Traffic Simulation Model con- sisted of matching base year ( 1985 ) ground counts with volumes n 1 projected by themodel . Once the model projected reasonable volumes for the base year, a new street network was coded to i simulated tile 5 e 199 , 2005, arid Full Development street systems. Cordon or gateway ( 1 ) traffic projections from METRO were used with the year 2005 Scenario. Cordon projections for 1995 were developed under Lire assumption of a steady growth between 1985 and 2005 . Full Development cordon volumes were assumed to be capacity of the struts feeding into the study area. During the calibration process , both the traffic generation rates from the ITE Manual arid raters that were developed by DHS Asso- ciates of Oakland , Ca. , using a 1981 )rousehold survey that was conducted in the Salem Urban Area, were compared. It was deter- mined that Salem trip generation rates provided the- most reason- able trip tables and , with the exception of Full Development , ' were used for the purpose of this study. ---------------------- c ' ( 1 ) Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ's) No- 38-42 found on Maps 5 and 6 EXHIBIT PAGE �. it 14 , 1986 . `lemo to Dick Woelk C The trip rates that were used for the 1995 and 2005 Scenarios are 1 as follows: r` (.r 7 .33 trips per unit Single Family Dwelling, nits 7 ,56 trips per employee Commercial-General 2,3g trips per employee Commercial-Professional Elementary School 10.88 trips per employee The Full Development Scenario was approached differently from the 1995 and the 2005 target years. The trips were computed on the basis of gross acreage with a rate ofnd2298t64ptrips s per aper bacre used for Commercial-General (retail ) a being used for Commercial-Professional (office) . These rates Tamp from a publication entitled "Development and App lication of€ Generation Rates" (FHWA, January, 1985 ) . ( A restraint loading was used in distributing projected traffic on the simulated street network. The following capacities were used for this purpose: High Volume Arterial (99W) 35 ,000 vpd Major Collector with turn lanes 16 ,000 vpd •• If w/o turn lanes 10, 000 vpd Residential Streets ( imrroved) 4 ,000 vpd I •1 " (unimproved) 1 ,000 vpd 11 was assumed that the traffic volumes on 11wy 99W are near or at capacity and, as a result, volumes along this corridor would not change. Finally, the two primary routes that were that were tested (68/69th Street Extension from Hampton Street to Hwy were and the Dartmouth-78th Street connection from I-5 to 99W) coded with a continuous left turn ?ane . POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION age 3) Population and employment distributions for i '85 (Trblconducted in were based on the cursory land use/parking February of 1986. Likewise , andthe Fullpopulation Developmeatecanobeenfoundtrin � butions for 1995 , 2005, Tables 2 - 4 found on pages 4 - 6• ent for 5 and It was assumed that f°rstcoccur alonglthevma�nmcorridorsg9within the year 2005 would the Tigard Triangle. These corridors include Hampton St. between 72nd and 67th Streets; 68th St. between Hampton and Haines Streets; and the Dartmouth -- 7otulatStreet ion fExtensiondbetween the 1-d and Hwy 99. METRO employment/p p Tigard Comprehensive Plan were used to determine the level of development and type of distribution within the study area. The information contained in the Dwelling Unit and Employment Tables include the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) ; Single Family Dwelling Units (SFDU) ; Commercial-Professional (COMPRO) employ- ment, which covers office uses; Commercial-General (COMGEN) em- moo.® • "femo to Dick Woel h A( i 1 14 , 1936 ployment, which covers retail uses; and School employment. The exception is the Full Development scenario which utilizes the number of acres instead of employment for COMPRO and COMGEN. TABLE 1 1985 DWELLING UNIT/POPULATION DISTRIBUTION (2) (2) (2 ) TAZ SFDU COMPRO COMGEN SCHOOL j 1 0 490 0 0 l 2 0 177 0 0 3 0 104 0 0 4 0 134 0 0 5 0 128 0 0 6 2 106 0 0 7 5 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 9 2 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 i � 11 0 13 0 0 12 7 0 0 0 13 12 0 0 0 t 14 2 0 0 0 ( ! 15 9 0 0 0 16 1 0 0 0 I 17 10 0 0 0 18 3 103 0 0 19 7 0 0 0 20 5 0 0 0 21 i 0 0 0 22 4 0 0 0 23 6 0 0 0 24 2 0 0 0 25 11 0 0 0 26 16 0 0 0 27 13 0 0 0 28 0 167 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 30 4 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 54 32 32 0 0 0 33 5 0 0 0 34 18 0 0 0 35 2 0 0 0 36 1 0 0 0 37 14 0 0 0 42 0 500 0 0 l 43 94 0 460 0 44 94 0 460 0 45 94 0 460 0 -------------- ---TOTAL- 482 1 ,922 1 ,380 54 ------------------------------------------- ------------ ( 2) Employment Figures Memo to Dick Woelk ril 14 , 1986 TABLE 2 I 1995 DWELLING UNIT/POPULATION DISTRIBUTION ( 2 ) (2 ) (2 ) TAZ SFDU COMPRO COMGEN SCHOOL 1 0 490 0 0 2 0 200 0 0 3 0 100 0 0 4 0 150 0 0 5 0 150 0 0 6 2 100 0 0 7 5 0 0 0 l 8 0 0 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 11 0 100 0 0 12 7 0 0 0 13 12 0 0 0 14 2 0 0 0 15 9 0 0 0 16 1 0 0 0 17 10 0 0 0 ! 18 3 150 50 0 19 7 0 0 0 r 20 5 0 0 0 21 7 0 0 0 22 4 0 0 0 23 6 0 0 0 24 2 0 0 0 25 11 0 0 0 26 16 0 0 0 ( 27 13 0 50 0 28 0 300 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 30 4 200 0 0 31 0 0 0 55 32 32 0 0 0 33 5 0 0 0 34 18 0 0 0 35 2 0 260 0 36 1 0 0 0 37 14 0 0 0 42 0 400 0 0 43 94 0 460 0 44 94 0 460 0 45 94 0 460 0 ------------------------------- TOTAL 482 2,340 1 ,740 55 ----------------------------------------------------------------- (2) Employment Figures ( (3) Number of Acres a • Memo to Dick Woelk C-il 14 , 1986 1 TABLE 3 2005 DWELLING UNIT/POPULATION DISTRIBUTION i p (2) (2 ) ( 2 ) TAZ SFDU COMPRO COMGEN SCHOOL ' 1 0 490 0 0 2 0 400 0 0 3 0 100 0 0 4 0 250 0 0 5 0 250 0 0 6 2 400 0 0 7 5 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 10 0 400 0 0 11 0 300 0 0 12 7 0 0 0 13 12 0 0 0 14 2 0 0 0 15 9 0 0 0 16 1 0 0 0 17 10 0 0 0 18 3 200 50 0 19 7 0 0 0 20 5 0 0 0 21 7 0 0 0 22 4 0 0 0 23 6 0 0 0 24 2 0 0 0 25 11 0 0 0 26 16 0 0 0 27 13 0 50 0 28 0 300 0 0 29 0 400 0 0 30 4 400 0 0 j 31 0 0 0 55 ( 32 32 0 0 0 33 5 0 0 0 34 18 0 0 0 35 2 0 260 0 36 1 0 0 0 37 14 0 0 0 42 0 400 0 0 43 94 0 460 0 44 94 0 460 0 45 94 0 460 0 ------------------------------- TOTAL 482 4 ,290 1 ,740 55 ----------------------------------------------------------------- t (2) Employment Figures (3) Number of Acres Memo to Dick Woelk it 14 , 1986 l TABLE 4 i FULL DEVELOPMENT DWELLING UNIT/POPULATION DISTRIBUTION I (3) (3) (2) TAZ SFDU COMPRO COMGEN SCHOOL 1 0 20.0 0 0 2 0 5. 1 0 0 3 0 4 . 1 0 0 4 0 3.4 0 0 5 0 6 .9 0 0 6 0 5.7 0 0 7 0 5. 7 0 0 8 0 5.7 0 0 9 0 2.9 0 0 { 10 0 2. 9 0 0 i 11 0 2.3 0 0 t 12 0 4 . 8 0 0 f 13 0 12. 3 0 0 14 0 2.9 0 0 15 9 0 0 0 16 0 6 .9 0 0 4 17 0 6.9 0 0 18 0 0 13 .8 0 19 0 8. 4 0 0 1 20 0 4 . 8 0 0 21 0 2. 1 0 0 22 0 1 . 1 0 0 23 0 2. 1 0 0 24 0 1 . 1 0 0 25 11 0 0 0 26 16 0 0 0 27 0 0 27 .8 0 28 0 14 . 1 0 0 29 0 23.6 0 0 30 4 0 16.0 0 31 0 0 0 55 32 32 0 0 0 33 0 0 43 .8 0 i 34 18 0 0 0 t 35 0 0 9.5 0 36 14 0 0 0 ( 37 0 27 . 5 0 0 [ 42 0 --(4 ) 0 0 43 94 1 .3 ---( 4 ) 0 44 94 0 ---(4 ) 0 45 94 0 ---(4 ) 0 ------------------------- ---- -----------TOTAL--386--184 .6 110.9 55 (2) Employment Figures (3) Number of Acres (4 ) Employment Figures Used (Default) O;T v4 PAGE !r i Memo to Dick Woelk � �� i1 1.1 , 1986 t( TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS The traffic projections for the various scenarios can be found in the maps that area attached to this memorandum. Please note that the first four maps (No. 1 - 4 ) contain the actual ground counts ( 1985) and the projected traffic volumes for 1995 , 2005 , and Full Development. The fifth map (No. 5) illustrates boundaries of the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ's) in comparison with the land uses contained in the adopted Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The last map (No. 6) graphically shows how the TRANPLAN loaded TAZ trips onto simulated street network. If you have any questions regarding the modeling processes or would like additional information, please feel free to contact me. 1 i i i I EXHOT PAC,; '�- KITTELSO O& L� ANINASSOCIATES G/TRAFI FENGINEERING TRANSPORT r,. 512 5 W BROADWAY • PORTLAND.OREGON 97205 • (503,228-5230 May 13, 1986 Project No. 1 .03 Mr. Richard L. Woelk Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc. 200 16016 SW Boones Ferry Road, Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 i Dear Dick: Subject: Summary of Comments at Meeting on Tigard Triangle L The purpose of this letter is to recap for you my comments on two key issues that arose during our joint meeting with ODOT on Friday, May 2. These issues include the basic trip generation ' rates (by land use type) that have been assumed as part of your on-going study for the City of Tigard, and also the related issue { of the percentage of all Triangle-generated trips assumed to remain entirely within the study area boundaries. As you know, my concern with the basic trip-generation rates that have been used is that they are taken from a previous investiga- tion of regional travel demands within the Salem area, whereas I the current study is focused on a relatively small area in an l outlying part of Portland. As a result, total traffic volume is probably being underestimated at the key portal points into and out of the Triangle area . For example, consider the assumed trip generation rate of 7.56 vehicle trip ends 1,"r employee for all Commercial-General land uses. Recognizing that at least three of these vehicle trip ends can be attributed to the employee (in- cluding travel to work, travel during lunch time, and travel home) , this assumption implies tLat each employee will serve only two or three customers on an average weekday during his/her entire 8-hour work shift. This seems to be an unreasonably low M estimate of employee productivity, and it is difficult to imagine many Commercial-General land uses that could survive on such a small number of customers. Of course, it is possible that these trip generation rates reflect only new vehicle trip ends generated by Commercial- General land uses, and that in fact there will be many internal ter- vehicle trip ends as well. Unfortunately, ignoring these in nal vehicle trips during the overall assignment process is likely ( to result in an underestimate of total traffic volumes on the t ' t I T S Mr. Richard L. Woelk May 13 , 1986 Page Two ` internal street system, and is also likely to once again result in an underestimate of total turning movement volumes at the key Triangle portals. Furthermore, a purely practical viewpoint would also suggest that most vehicle trips will originate outside the study area. This is because the Full Development scenario assumes there will be less than 900 residential units within the Tigard Triangle area . Since these households will make rela- tively few shopping trips on any given day, and since only a por- tion of these shopping trips will be made to businesses located within the Tigard Triangle, it follows that most of the vehicle trips attracted to these new commercial developments must come from locations outside the Tigard Triangle. fI believe that the foregoing represents a fair assessment of my basic concerns, and hope you will be able to take these comments into consideration as you prepare a final version of your report. t Please feel free to call me if you have additional questions t related to this matter that I may be able to answer. Sincerely, Wayne K. Kittelson Principal cc: Tom Schwab Gordon S. Martin ` 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 May 22, 1986 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Richard L. Woelk Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc. 16016 S.W. Boones Ferry Road, Suite 200 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 RE: Traffic Study for Tigard Triangle. Dear Mr. Woelk: This letter will address and analyze six areas which affect the forecasted traffic impact on the currently proposed street• system in the Tigard Triangle. The analysis of the six areas has led me to believe your traffic study underestimates the severity of the traffic impact on the proposed street system. Therefore, I feel additional consideration should be given to the following areas before your study is finalized. 1. Buildable Land Inventory in the Triangle. 2. Employment Forecasts of the Triangle by year 2000. 3. Build-out of Triangle by year 2000. 4. Build-out of Triangle by year 2005 using Empl,-)yment Forecasts from Mr. Pratt's April 14, 1986, memo. 5. Trip Generation Rates / Linked Trips for Commercial General (C-G). 6. Commercial Professional (C-P) Trips as a Peak-hour Function. Item 1. Buildable Land Inventory in the Trian&le. By examining the 1978 and 1983 Comprehensive Plans, it appears that during the comprehensive planning process, the acreage in the Triangle that had been redesignated to C-G from Highway Commercial was not transferred to the Triangle's C-G land inventory. It also appears that during the same planning process, the residential land that had been redesignated to C-P was not added to the Triangle's C-P land inventory. For this reason I conducted in 1985, a land inventory census of the Triangle and found the difference between the Comprehensive Plan Urbanization Document (CPUD) buildable land for the Triangle and my own, was approximately the same amount of acreage in the Triangle ti-At had been redesignated to C-G and C-P. The table below shows the total developed and buildable land associated with zoning designations within the Triangle according to my 1985 land inventory census of the Triangle. G �- C Land Inventory in Triangle Current Zoning: ( Total Acres Developed Acres Buildable land I 1985 Census Acres Commercial General 161.51 30.59 130.92 Commercial Professional 129.93 41.21 81.51 PGE Sub Station (in C-P) 7.21 0.00 Residents R-3.5 41.36 41.36 0.00 Totals: 332.8 120.37 212.43 Using the table above and data from CPUD's buildable land inventory, leads to revised totals for Commercial and C-P buildable land in Tigard which are both larger than CPUDs. Both increased totals are due to increases in C-G and C-P buildable land within the Triangle. According to CPUD, there is 90.6 acres as opposed to my census of 130.92 acres of C-G buildable land in the Triangle. This increases the total Commercial buildable land in Tigard of 152.69 acres (in CPUD) to 193.01 acres. (The total Commercial buildable land in Tigard as reported in CPUD's buildable land inventory includes the acreage from the zoning designations of: C-G, C-N, C-G P-D, and 1/2 of the CBD). CPUD also shows there is 66.68 acres as opposed to my census of 81.51 acres of C-P buildable land in the Triangle. This will increase the Total C-P buildable land in Tigard of 117.32 acres (in CPUD) to 132.15 acres. (Total C-P buildable land in Tigard as reported in CPUD's r buildable land inventory includes the acreage from the zoning designations of: C-P {i and 1/2 of CBD). The following two tables summarizes the buildable land inventory for CPUD and my own, in terms of Commercial and C-P buildable land in the Triangle and Tigard. Commercial Buildable Land (Acres) Martin CPUD j Commercial Buildable Land In Tigard Excluding Triangle: 62.09* 62.09 C-G Buildable Land In Triangle: 130.92 90.60 Total Commercial Buildable Land in Tigard: 193.01 152.69 - *From CPUD's Buildable Land Inventory �f (♦. -2- U,-f- ;''r_ �� 4 � � Commercial Professional Buildable land (Acres) i Martin CPUD i C-P Buildable Land in i Tigard Excluding Triangle: 50.64* 50.64 C-P Buildable Land In Triangle: 81.51 66.68 Total C-P Buildable Land In Tigard: 132.15 117.32 i *From CPUD's Buildable Land Inventory f Item 2. Employment Forecasts of the Triangle by year 2000. f The potential for employment growth within the Triangle is as great as for any buildable land in Tigard. Therefore, if the CPUD's forecasted employment growth is used, it is reasonable to distribute that data proportionately to Tigard's buildable land inventory. For this reason, the Triangle can expect to receive a percent of CPUD's year 2000 forecasted employment growth equal to the ratio of Triangle to Tigard buildable land. The following employment growth information is from page 290 of CPDD: Employment Growth for Tigard Retail Employment Office Employment 2000 8,320 14,020 1980 -61560 -7,630 Total New Employees: 1,760 6,390 Using CPUD's forecasted employment growth and the Triangle's revised buildable land inventory as outlined in item ill, the Triangle's C-P and C-G, share of CPUD's forecasted employment growth of Tigard is determined below. Triangle Commercial Professional Employment Forecasts From item 1/1, the total revised C-P buildable land in Tigard is 132.15 acres of which 81.51 acres lies within the Triangle. Therefore, the Triangle has 61.72 % of the C-P Buildable land in Tigard, that is, 81.51 Buildable C-P acres in Triangle = 61.7% of C-P buildable land is in Triangle 132.15 Buildable C-P acres in Tigard {t i The forecast of 3,941 new C-P employees in the Triangle by the year 2000 is now found: ,{ 61.7% of 6,390 new C-P employees in Tigard = 3,941 forecasted new C-P employees allocated to Triangle by year 2000. ! Triangle Commercial General Employ ment Forecasts From item /I1, the total revised Commercial buildable land in Tigard is 193.01 acres of which 130.92 acres lies within the Triangle. Therefore, the Triangle has [ 67.8% of the total Commercial buildable land in Tigard, that is, t 130.92 Buildable C-G acres in Triangle = 67.8% of Commercial buildable ` 193.01 Buildable Commercial acres in Tigard land is in Triangle T The forecast of 1,193 new C-G employees for the Triangle by year 2000, is now found: j 67.8% of 1,760 new Commercial employees in Tigard = 1,193 forecasted new C-G employees allocated to Triangle by year 2000. r Item 3. Build-out of Triangle by year 2000. Triangle C-P and C-G build-out by year 2000 is approximated below using CPUD's employment forecasts (from item /i2) prorated to the Triangle's revised buildable land inventory (from item 1/1.) Triangle Commercial Professional Build-out (Using prorated CPUD employment forecasts from item 4/2) In 1985, I conducted a detailed census of the C-P developments in the Triangle and found that there is 538,314 gross square feet (GSF) of development with 1,805 capacity employees. Using the forecast of 3,941 new Triangle C-P employees by year 2000 from item 4/2, and the average GSF per C-P employee of 298 (538,314/1,805), the GSF of new Triangle C-P development by the year 2000 is: 3,941 new C-P employees @ 298 GSF/employee = 1,174,332 GSF of new Triangle C-P development. Due to the high cost of land in the Triangle the current trend is a maximum City Code build-out per acre of 29% or 12,632 GSF of building space for the first floor. In the C-P zone, two floors or 25,264 GSF (2 X 12,632 GSF) of building per acre has recently been the rule. The conversion of GSF to acres of new Triangle C-P development is: i -4- (r 4- ( - i 1,174 332 GSF = 46.48 acres of new Triangle C-P development by year 2000. 25,264 GSF acre Therefore, the estimated new C-P build-out in the Triangle by the year 2000 is 14.0%, that is, 46.48 acres of C-P = 14.0% new Triangle C-P build-out by year 2000. 353 tote acres n rlangle ;P Triangle Commercial General Build-out 1,-. (Using Prorated CPUD Employment Forecasts from Item #2) Before new build-out in the year 2000 is determined it is necessary to find the GSF per employee. The use of the portion of the Triangle which adjoins Pacific Highway as a model upon which an average GSF can be determined is based on CPUD's prorated forecast of new C-G employees in the Triangle by the year 2000. f With 440 C-G employees and 226,965 GSF developed at full lease-out (totals are from my census conducted in 1985), this portion of the Triangle development is indicative of future Triangle C-G development given the year 2000 forecast of 1,193 new C-G employees in the Triangle as determined in item 112, provided that the percentage of restaurant facilities is reduced from 25% to the normal 15% of ' C-G development in areas with a similar employment level. Therefore, the average GSF per employee is 515 (226,965/440) before, and 580 GSF per employee after the restaurant percentage normalization. f Using the year 2000 forecasted new Triangle C-G employees of 1,193 from item f/2, and the average GSF per C-G employee of 580, the resulting 691,940 GSF of new Triangle C-G development may now be determined as follows: 1,193 new C-G employees @ 580 GSF/employee = 691,940 GSF of new Triangle C-G development Due to the high cost of land in the Triangle we can expect a maximum City Code build-out per acre of 29% or 12,632 GSF of building space for the first floor. In the C-G zone it is likely that there will be only one floor therefore, 12,632 GSF per acre is used. The conversion of GSF to acres of new Triangle C-G development is: f 691 940 GSF = 54.78 acres of new Triangle C-G development by year 2000. 12,632 GSF acre Therefore, the estimated new C-G build-out in the Triangle by the year 2000 is 16.5%, that is, 54.78 acres of C-G = 16.5% new Triangle C-G build-out by year 2000. 333 total acres in Triangle The following table is a summary of employment and build-out for the Triangle by year 2000 using prorated CPUD employment forecasts from item #2: ( -5- PAGE __ 6 - i c � Triangle Build-out and Employment Summary Year 2000 f (Using Prorated CPUD Employment Forecasts from item #2) i t ` Year Employment Acres Triangle Build-out Commercial General 1985 440 30.59 9.2% New Commercial General 2000 1193 54.78 16.5% Commercial Professional 1985 1422 41.21 12.4% New Commercial Professional 2000 3941 46.48 14.0% PGE Sub-Station 0 7.21 2.1% Totals for year 2000 6996 180.27 54.2% By prorating the CPUD's employment data to the Triangle's revised buildable land inventory, a 54.2% build-out can be achieved by the year 2000. This forecasted build-out plus five more years at the same yearly rate will approximate your forecasted 70% build-out in the year 2005. j Item 4. Build-out in Triangle by year 2005 using Employment Forecasts from Mr. Pratt's April 14, 1986, Memo. i r E Before build-out can be computed, it is necessary to determine new Triangle employees in C-P and C-G for the year 2005. An analysis of Mr. Pratt's memo l reveals a forecast of 2,468 new C-P and 360 new C-G employees in the Triangle for the year 2005. The year 2005 total C-P and C-G employees for the Triangle may also be determined using Mr. Pratt's memo to find the number of 1985 C-P { employees and my 1985 employee census f or C-G (since it is not possible to C determine this from Mr. Pratt's memo); the total employees in the Triangle for C-P is 3,890 (1,422 employees in 1985 + 2,468 new employees in the year 2005) and C-G is 800 (440 employees in 1985 + 360 new employees in the year 2005). The summary of the year 2005 Triangle build-out analysis for C P and C-G given in (A) and (B) below, will show that the forecast of 4,690 total Triangle employees (3,890 C-P + 800 C-G employees) in the year 2005 results in a 34.8% build-out of the Triangle as opposed to the 70% build-out stated in your traffic study. (A) Commercial Professional New C-P build-out in the Triangle by the year 2005 is determined below. From Mr. Pratt's memo, it was determined that your traffic study is estimating 2,469 new C-P employees by the year 2005. In 1985, I conducted a detailed census of the C-P developments in the Triangle and found that there is 538,314 gross square feet (CSF) of development with 1,805 capacity employees. Therefore, the average GSF per C-P employee is 298 (538,314/1,805), and the GSF of new Triangle C-P development by the year 2005 is 735,464 GSF, that is, i 1 2,468 new C-P employees @ 298 GSF/employee = 735,464 GSF of new Triangle C-P development. Due to the high cost of land in the Triangle the current trend is a maximum City Code build-out per acre of 29% or 12,632 GSF of building space for the first floor. In the C-P zone, two floors or 25,264 GSF (2 X 12,632 GSF) of building per acre has recently been the rule. The conversion of GSF to acres of new Triangle C-P davelopments lss 735 464 GSF = 29.1 acres of new Triangle C-P development by year 2005. 25,264 GSF Acre Therefore, new C-P build-out in the Triangle by the year 2005 is 8.7%, that is, 29.1 Acres of C-P = 8.7% new Triangle C-P build-out by year 2005. I 333 total acres in Triangle t (B) Commercial General Before new C-G build-out in the Triangle by the year 2005 is determined, it is necessary to find the average GSF per employee. The use of Washington Square II as a model upon which an average GSF can be determined, is based on your forecast of new C-G employees in the Triangle by the year 2005. With 302 employees and 83,382 GSF of development at full lease-out (totals are from a 1986 f census I conducted), the Washington Square II development is indicative of future Triangle C-G development given the low, year 2005, forecast of 360 new C-G employees as determined from Mr. Pratt's memo. Therefore, using :he average GSF per employee of 276 (83,382/302), and the 360 new C-G employees in the year 2005 as determined f—rom Mr. Pratt's memo, the resulting 99,360 GSF of new Triangle C-G development may now be determined as follows: 360 new C-G employees @ 276 GSF/employee = 99,360 GSF of new Triangle C-G development. Due to the high cost of land in the Triangle we can expect a maximum City Code ( build-out per acre of 29% or 12,632 GSF of building space for the first floor. In the i C-G zone it is likely that there will be only one floor therefore, 12,632 GSF per acre is used. The conversion of GSF to acres of new Triangle C-G development is: 99,360 GSF - 7.87 acres of new Triangle C-G development by year 2005. 12,632 GSF/acre Therefore, the estimated new C-G build-out in the Triangle by the year 2005 is 2.4%, that is, 7.87 acres of C-G = 2.4% new Triangle C-G build-out by year 2005. 333 total acres in Triangle -7- PAGE �" The following table is a summary of employment and build-out for the Triangle by year 2005 using the employment forecasts from Mr. Pratt's April 14, 1985 memo: Triangle Build-out and Employment Summary Year 2005 (Using Mr. Pratt's Employment Forecasts) Year Employment Acres Triangle Build-out Commercial General 1985 440 30.59 9.2% ( New Commercial General 2005 360 7,87 2.4% Commercial Professional 1985 1422 41.21 12.4% New Commercial Professional 2005 2468 29.11 8.7% PGE Sub-Station 0 7.21 2.1% Totals for year 2005 4690 115.9 34.8% { The above employment and build-out summary table indicates that an employment level of 4,690 results in a 34.8% build-out of the Triangle. Therefore, it is unlikely that the Triangle will attain a 70% build-out. 4 Item 5. Trip Generation Rates / Linked Trips for Commercial General (C G) It is my understanding that Salem trip rates from 1981 (which are much lower than E 1-;2 rates) are being used instead of ITE rates because ITE rates caused the proposed street system to fail. Whereas the Salem trip rates did not--with the exception of the intersection at Pacific Highway and Dartmouth. For the following reasons, ITE rates rather than the Salem Trip rates are more appropriate for the traffic study of the Triangle. The first reason is that the I{ Transportation Analysis Manager at the Oregon Department of Transportation, Tom Schwab, found the ITE rates appropriate and used them when he prepared his traffic study for the Triangle. A second reason is the potential of drop-in traffic from the approximately 140,000 vehicles per day which pass by on the three major state arterials surrounding the Triangle. A third reason arises from the assumption that only 10% of the C-G trips will originate from outside the Triangle and 90% of the trips originate from within. This implies that the C-G developments within the Triangle will primarily do business with residents and employees of C-P developments also in the Triangle. It is unrealistic to limit the service area of C-G developments to within the Triangle by the assumption above because of the close proximity of the Triangle to other cities, potential drop-in traffic from the three state arterials, and the fact that other C-G developments such as Beaverton Town Square attract much more than 10% of its customers outside an area the size of j the Triangle. In other words, the C-G developments can expect to have a service l area many times larger than the Triangle with a much larger customer base and subsequently, will be responsible for a larger volume of trips to and from the Triangle. 1' �. 1i1' i PACG,E __ 1 f Therefore, assuming that the poor traffic circulation on the current internal street system of the Triangle will be corrected with the implementation of a properly designed system, there are strong reasons to bel*-ve that ITE trip generation rates s are the appropriate rates to be used for the Triangle. Item 6. Commercial Professional Trips as a Peak-Hour Function. r. i In your traffic study the C-P trips are represented on the proposed street system on a per day basis. The Intersection Capacity Map year 2005 scenario, which was handed out at the March 19, 1986 meeting with the NPO #4, shows all of the f internal intersections within the Tr*angle functioning at "A" or "B" levels of E service. If you conduct traffic counts during the P.M. peak hour at the 72nd Avenue / Hampton street intersection which is nearly exclusively used by C-P traffic, it is clear that it is functioning at an unacceptable level of service. For f this reason I feel C-P traffic should be studied on a peak-hour basis rather than a per day basis. Summary of items 1-6: 1. The results of my 1985 census of the Tigard Triangle leads to revised totals for CPUD's buildable land inventory for the Triangle and Tigard. The summary tables in item #1 shows an increase in C-G buildable land in the Triangle from 90.6 acres (from CPUD) to 130.92. This revision changes the total Commercial buildable land in Tigard (from CPUD) from 152.69 acres to 1 193.01. The table also shows an increase in C-P buildable land in the Triangle from 66.68 acres (in CPUD) to 81.51. This revision changes the total i Commercial buildable land in Tigard (in CPUD) from 117.32 acres to 132.15. In the Triangle there is 129.93 acres zoned for C-P development, 161.51 acres zoned for C-G development, and 41.36 acres zoned for residential for a total of 332.8 acres in the Triangle. E 2. If CPUD employment data is used, it should be distributed proportionately to the revised buildable land inventory for Tigard. By allocating the Triangle its prorated share of the forecasted 8,150 total new C-P and C-G employees in the City of Tigard by the year 2000, the Triangle can expect 3,941 new C-P and 1,193 new C-G employees. 3. The employment levels from #2 above, yields a 54.2% build-out of the Triangle by the year 2000. 4. The 70% build-out in the Triangle by the year 2005 is inconsistent with the employment growth forecasts you are presently using. Your current employment forecasts will generate 11.1% new build-out and a total build-out of 34.8% in the Triangle by the year 2005. There must be much more new employment in the Triangle to attain a 70% build-out. (Using the Office to Retail employment ratio obtained from CPUD and the same process and information used in the calculations of item #3, it would take 1,849 new C-G and 6,108 new C-P employees to attain a 70% build-out.) S. The trip generation rates used for C-G are to low, Not using the ITE rates because they over-load the proposed street system, will subsequently cause the 4 :affic impact on the system to be underestimated. Also, it is unrealistic to i.. assume that 10% of all C-G trips will originate from outside the Triangle and 90% of all trios originate from within. The Triangle has 140,000 vehicles passing by each day which provides an extremely large supply of drop-in traffic. F 6. C-P traffic is primarily a peak hour function and thermstore should be studied as such. x the future traffic impact is underestimated in the Triangle and the necessary street improvements are not provided for, land values will fall and future development will be hindered. Poor access and traffic circulation does not attract , customers. For these reasons the future traffic projections for the Triangle are f very important to property owners an:: developers of the area. 1 If you have any questions please feel free to call either Wayne Kittelson or myself. s r Sincerely, : GORDON S. MARTIN 620-2477 r I cc: Mr. Wayne K. Kittelson s Mr. Thomas Schwab Mr. Gary L. Tyler . Mr. Charles Ruttan E EXot-IlSiT (c • I I(ITTELSON & ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 512 S.W.BROADWAY o PORTLAND.OREGON 97205 • (503)228-5230 1 Kcn<1 July 18, 1986 I Project No. 1.03 Mr. Richard L. Woelk Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc. 16016 SW Boones Ferry Road, Suite 200 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 + HAND DELIVERED SUBJECT: Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Study Dear Dick: L As you know, Gordon Martin and I met on June 13 with Mr. Randy Wooley, Tigard City Engineer, in order to try to eliminate some of the key differences between the set of assumptions used in our original analysis and the set of assumptions being used in the ` current study under performance by Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc. (ATEP) . We requested this meeting because of our understanding that you feel constrained in your ability to develop assumptions similar to ours. Specifically, I refer to our earlier conversations in which you indicated that your assumptions are required to be consistent with all informa- tion contained within Tigard' s current Comprehensive Plan, and also with projections developed by the Metropolitan Service District (MSD) . Since City staff have the ability to provide additional or new direction to your analysis, we believed it would be beneficial to raise the following points with Mr. Wooley: 1) The Buildable Land Inventory, which is contained within the Urbanization Document and therefore is also a part of the current Comprehensive Plan, does not accurately define the total amount of land with traffic- generating potential that is contained inside the Tigard Triangle. In fact, the current Comprehensive Plan identifies only the net buildable land within the Tigard Triangle, and excludes all sensitive land areas. By using only the buildable land area in its traffic cyMINT PAGE I Mr. Richard L. Woelk i July 18, 1986 E Page 2 z study, ATEP is effectively assuming that sensitive lands have no ability to generate vehicle trips. This i is an unrealistic assumption, since most developers "overbuild" on the nonsensitive land within their development, and use the sensitive lands for other required amenities such as parking and landscaping. Thus, the net density of the completed development is equal to the maximum density allowed under current zoning, taking into account the entire amount of land + that is available and not just the buildable land. 1 2) Partly because of 1) above, the ATEP study is under- estimating total employment within the Tigard Triangle . Obviously, developing an accurate estimate of total future employment within the Tigard Triangle is a crit- ical component of any traffic study cfor rethis area , since employment leveot1highly ln fact, one of the key with vehicle trip-making pential estimators of traffic generation that is used in MSD' s current regional transportation model is total employ- ment. i 3) Also with respect to predicting future employment levels within the Tigard Triangle, the ATEP study believes itself to be constrained and limited by cur- rent MSD projections. However, it appears that the MSD I projections upon which ATEP is relying are outdated and therefore inappropriate for use in this study. ' On June 24, Mr. Wooley wrote a letter .to Mr. Martin that responded to these comments. With respect to the first item, Mr. Wooley concurred with ATEP's decision to exclude sensitive lands from consideration during performance of its traffic study. Z respectfully disagree, and point out that most new developments • do not even come close to full. lot coverage. Today' s developer must meet minimum City requirements with respect to such elements as surface parking, landscaping, open space: and buffer areas. These requirements can be and often are met through use of on- site sensitive lands without sacrificing the overall densities that are . normally achieved. Thus, the trip generation rates that traffic engineers use implicitly assume only 25-30 percent lot coverage for commercial retail developments, and 30-50 percent lot coverage for commercial office developments. In further support for my position on this issue, I cite as examples virtually every private development with which I have been associated that included some amount of non-buildable land. Z suspect that many of your private clients have also been in similar situations, yet were able to design their developments in BIT 1 PAGE r Mr. Richard L. Woelk July 18 , 1986 Page 3 i such a way that maximum allowable densities were achieved. I recently spoke with Elizabeth Newton, Senior Planner for the City of Tigard, and she echoed this belief by stating that many Tigard developments are able to achieve maximum allowable densities i without constructing on sensitive or otherwise unbuildable lands. i Furthermore, I should note ghat building can often occur on sensitive lands if appropri.Lte site improvements (for example, filling, storm drainage, etc. ) are completed. This is definitely the case within the Tigard Triangle. In fact, a good example of this type of development is the Park 217 complex, which is directly west of the Tigard Triangle. Finally, it is important to remember that, at least in your "Full Development Scenario", trip generation rates were computed on the ` basis of gross acreage. Therefore, these rates were not 1 developed through a process that excluded sensitive lands from the total available acreage, and so your analysis must also include all land within the Tigard Triangle, and not just the buildable land. Mr. Wooley's letter dated June 24 also responded to our expressed concern regarding projected employment levels within the Tigard Triangle. In his response, Mr. Wooley relies upon ATEP 's exper- tise in evaluating the need for modifying its current employment assumptions. With this reliance in mind, I would like to take this opportunity to present several observations and points of information. t On May 16, 1985, Mr. Dick Bolen, who is a Senior Data Analyst for MSD, wrote a memo indicating that the land use assumptions employed by MSD for the Tigard Triangle up until that date were significantly different from the zoning characteristics found in Tigard's updated 1984 Comprehensive Plan. A copy of Mr. Bolen' s memo is attached. Based on the recommendation contained in Mr. Bolen's memo, the Southwest Technical Advisory Committee devel- oped new employment forecasts for traffic zones 129 and 226. MSD's revised employment forecasts for these zones are also attached for your review. As you can see through a review of this information, the latest MSD forecasts project a retail employment increase by 2005 of 117 employees in traffic zone 129 and 636 employees in traffic zone 226. In contrast, the retail employment increases estimated in Mr. David Pratt's April 14, 1986 memo to you are for 310 new employees in traffic zone 129 but only 50 new retail employees in i traffic zone 226. These assumptions represent less than half the I � 111 T i c c. Mr. Richard L. Woelk July 18, 1986 Page 4 net number of new retail employees projected by MSD for these two zones, and therefore are inconsistent with current MSD projec- tions. l A similar (but not so significant) situation occurs with respect S to projected office employment within the Tigard Triangle. MSD's latest projections are for 2,649 additional office employees within traffic zones 129 and 226 by the year 2005. However, Mr. Pratt has assumed that only 2,468 new office employees will be located within these two zones by 2005. The above information indicates that your current analysis is underestimating future employment levels within the Tigard Triangle area, at least with respect to current MSD projections. Beyond this, I believe that the latest employment forecasts pre- pared by MSD for the Tigard Triangle (traffic zones 129 and 226) are still too low, primarily because the recent Tigard Comprehensive Plan update (which greatly increases the avail- ability of undeveloped commercial land) is not sufficiently ( reflected in these forecasts. To illustrate the basis for this ` belief, I refer you to Attachment 3, which identifies MSD's esti- mated allocation of employees on a "per square feet of floor area" basis and also on a "per acre of land area" basis . Using this allocation in combination with MSD's estimated employment increase suggests that only 25 additional acres will be developed into retail activities and only 31 additional acres will be ` developed into office activities. Recognizing that there are 1 approximately 333 acres available within the Tigard Triangle and taking into account all existing development, this would mean that only about 39 percent of the available land area is t developed by 2005. This seems to me to be an unreasonably low 2005 buildout estimate for the Tigard Triangle, given its location and access to regional transportation facilities. ' Of course, Mr. Pratt's estimated employment increase will result in an even lower 2005 buildout estimate. Specifically, applying i MSD's employee density figures in combination with Mr. Pratt's employment projections suggests that only 12 additional acres will be developed into retail activities and only 29 additional acres will be developed into office activities by 2005. After j taking all existing development into account, this represents about a 35 percent buildout of the Tigard Triangle by 2005. More important, this calculation appears to be in direct conflict with your draft report's assumption that these conditions represent a 70 percent buildout scenario for the Tigard Triangle. Therefore, even if you are convinced that Mr. Pratt's employment projections are a reasonable representation of 2005 conditions, your report should qualify this assumption by noting that, under l Mr. Richard L. Woelk July 18, 1986 r Page 5 K this scenario, 35 percent of the Tigard Triangle's land area will be developed. Such a qualification is especially important to make in this particular traffic circulation study, where recommendations are being developed for sizing the Tigard Triangle's internal roadway system so that expected future - traffic volumes can be accommodated. I hope that these comments will be useful to you as you prepare your final report. If you have additional questions or comments regarding any of the material contained in this letter, please do ( not hesitate to call. Si cerely, nrX. ittelson, P.E. Principal cc: Mr. Tom Schwab Mr. Gary Tyler Mr. Randy Wooley f f I i C-CE .r June 24, 1986 Gordon S. Martin OREGON 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 25 Years of Service 1961-1986 Reference: Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Study On June 13, 1986, you and Wayne Rittleson requested my consideration of letters which you had written to ATEP in May. I have reviewed those letters 1 and have the following comments, numbered in accordance with your letter of I May 22, 1986. i Item 1. ( You noted that areas of buildable land in the Tigard Triangle from your j calculations are greater than the areas shown in the table on page I-293 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. It appears that you have assumed all undeveloped land to be buildable. The Comprehensive Plan, on the other hand, assumes that certain areas are not buildable due to the presence of steep slopes, drainageways, and other restrictions. I conclude that ATEP's decision to use the Comprehensive Plan figures was a correct decision. If you have additional questions about the Comprehensive Plan figures, I j suggest you contact Senior Planner Elizabeth Newton here at City Hall. ` Items 2 — 4. IfYou have presented estimates of employment in the Tigard Triangle in the years 2000 and 2005. Your estimates are based on assumptions you made in Item 1 and on the assumption that employment in the Triangle will grow at the same rate as overall employment in Tigard. Your suggestions have been made available to ATEP. Predicting future employment levels is really not a critical part of the study, in my opinion. Employment growth depends on economic factors which are difficult to predict. The purpose of the study is to identify traffic improvements that may be needed at full development of the area and to identify potential phasing of the improvements. Construction of the various phases will occur as development actually occurs. Estimates of future employment growth may ( help us to estimate how soon each phase will be needed, but such estimates should not control implementation of the plan. ATEP has reviewed the material you provided. I will depend on ATEP to evaluate the data you have provided and to determine the extent to which your suggestions should be included in the final report. �r 1 13125 SVS{Halt Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397.Tigard,Oregon 97223 (.503)639-4171 �^ Gordon Martin June 24, 1986 Page 2 t Items 5 and 6. You and Wayne Kittleson have presented comments regarding trip generation rates being used in the study. It is my understanding that, after carefully considering your comments, ATEP has made some adjustments in the trip generation rates being used in the study. Sincerely, Randall R. Wooley, P.E. t City Engineer 11 cc: Wayne Kittleaon cc: Dick Woelk, ATEP (RRW:br37) I i i; I EXHIBIT PACE DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HiGGINS &TONGUE JENNIFERL.PALMOUIST- ROBERT R.CARNEV MI CNACL J.FRANCIS ROB E RT L.ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RAN DOLPN MILLER Ron J.HIOGINS JOHN O.CANALAN JOHN AS H.TONGUE BSI S.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE 1300 JOHN P.CNOWELL• G[OROE J COOPER.111 PACIFIC FIRST FCDERAL BUILDING OARS L•TS LER CHARLES D.RUTTAN TELECO►t[R 13031 224.7324 RUSSCLL R KILKENNY ROBERT K.WINO ER MELLC RODC O.KENNETH SHIROISHI• PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 MERSNA MURRAT-LU SD7 GILBERT C.PARXC. JR. ANNE wM1T ELCS JOAN O•,+[ILL.AID TELEPHONE(503)224.6440 PETER R.SORO.JN. ANDREW S.CRAIG DONALD C.TCM PLCTON• ANDRE S O.BAKER OOU OLAS V.VAN O7K BRAOL JACK D•HOFFMAN WILLIAM H.MORRISON 11597.19571 JACK N.DUNN (� BAILEY JAMES 6.SMITH July 21, 1986 RALPH 8.274) NATHAN L.COHEN / IID 02.19741 OF COUNSEL -ADMITTED IN OREGON AND WASHINOTON Mr. Tim Ramis Attorney at Law 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 Dear Tim: As you know, this firm represents Gordon Martin and Gordon Martin, Jr. I am writing at their request. Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to Mr. Richard Woelk from Wayne Kittelson. Mr. Kittelson is a professional engineer employed by the Martins some time ago to conduct a traffic study relative to the Dartmouth Local Improvement District. My purpose in writing is to again point out that the Martins have serious concerns regarding the assumptions apparently being used by Mr. Woelk in preparing his traffic study. The letter from Mr. Kittelson sets forth those concerns which include: ® 1. Underestimating the total acres of land which can be built upon within the Tigard Triangle. 2. Utilizing outdated employment projections when updated projections were available from Metropolitan Service District. 3. Assuming a 70 percent buildout scenario for the Tigard Triangle when in fact a 35 percent buildout would result if Mr. Woelk's current employment forecasts are used. I ask that you urge that the concerns raised in Mr. Kittelson's letter be given serious consideration by the City of Tigard and Mr. Woelk. If the City acts based upon a traffic study containing clearly erroneous assumptions, damages to the Martins and other property owners in the area may result. Very truly yours, GARY L. TYLER GLT:Iko cc: Gordon Martin EXHIBIT , l J J r C111�®F T9�A j July 22, 1986 OREGON 25 Yeofs of S9MCC, 1961-1986 Gordon Martin 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, OR 97223 Recently you brought me a drawing titled "South Tigard Bypass" and dated 2/7/86. The drawing proposes a new roadway from the Haines Interchange of I-5 to Hall Boulevard. At Hall Boulevard, the road would connect to McDonald ! Street, providing a through route to Pacific Highway. Engineering data (traffic projections, vertical alignment, estimated costs, etc.) were not provided. After reviewing the proposal, I have the following comments: 1. In order to be a true bypass route, the roadway would need to be located further south. It would preferably connect to Pacific Highway at a point south of King City. 2. The proposed route could be expected to substantially increase the volumes of traffic on McDonald Street and in the Tigard Triangle. Increased traffic would be especially objectionable on McDonald Street where the adjoining development is residential. 3. The cost of the roadway construction would be very high. In addition, the roadway would necessitate improvements to McDonald Street and revisions to [ existing freeway interchanges. State funding for the roadway is unlikely. 4. I can find no advantage of this route over other traffic concepts currently being studied. Based on these observations, I cannot support your proposal. It appears to me that City funds could be more effectively utilized for improvements to the existing roadway system. Sincerely, Randall R. Wooley, P.E. City Engineer RRW:br62 � E 4 13125 SN Hail Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 ' E H U'T__ a f Parc _ 1 i. Gordon S. Martin 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue !J Tigard, Oregon 97223 August 12, 1986 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Dick Bolen Metropolitan Service District 2000 S.W. First Portland, Oregon 97201 Re: Tigard Triangle Employment Forecasts. Dear Mr. Bolen: The following two comparisons indicate an employment update to traffic zones 129 and 226 may be necessary: (1) a comparison based on undeveloped land in each traffic zone (see table in Appendix 1) indicates the forecasted new retail and new "other" employment for traffic zone 129 is understated in contrast to traffic zone 226, and (2) a comparison based on the percentage of District 12's forecasted employment and undeveloped land in traffic zones 129 and 226, reveals that MSD's 1983-2005 employment forecast for these two traffic zones do not reflect the percentage of District 12's undeveloped land contained in these traffic zones. Specifically, the combined traffic zones of 129 and 226 account for 68% of District 12's undeveloped retail land, but receive only 25% (745/3,015) of the District's 1983-2005 new retail employment. The traffic zones also account for 62% of the undeveloped office land within the District, but receive only 40% (3,123/7,705) of the Districts 1983-2005 new office employment. The following information was used to derive the percentages given for comparison (2) above. MSD's 1983-2005 employment forecasts show that District 12 will have a total new employment of 16,751 by Year 2005 and the combined traffic zones of 129 and 226 will have 745 new retail employees and 3,123 new "other" employees (see table in Appendix 1). Using the employment percentages for retail and office sectors from MSD's 1980-2000 Washington County employment forecasts, District 12 Ecan expect 18% of the total new employment in the retail sector (3,015 retail employees) and 46% in the office sector (7,705 office employees). The enclosed ' zoning map may be used to verify the percentage of District 12's undeveloped retail and office land contained in the combined traffic zones of 129 and 226. If the 'employment forecasts for traffic zones 129 and 226 are to reflect the percentage of District 12's undeveloped land contained In these traffic zones, the percentage of forecasted employment within these traffic zones should be Increased. Sincerely, i r Gordon S. Martin f f CC., Torn Schwab ` Wayne Kittelson Gary Tyler Enclosure. ,r:-.-►-_� PAGE 3- _ C C Appendix 1 MSD's Forecasted New Employment To Traffic Zones 129 And 226_. The following table shows MSD's Year 1983-2005 zonal distribution of employment i for traffic zones 129 and 226, in addition to the corresponding acres of undeveloped land in each zone. ` MSD Retail Employment MSD "Other" Employment t Traffic 1983 2005 Change Acres 1983 2005 Change Acres Zone Undeveloped Undeveloped 129* 765 868 103 72 1,139 1,529 390 42 226 99 741 642 61 223 2,956 2,733 62 Total 864 1,609 745 133 1,362 4,485 3,123 104 *Traffic zone 129 South of Pacific Highway (the Triangle portion of 129) has 96% of the zoned undeveloped retail land and 81% of the undeveloped office land. See colored zoning map. f i i i i i i PAGE � __ C ' Worksheet 1 i 4 Current Levels Of Employment In Traffic Zones 129 And 226. r MSD's 1985 retail and "other" (office) employment census data for traffic zones 129 and 226 differs significantly from my May 20, 1985 employment census of the Tigard Triangle. The following table illustrates the differences between MSD's census and my own. I Retail Employment "Other" Employment Traffic MSD Martin MSD Martin ( Zone Triangle Triangle 1 129 751 *414 1,513 *215 226 105 26 323 1,228 i -- Total 856 440 1,745 1,443 *The Martin census for retail and "other" employment In traffic zone 129 only Includes employment South of Pacific Highway which falls within the Tigard Triangle . All employment in traffic zone 226 Is within the Triangle. i i i r Ron E XHINNT `a i PAGE 3 Work_ she_ et 2 The following table shows maximum capacity new employment (using MSD's ( eakdown procedures) at full development of a!1 currently undeveloped l � employment br retail,office, and industrial land in District 12. Percentage Acres Employees gmploytnent of total new ew Land Undeveloped Per acre Employment Use 150 30 4,504 Retail- Regional 20 1._028 51 Retail - Other 5,532 = 21% j 5 13,260 Office 156 S _ 13,260 = 49% L127 50 6,340 Industrial - Park 18 1,720 Industrial - Light 96 10 20 Industrial - Heavy 2 2,080 = 30% I 26,872 = 100% Total 582 The maximum capacity employment for District 12 is 26,872 new employees. Given 1 forecast percentages provide a reasonable the percentage of employment in each of the three land uses, MSD's 1980-200 Washington County employment fo Pe f breakdown of employment by land use. i I r. •J f I E.�.HO PAGE •• MANNING i DESIGN RESEARCH S.DEVELOPMENT TRAINING i 1' JACK E. LEISCH S ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 1603 ORRINGTON AVENUE. SUITE 1280 • EVANSTON. ILLINOIS.60201 •' PHONE: 312/866-9490 August 20, 1986 r . mr. Wayne Kittelson Kittleson & Associates f 512 S.W. Broadway, Suite 220 Portland, Oregon 97205 Re: Tigard Triangle Interchange Study Dear Wayne: f r Pursuant to our recent meeting, Joel and I have had the opportunity to 1 review the interchange design for the Tigard Triangle Interchange. While the grade separated ramp braid provides the desired operations, &rrAdMik r alternatives which will provide the desired operations and develop greater access to the commercial development and existing street network. Also, with blresmspinraid there the southwestiquadrantlofbe some the Pacific ment highway dhighwayInte way prororchange. The alternative which we have prepared, develops one way frontage roads along Highway 217 and connects the existing interchanges. This design would require the construction of the frontage roads, widening denin sof Highwactionof 217 between I-5 and the Tigard Triangle Interchange, t the existing interchanges, and the widening or replacement of the existing overpasses. The advantages of this concept are: This design will provide uniform operation along Highway 217, by eliminating weexitsweave follot�ed by twoadjacent entrancesinterchanges and developing to • This configuration would increase the capacity of Highway 217 by ! adding a lane between I-5 and the proposed interchange and by 1 providing a 2-lane exit and exclusive entrance for the ramp connections at the Tigard Triangle Interchange. i This concept will improve the interchange operations by standardizing their design. The proposed design will improve access by providing additional connections to the existing street network. • The frontage road design will increase the flexibility and qW capacity of the network by providing the ability to bypass bottlenecks within the network. PAGE Cnsu COOL:-821-11"0 Mr. Mayne Kittelson -2- August 20, 1986 Joel and I would be available to meet with the developer and discuss this alternative and the possibility of additional design services on our next trip to Portland, Oregon. If we can provide additional assistance, please give us a call. [ Sincerely Chris E. Angleman Principal Associate { CEA:fs f PAGE- � DUNN, CARNEY,ALLEN. HIGGINS&TGNGUE ? J[NNI/CRL PALMOUIfT• RCS[RT R CARNEY MICHAEL J FRANCIS ROSER7 L.ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW W RANDOIPH MILLER JOHN JS MIGGINS SSI f W.5IKTH AVENUE.SUITE I'GO JOHN C CAHALAN THOMAS M TONGUE PACT PIC►I 12T►EORAL SUILOING JOHN P.CROWELL• GEORGE J COOPER.III TCLE C OPI[R 13021 224.7324 OARY L TYLER 1 CHARLES D RUTTAN RUSSELL KILKENNY P ROtl ERT K WINGER PORTLAND. OREGON 97204 MLLE RODE ` O KENNETH•MUIOISMI• TELEPHONE (903)224.16440 MARSHA MURRAY•LUfw OILSERT E.PARKER.JR. A14 Me WHITELEY JOAN O'N EILL.P.C. PETER R TORO.JR ANDREW S CRAIG O RADL[Y O. SAK[R DONALD E TEM►l[TON• { DOUGLAS V.VAN DYK JACK D.HO/IMAN SALLY R. LEISURE JACK N OUNN September 16, 1986 SHANNON I.SKO►IL { JAMES G.SMITH WILLIAM M MORRISON ` NATMAHL Co HER II897•19831 S OF COUNSEL RALPH R SAILEY Y 11902.1!741 HAND DELIVERED -ADMITTED IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON Mr. Thomas H. Schwab Transportation Analysis Manager j Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Boulevard i Milwaukie, OR 97222 Re: Tigard Triangle Interchange Dear Tom: It was good to see you. I certainly appreciate your taking the time to meet with us on September 4, 1986. This letter is to recap for all of us the comments made on key issues that arose during our joint meeting at the CH2M Hill offices. i 1. Regional Impact. According to Joel Leisch, the conceptual I designs for the Tigard Triangle interchange prepared by Mr. Martin and yourself provide the desired operation for the area, but do not provide the most optimum design alternative. The conceptual design Mr. Leisch is recommending is more extensive than the Martin designs and, F therefore, provides greater access to the commercial developments and s existing street network. Additionally, Mr. Leisch's design proposal for I the Tigard Triangle interchange can be tied into ODOT's current plans E to reconstruct the 1-5 and Pacific Highway interchanges that intersect o- Highway 217, thereby mitigating costs. Combining the Tigard Triangle interchange proposal with the I-5 and Pacific Highway projects will help s, solve several current regional transportation problems associated with E. these Highways. These regional transportation improvements will also help soften the E traffic impact resulting from the employment explosion anticipated from the Tigard Employment Corridor that follows the alignment of the t proposed -collector arterial street from 1=5 West through the Tigard Triangle and south to McDonald street (alternative to the Dartmouth Street extension). € 2. Corridor Development. Full development of the 400 acres of undevelope U—Commercial and industrial land contained within the corridor will generate approximately 18,000 new. employees and account for 60% of District 12's new employment over the next 36 years assuming a steady employment growth consistent with MSD's District 12 forecasts. , Regardless of the employment forecasts for the year 2005 that are F FMOtT PAGE Mr. Thomas H. Schwab September 16, 1986 ! Page 2 r (i i currently being Issued by MSD for the Tigard Triangle, or those being used in the ATEP study, we all concurred that the overwhelming consideration for the area must now be the development of a street network plan that will accommodate the transportation's needs beyond the year 2005. It is my understanding that we are now waiting for the completion of the ATEP traffic study for the Tigard Triangle, and that you share 1 some of our concerns related to the employment forecasts and build-out assumptions being used in the study. As you are aware, ODOT is the state regulatory agency with jurisdiction in this matter and, therefore, controls the permit application for the connection of Dartmouth Street to Pacific Highway, a state facility. Since ODOT directly participated in the ATEP traffic study by running the study's computer analysis (which may have only amounted to feeding data into a terminal and collecting output), the City of Tigard may now argue that the assumption and methodology of the study r originated with ODOT and therefore, ODOT concurs with the study. I I thank you for making it clear in our meeting that ODOT's participation in the traffic study was purely a courtesy to ATEP to aid r in the timely completion of its study and that ODOT does not, at this i time, endorse the study, the analysis procedures, or the assumptions used in the study. 3. Review. We are all looking forward to meeting with you following tt e completion of the ATEP study so we can all move forward with the positive steps of designing and implementi,ig a transportation network that will accommodate the future traffic anticipated in the area. Hopefully, the City of Tigard will have the report ready by September 22, 1986. ( If you have any questions, please call. Thank you for your courtesies in this matter. Very truly yours, Charles D. Ruttan CDR/mbr ( cc: CH2M Hill Robert A. Neumeister Gordon Martin Wayne Kittleson Joel Leisch t ( PAG a - f � Gordon S. Martin r . 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon 97223 { October 21, 1986 r i HAND DELIVERED ` Mr. Lee Gunderson. Oregon State Highway Division { P.O. Box 565 I Beaverton, Oregon 97075-0565 RE: Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Extension Street Intersection Level of Service. Dear Mr. Gunderson: The purpose of this letter is to expand upon the various topics we discussed in our l - telephone conversation on October 9, 1986, concerning the proposed Dartmouth Extension Street L.I.D., within the Tigard Triangle, and the level of service at the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection at S.W. 78th Avenue. ' The street system for the Tigard Triangle, which Includes the currently proposed Dartmouth Street L.I.D., was designed in 1975 by Mr. Carl Buttke, a traffic j engineer, as part of the City of Tigard's 1977 Comprehensive Plan. Dartmouth Street was originally designed as a 3 lane Collector, to provide primary access to Pacific Highway and I-5 for the 80 acres of Industrial land west of 72nd Avenue. Dartmouth Street's secondary function was to provide one of three routes to Pacific Highway for the 130 acres of Commercial Professional land east of 72nd Avenue. Mr. Buttke's street system for the Tigard Triangle is enclosed as Exhibit S #1. i During the 1983 Comprehensive Planning Process, the City of Tigard changed the 1977 Comprehensive Plan zoning designation of the above 80 acres of Industrial land, and an additional 10 acres of residential land to Commercial General. As you know, the trip generation rates for Commercial General are significantly higher ` than those for Industrial. Therefore, if the original Dartmouth Street design is to be used to service Commercial General land, the street must have the capability to accommodate higher traffic volumes than what was originally anticipated from the ` . Industrial land. 1 # . In 1984, the City of Tigard formed a L.I.D. for the construction of Dartmouth r Street which was identical to Mr. Buttke's 1975 design under Industrial zoning. A copy of the City Engineers aerial photo showing the alignment of the Dartmouth Street L.I.D. is enclosed as Exhibit #2. During the L.I.D. public hearings, I pointed out to the City that Dartmouth Street had not been designed or tested for Commercial Gener iai uses, and that the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection would not be adequate to service the entire Triangle area as the City contended. The City chose to ignore my recommendation that a traffic engineer should review and study the proposed Dartmouth Street L.I.D., to determine if the design and capacity would be adequate to handle the traffic demands of the Tigard Triangle under the new zoning. r Mr. Lee Gunderson October 21, 1986 Page 2 Under these conditions there was no choice but to contest the formation of the Dartmouth Street L.I.D. in the courts. This challenge ultimately resulted in a decision from the State Appeals Court voiding the L.I.D. assessments. The letter from Mr. Edward Hardt to Mr. Robert lean dated September 4, 1985, concerning the inadequacy of the Dartmouth Street design and the unacceptable LOS (level of service) at the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection, was one of the underlining arguements influencing the State Appeals Court's decison. Mr. Edward Hardt's letter is enclosed as Exhibit 113. Mr. Hardt's letter was written in response to the results of Mr. Wayne Kittelson's 4 traffic study for the Tigard Triangle, and how those results should be interpreted in relation to ORS 374.305 and OAR 734-50-030 (3). The State Attorney Generals office interpreted these Statutes and Administrative Rules as ODOTs obligations to the general public to regulate construction of new street improvements so they do not create "undo interference or hazard to the free movement of normal highway and pedestrian traffic" on existing State facilities. Mr. Kittelson's traffic study for the Triangle focused on the LOS at the Pacific j Hlghway/Dartmouth Street Intersection. All stages of the traffic study (analysis ' procedures and assumptions) were reviewed and agreed upon by Mr. Tom Schwab during the course of the study. The traffic study's analysis results were that the proposed Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection will operate at an f unacceptable "F" LOS during the 2005 P.M. peak hour, with an intersection volume/capacity ratio of 2.01. I It should be noted that the v/c factor of 2.01 for the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection is conservatively low, because the allocation of Triangle traffic oriented towards Pacific Highway was assumed in the traffic study to be equally distributed between partmouth Street, 72nd Avenue, and 69th Avenue. Under actual build-out conditions, there will not be an even distribution among these three available Collector streets and their respective access points to Pacific Highway. MSD's recent trip distribution projections show that the largest traffic l flow out of the Triangle is northwesterly oriented, which indicates high traffic ( volumes on Dartmouth Street and it's intersection at Pacific Highway. The conclusion of Mr. Kittelson's study was that the proposed Dartmouth Street L.I.D. will not be adequate to accommodate the expected 2005 P.M. peak hour traffic demands associated with a total Tigard Triangle build-out of 55%. The Tigard Triangle is now at a 25% build-out with approximately 296 acres of zoned Commercial land. Mr. Kittelson's traffic study for the Tigard Triangle is enclosed as Exhibit 0. Mr. Tom Schwab conducted an independent traffic study for the Triangle which + . focused on the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection. Mr. Schwab's study concluded that the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection will have a v/c ratio greater than 1.0 during the 2005 P.M. peak hour, with a total Triangle build-out of 42%. PAGE � Mr. Lee Gunderson October 21, 1986 i Page 3 s In September of 1985, the City of Tigard contracted with ATEP to conduct a traffic study for the Tigard Triangle. The ATEP study will undoubtedly be used to refute Mr. Kittelson's and Mr. Schwab's traffic studies, showing that the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection will operate at an acceptable LOS in the year 2005. With this analysis result, the City can contend that a permit request should be approved to connect Dartmouth Street to the State controlled Pacific Highway. + According to Mr. Kittelson and Mr. Schwab, the analysis procedures and a number of the assumptions used in the ATEP study are questionable. For instance, the ATEP study is forecasting a total build-out of 70% in the Triangle by the year 2005, but the 2005 employment forecasts ATEP is using dictates a total build-out of 37%. Once more, the ATEP study is basing it's trip generation on employment, and not on gross square feet of building area. This analysis procedure misleads the Triangle's true traffic impact on the surrounding state facilities by grossly understating the total number of vehicle trips that would be generated from a total Triangle build-out of 70%. I ATEP has also eliminated 70 acres (21% of the Triangle) of Commercial land within i the Triangle under their full development scenario, contending that the land is unbuildable because it is designated sensitive land - not flood plane. According to Mr. Kittelson and Ms. Elizabeth Newton, senior planner at the City of Tigard, the j land that ATEP has designated upbuildable can indeed be developed to it's full potential after minor site improvements have been completed. All Tigard Triangle 1 land that was eliminated from ATEP's traffic study does intact have full traffic generating potential. It is obvious that these and other similar assumptions and analysis procedures used in ATEP's traffic study were designed to reduce the total traffic generation of the Triangle to a level which brings the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection to an acceptable LOS in the year 2005. Unless these questionable assumption and procedures are revised in ATEP's final traffic study draft, I will have to conclude that the study is flawed. 1 have enclosed ATEP's latest study draft as Exhibit #5, and correspondence from Mr. Kittelson related to the analysis procedures and assumptions used in their traffic study as Exhibit 06. As of October 16, 1986, the City has still not completed a traffic study proving that the Dartmouth Street L.I.D. design will provide adequate internal capacity for the Triangle, or an acceptable LOS at the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection to the year 2005. The City has in fact gone ahead and completed 40% of the construction engineering for the Dartmouth Street L.I.D. without this proof. The Tigard City Council letter dated August 14, 1986 is enclosed as Exhibit 4/7. The alternative to the Dartmouth Street L.I.D. is the Tigard Triangle Interchange Proposal. The alignment of this proposed 5 lane Arterial Collector starts at I-5 and runs west through the Triangle connecting to to Highway 217, and than south with a 3 lane Collector to Hall Boulevard at McDonald Street. Variations of this proposal have been worked on and reviewed by Mr. Jack Leich, Mr. Kittelson, Mr. Schwab, and myself for several years. An aerial photo showing the alignment of Mr. Jack Leich's design for the interchange proposal is enclosed as Exhibit #9, and his accompanying cover letter as Exhibit #9. 1' PAG Mr. Lee Gunderson October 21, 1986 j Page 4 Based on MSD's trip distribution projections, the capacity deficiency at the Pacific Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection is largely caused by high volumes of �. Traffic leaving the Triangle and making left-turns onto Pacific Highway Q westbound. A large portion of this Pacific Highway traffic has destinations oriented towards either southwest Tigard, or access to Highway 217 northbound. The Tigard Triangle Interchange Proposal gives Triangle traffic direct access to Highway 217 and southwest Tigard thus eliminating unnecessary travel on Pacific f Highway. This alternative will not only improve the LOS at the Pacific l Highway/Dartmouth Street Intersection, it will also provide a major alternate route from I-5 to Highway 217 and southwest Tigard which will greatly improve the overall traffic flow on Pacific Highway. At our last meeting, Mr. Schwab 4 recommended the possibility that the Tigard Triangle Interchange Proposal could be Included in the Pacific Highway/Highway 217, and the I-5/Highway 217 Interchange reconstruction as part of one large Highway 217 Corridor Project. Mr. Schwab is now looking into this possibility. Mr. Charles Ruttan's letter dated i Septempber 16, 1986 is enclosed as Exhibit #10. I hope this background Information will be helpful in future discussions with Mr. Schwab and the City of Tigard. If you have any questions please feel free to call either Mr. Kittelson at 281-5230 or myself at 620-2477. i Sincerely, Gordon S. Martin 1 Enclosures: Exhibit 19 Mr. Carl Buttke's 1975 Triangle Street Design i Exhibit 2, Dartmouth Street L.I.D. Aerial 1 Exhibit 30 Mr. Edward Hardt's Letter dated September 4, 1985 Exhibit 4, Mr. Wayne Kittelson's Traffic Study dated August 20, 1985 Exhibit 5, ATEP's latest Traffic Study draft dated April 14, 1986 Exhibit 6, Mr. Wayne Kittelson's letters dated May 13, 1986 and July 18, 1986 Exhibit 72 Mr. Gary Tyler's letter dated August 14, 1986 Exhibit 8, Tigard Triangle Interchange Proposal ` Exhibit 9, Mr. Jack Leisch's letter dated August 20, 1986 Exhibit 10, Mr. Charles Ruttan letter dated September 16, 1986 j cc: Mr. Wayne Kittelson Mr. Charles Ruttan Mr. Tom Schwab PAGE �1 t f fDARTMOUTH L I D TRAFFIC CONCERNS AND RELATED ISSUES ( VOLUME II f f f Submitted by: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin 1_ f_ 1 DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE t Charles D. Ruttan Douglas V. Van Dyk Attorneys for Gordon R. Martin ( ' and Gordon S. Martin r Y. ^`F isr. ms's IrW rAA n ,N0 r� Iw YnAm f i w - t .�R ' Kir ay,:: Y! yr .r :..'.d' a --c �y } �, ti-- `. �., � �_.i f�'S1.,rti:. t ° t:'.+, �-��qj � Y .• d* _� »`a;y � r }1. t ..° 1�"'S.:i•.'�. ^"r .�n � ri� L r � ...-.� .A... r'�.:i f�'.";;'+;;.4 .,.._ ...r�.'S� c2 e .t.4..:�..s._... -fs ��✓. a .^TLrr 'TIGSRD TRI, NGL ` TRAF'FI C CI RCLBLA�'I ON 1, i prepared for The City of Tigard, Oregon ygRD L A JOINT VENTURE BY ASSOCIATED TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING PLANNING, INC. AND MORGAN, RYAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. r OCTOBER, 1986 86-239Ul? 2� PAGE 13 Jill r OF T 1�S�RD O s0 Ti®ARD TRZaNGLE TRAFFIC CIRCVLAT IOM STUDY ( � 1 tINTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SSUPIPTIOPIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS- 11 , 0000 . .4 • • • • • • • • • • • STUDY PROCEDURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • TRANPLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . YS EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES. . . . . . . . " EXISTING ROADWAY 'DEFICIENCIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 0os .7 SCENARIO ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . • ' � � � � RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " " " " " " • • • 12 A PPENDIX. . . w . . . . . • . . . . . . . w . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . 14 I i v rG N r�i t v f o T i_aa r d -� .aFftG Circulation Study ...:, October 30, 1986 1 t taTRODUGTLON. t� art of an overall Transportation Planning i This Circulation Study is of major transportation facilities and Process by which all typesort will deal primarily with streets, services areconsidered. Thiswelrepor the tole of at •-• modes of { but will c transportation. of this study is to analyze the future appoximatelystreet ee337wacres The purpose on she northwest, Highway the Tigard Triangle TheePacific sHighway (99W) on app and is bordered by and Interstate 5 on the east. 217 on the southwest, firm of Associated j the Traffic Engineering and the Urban This study was conductedand Engineering, Inc. , (ATEP) Transportation Planning Inc. , (MRA) . Planning firm of Horgan, Ryan & Associates, • transportation planning functions: This study performs the following traffic ' 1 Identification of the present circulation patterns by volumes. on patterns by traffic volumes. 2. Identify future circulati 3. Identify present roadway deficiencies affecting circulation. i future roadway deficiencies affecting 4. Identify potential , circulation. street and circulation plans for the City's , 5. Develop specific meet the City's stated goals and future street system that policies, and that minimize the deficiencies in the street . system. `� Lne*n A�$UM TIQNS f transportation planning process, several' In order to carry out this tzansp for the prediction of future traffic oofVO�hese assumptions are necessary Triangle Area. Kant planning; and distributions within the TigardMETRO,transportation Bunke, Wayne assumptions are based on earrllierpe�fozmedrbyt transport But work in the area, Including These assumptions are- 115t ed be Kittleson, and CH2M-Hill. completed 1. No major improvements will be made after the Jrecently . r : TIGARD Gr� CIRCU ATION TRIANLE RAFT M y ning. ' Highways 99W an 217 ill be widened to interstate 5 wide :a six lanes each toward the end of the pla g in s•.r This includes 2• The land within the Tigard Triangle Area will develop l�T accordance with the Tigard Comprehsingle family development to ;..,�.:. conversion of much of the existing more intense uses, and the aev99t,Pmssignificant ntm outheasterlyintothecentral area extending from Highway portion of the Triangle. fumed The development of this area will still beur eprimarilyr time. llocatedt is snear 3• and that r that more intense developmenartilof the planning period, the highways in the early p Intense development of the central area will not occur until the i end of the period. me rates as 4. The developable land will generate traffic at the rates•• wilsa l not similar land developments nationwide, and these change over time. 5. The mix of single occupant vehicles, multiple occupant vehicles, , transit ridership, and uther nless otherwiseVeIndicated inmodes of anthe rvarious will remain constant alternative scenarios. will be the target for evaluating and 6• Level of for planningg hestreet system. the Tigard Triangle Area will achieve 60 percent j 7• By 2000, ; build-out and by 2005, it will achieve 70 percent build-out . g• Population and employm ent growth will occur as described in they: study Area Growth projections section edbinothe appendixion of this , Employment Projections to bles report. ro fronting Highway 99W will continue to haver ® 9• The business properties Highway and will not cause traffic loading oni (� direct access to the the internal streets of the area. 10. Sixty percent of all trips generated within the study area will be 99W. The remaining 40 percent will bet oriented to Highway 217 and Interstate 5 via the 72nd f. oriented toward Highway Avenue/Highway 217 interchange or the Haines Road/Interstate 5 interchange. 11. The new retail development attract 30 percent of its trips tifomhwithin zthe ritriangle,angle eand i70 percent from without. The Tigard comprehensive Plan also contains more general asakentints regarding transportation. These are listed below and are all account in this traffic circulation study. t I.. Because of the diverse number of veehi� cle�trriipss per day that azo TTGARD TRIANGLF,—TB t�?_C CIRCt�r "TION STUDY 4 i t 'A f t i : Tigard residents, the automobile will remain the most taken by ( ` " dominant source of transportation. .i � transportation corridors many of the primary (collector streets) ydeveloped 2' of Tigard are currently developed below city � •'tip' within the City service both current and future . standards, and thus inadequately traffic demands. 3. With the City of Tigard there are numerous employers with over f fifty (50) employees and not all of the employees of these firms reside within the Tigard City Limits. Mose energy conscious because of s 4. People will become increasingly. This factor may increase • public j continuing high fuel prices transit ridership. It ictlandes core area andsumd that most oftnot inaincreasevin will be from Tigard to Pr Inter-Tigard trips. 5. Bicycle and pedestrian pathway systems will result in some rips within the community. These seduction of automobile tmodes f e short vehicle trips for shopping of travel could replaci purposes. I 6. Transportation planning for the City of Tigard must be conducted local and J in cooperation with other Metrop litanregional Service Districttions(MSD)e•g.' Washington County 7. social and environmental concerns will continue to influence transportation routing and development. Most of the population and employment growth during the planning 8. will occur in the suburban areas rather than period (1980-2000) more pressures on the the Portland urban core; thus putting transportation systems. It may also have the effect of , suburban a person lives in Tigard and commutes ' i creating longer trips, i .e. , #} to work in Portland. f The Tigard . Comprehensive Plan contains Policies on transportation planning (page II-56) . The first b lopoky is directly relevant to the Tigard Triangle Area and is quoted 8.1.1 The City shall plan for a safe and efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and anticipated [ future growth and development. t plan also contains a discussion of the street system in the Triangle The i area (page I-234) . This discussion is quoted below: t The needed collector connections within NPO i#4 are located within the Triangle Area. The adopted NPO i4 plan, indicates the connections for this area that are needed tot ! provide job access to the commercial and industrial; development areas. These inner Triangle Collector links include: TRIANGLE TRAFFIC ^�prttr ATION STUDY - �' C OF TI 1. A connection between Pacific Highway at 78th south to Dartmouth. Although the exact alignment of this collector connection has not been determined, it is anticipated the alignment will continue in a southerly direction from Pacific Highway and then east to the existing Dartmouth right-of-way. This ' connection will be continued to I-5 via the new I-5/Haines Road interchange. Ir 2. A connection in the form of a loop road from 69th ' westerly to 72nd, to the Dartmouth connection, ( �1 above) then south in an easterly direction to I "` Hampton; and !' 3. A connection from #2 above to Atlanta to be aligned with 68th. _ f To complete the collector system in the Triangle-area, the upgraded to minor collector following streets must be standards; 68th, 69th, and 70th. 4 Each of these proposals from the Plan were incorporated into the r alternatives being studied. ,STUDY PROCEDURE- The following steps where used in the development of this study: [ 1. Inventory - ern was gathered j from the count and Tigard, Metro, andoOregontDepartmentatofnTransportation from g staffs . hose counts were taken throughout Extensive additional manual and the study area. The city's - current land use inventory was updated where necessary. 2. Protections The Tigard Triangle Area was broken down into areas which were mapped in, transportation analysis zones (TAZs) based on similar existing and future land uses. Several scenarios were developed for future street patterns In the areal generally dealing with the construction and configuration - F Dartmouth Drive extension, and the 68th Street extension. E �. The Tranplan computerized traffic forecast model was used to Projec Thd future traffic volumes and circulation patterns for 1995, and 2005. METRO EMME 2 transportation model was used to determine the Full Build Scenario. �M.i'mRIT ys I ...moo., rrar n*IGL,E T� FTG CIRC""'TI nit STUDY FTY OF TIGARDt OREGON r.. 3. Analysis J. compared fa+ The Tranplan protections of volumandndturning movements plannedfacilitiesto edetermine to the capacities of existing deficiencies. erminations of level of service were made for For each scenario, det ' critical intersections based on the alternative street layouts. Identified problem areas, which generally involve intersections, were analyzed in detail to imp determine if in there �re alternative configurations servithat would lead t P 4. Recommendations .. iency In st The circulation scenarioElm that demonstrates TziangleteArea ewas cselected moving traffic though out the entir g as the recommended system. TR N2� PLAN The Tranplan battery of transportation planning programs was used to thee scenarios analyze various future development growthcratesosdifferent. Eachoflandsdevelopment Is based on either different patterns, and/or different roadway layouts. The Tranplan software package was used to develop a traffic simulation model that would provide a LeT=langlenAzea.existing accomplishrthis�ea j traffic volumes within the Tigard t street network was developed for use with the software. A cursory land use/parking survey was conducted concurrently .distribution the coding to determine the existing population/employment within the study area. Aerial photographs were also used in the u coding ion processs. Tent survedata thata wasused providedconjunction popMETRO.with the 1983 at and e P Yn► Calibration of the Tigard Triangle Traffic simulation Model consisted of once matching 1985 ground counts with volumes projected bythe model. the the model projected reasonable volumes for the base year, network was coded gateway)simulate trafficlprojectionsand fromFull METRODevelopment usedstreet with r systems. Cordon (q for 1995 were developed under the jt the 2005 scenario. Cordon projections assumption of a steady growth between be capacity of1985 dthe 60streets lfeeding pinto cordon volumes were the study area. = During the calibration process the traffic generation rateswere Department trafficfrom the ITE Manual. This is consistent with both the Oregonpartment TransportationnRmethodology oj king projections. A single purposetrip tablewas used in projecting traffic _ volumes for this study. ^X.=t, i ice_ _ rrr n TIGARD TRIANGLE TRAFFIC CIRC TION STUDY CITY QE TOM- QEEGOU The tri rates that were used for all hisnaLepoxteis baneexcerptthe from T P appendix of t model. Included in the aPP ocuments that was provided to ATEP for use in this ! METRO's planning d This document details the generation rates. study. Similar trip rates were used for the full development scenario with the i exception of commercial-Gen eral8ublicnd ationiaentitleds"Developmentonal land usand i generation rates from a p ~1985) were used Trip g Generation Rates" (FHWA, January, 1 Application of TYip for these categories. These rates consisted of 462.4 and 298.64 trips per acre reseectively. f tal loading was used to distribute A capacity restrain incremenprojected traffic volumes for the various were usedscenarios on hfor sthisapurposexeet network. The following streetP - 35,000 vpd ' High volume Arterial (99W) 16,000 vpd Major collector w/ turn lanes ; • Major collector w/o turn lanes 100o vpd Residential Street (improved) ±' 000 vpd Residential Street (unimproved) 1,000 vpd i It was assumed that the traffic volumes on 99W were near or eat Finallyapac ,, ' and, as a result, volumes along this corridor will not Changfrom primary routes that were tested (68th/69th78thestr�eteconnection sion the two pz Y 99W� and the Dartmouth/ Hampton Street to Highway from I-5 to 99W) were coded with a continuous left turn lane. E i �.,.�.�.. TRAEEIGyy LAS- t i ATEP gathered detailed information on takenbyvolumes in the the Tigard Triangle Area by using counts i Oregon Highway Division, and METRO. heTATEP staffhese were cxtTheivcounts.dealewith hose and manual counts taken by j both volumes and turning movements. The results of these counts are 1 shown on Map 1. i The counts showed an existing overall traffic pattern as shown on Map 2. These arrows and percentage figures show the general direction of travel � demands to and from the Tigard Triangle Area. the Tigard Triangle is uried as this Each of the streets within ' either an arterial, collector, or local street forr the the ppPoseof analysis. These classifications are based on the Tigard comprehensive plan designations. Each of these classifications is described below: ., function of an arterial street is to ARTERIAL STREET - The primary across ortions provide for the traffic movement between areasand generators; and of a city or region, direct service to principal connect to the freeway/expressway system. A subordinate function , is the provision of direct access to Sincejathetprimary hfunction owever hofl function is highly discourage rather tol acce �. this type street is movement of azteziallestzeetsare or to ! abutting land oz parking, -, — !`ezC7E TLQArr� ( "500 I , E °p 6 cn � o cr% N 1448—� �qv� � � .,-1525 uAINES••p,D. I J °° \ S �iaco) DARTMOUTH ST• s£ pp,AtaKLIN ST. 00 °% `� N�►.�1P?oN ST• r o , � d ?IriAP�D ?P,IGN�•LE C1acu�a�loN 5'I'v0'Y o 1985 AV r-g,& P- DAILY TOTAL �' s tTRAF�IG VOLUMES (ADO4a w _ 4 NMI I � —A r 1 .................... 1 \ VARTMoUTH 15T• s Fg,QaKLIN ST. 4 N a M P T oN d$*T f: -r!&AFNP GIP�CV�.A'iloN.5TU0�' TP%AFFIG 1wXlST1NG � VOLUME �15"(F''t6U?101� w i QTY OF TIGARD. OREGON f regulation and control of parking, turning movements, entrances, exists and curb cuts. Control of access may also be required. Traffic volumes generally range between 5,000 and 35,000 vehicles per weekday. COLLECTOR STREET - Functions to conduct traffic from activity i centers and neighborhoods to arterial streets. It is a principal traffic carrier within a neighborhood, and also provides access to f abutting land. The average weekday volume could range between 2,000 to 8,000 vehicles per day. LOCAL -STREET - Provides access to abutting land. These streets serve local traffic movements and are not intended to accommodate i through traffic. The traffic volumes would be less that 2,300 vehicles per weekday in residential area, and may be somewhat ( higher in commercial or industrial areas. The traffic counts indicate, based on the above definitions• in what street classification the following streets are operating: ARTERIAL STREETS Highway 99W Highway 217 f Interstate 5 i COLLECTOR STREETS Hampton Street 68th Parkway 72nd Avenue All other streets in the Triangle Area are designated local streets. EXISTING ROADWAY DEFICIENCIES Capacity Analysis ATEP has inventoried the existing transportation system for those elements necessary for the circulation of the roadway's capacity. "Design Capacity" of any roadway is based upon the following factors: 1. Lane width 2. Shoulder width C 3. Plumber of lanes 4. Speed zones and constraints S. Intersection controls 6. Parking restrictions _ i 7. Roadside obstructions The impact of traffic volumes is governed by the location of least capacity. As a roadway's traffic volumes approach their maximums, that % ratio is generally expresses as a Level of Service (LOS) . The roadway's ability to carry vehicles compared to the congestion created is the _ TIGARD TR.TAPIG C f`,� �� E TRAFF7 CIRCULATION STUDY'+ _____�, pA primary factor in determining LOS, as they are described in Exhibit 1. EXHIBIT 1 LEVELS OF SERVICE Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of the effect of a number of factors which include speed and travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, safety, ( driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs. Level A - RelativeSFree Flow S No delay due to other vehicles. i Level B - (V/C > .5 & < .6) - •. I Stable Flow - Slight Delay An occasional delay due to other vehicles. Level C - (V/C > .6 & < .7) Stable Flow - Acceptable Delay. t Most drivers feel somewhat restricted, but not objectionable so. Level D - (V/C > .7 Approaching Unstable Flow - Tolerable Delay. Y Vehicles may be delayed during peaks with the ( peak period. i Level E - (V/C > -8 & < -9 ) - Unstable Flow, Congestion, Intolerable Delay ' During peak period, there will be long queues i of vehicles, and delays may be great. Level F - (V/C > •9 ) - i Forced Flow - Jammed The traffic system has basically broken down. Generally, street systems have been planned to operate at LOS "D" at worst. However, inflationary effects on the costs of construction an right-of-way have forced many communities, Tigard included, to design i Instead for LOS "E". The inconvenience that the LOS "E" situation creates at peak traffic periods is considered a valid trade-off for the costs of construction and impacts on the surrounding areas. t Chart 1 illustrates the present traffic volumes and curren s capacities �'IG RSD TRIANGLE TRAF Jill E_ of the major streets in the Tlgarcrzy OF ' d Triangle deo era. it n ingbelow designed ( at the present time, all internal streets are P capacity. CHART 1 Tigard Triangle Area Traffic Circulation Study CURRENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND CAPACITIES fProvided by Oregon State Highway Division PRESENT PRESENT CAPACITYDESIGN TRAFFIC STREET VOL _ [ UME CAPACITY RATIO_____ --------___ 45000 50000 0.90 INTERSTATE 5 37000 35000 1.06 HIGHWAY 99W 57200 35000 1.63 HIGHWAY 217 1165 10000 0.12 68TH 3994 10000 0.40 72ND north 9800 10000 0.98 72ND south 2973 10000 0.30 HAINES2411 10000 0.24 t DARTMOUTH HAMPTON west 3126 4000 0.78 t HAMPTON east 829 4000 0.21 �gr�r�nRIO ANAT ased on The scenario used for the Initial is Thisbinvolves ahchangeyto projected development for patterns with more commercial and industriallong Highway ighwa d99elandethe proposed Dartmouth extensive commercial use along g Y extension. The industrial/commercial development is he ar a by the a ark" developments currently within the area and also various business p Kruse Way. found to the east along The model results are shown in Table 2 on the next pages 1 0' 'c iOh STUDY •-`e' PAGE_ 9 _ T'IGARD TRIANGLE TR,�F�y.�.CrIRCUL�'�__—_---- TABLE 2 Tigard Triangle Area Traffic Circulation Study TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FOR MAJOR INTERNAL STREETS 1995 2005 BUILD-OUT 1,140 24,400 68TH-N. of Dartmouth 8,140 17 710 22,000 .68TH-S. of Dartmouth 8,915 13,700 15,700 69TH-S. 99 0 4,800 8,800 72ND-N. of Dartmouth 9,34 100800 11,550 72ND-S. of Dartmouth 4290 6,250 7,700 HAINES 7,630 12,200 21,500 ( DARTMOUTH-S.of 9910,400 33,000 .. t DARTMOUTH-E.of 72nd 7,460 970 10,300 21,500 _ DARTMOUTH-W.of 72nd 4. 000 5.000 7,000 r HAMPTON-w. of 68th X600 1,000 1,800 1;AMPTON-E. of 68th d the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual Planning Method of Using Tranplan and each major intersection was analyzed to determine intersection analysis, ears for peak hour flows, level of service for each of the projection y • and to determine intersection improvements that would be necessary to ' maintain a Level of Service on The major intersections are listed below with their LOS levels, based on the above projections: CHART 3 Tigard Triangle Area Traffic Circulation Study LEVEL OF SERVICE PROJECTIONS FOR MAJOR INTERSECTIONS WITHOUT INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS 1995 2005 BUILD-OUT E E F 72th & 99W E E F 69th & 99W E E E Dartmouth & 99 B E Dartmouth & 72nd B B E Dartmouth & 68th A B B 72nd 8 Hampton A A A - 68th & Hampton TIGARD_TRI•�G C N i CITY OF T f CHART 9 Tigard Triangle Area Traffic Circulation Study LEVEL OF SERVICE PROJECTIONS. FOR MAJOR INTERSECTIONS WITH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS _ 1995 2005 BUILD-OUT E E E ..Dartmouth & 99 E E E { 72th & 99W E E E f 69th & 99W A B D Dartmouth & 72nd A A C Dartmouth & 68th A A B .• f 72nd & Hampton A A D 68th & Hampton 1 The street improvements 6referenced extension iwithChart continuouscleft turnelanesg DDartmouth extension and 9th See the Technical Appendix for complete lane configurations. f �ONcc.US I ONS The andemonstrates that most of the Tigard Triangle Area alysis above can be developed without extraordinary street improvements as long as a methodical system of making the necessary intersection improvements is 1 implemented. It is evident that the Interfaceof thefic Triangle areawith Hirhway 99W . is and will continue to be a working in conjunction with ATEP, has determined that Levels of Service te ffic tion will be maintained at LO 99w 99Wpwillievolveeinto aproviding ramore ofoa within the Triangle. local access role talk volume. trips diverted to stabilizing the west on likely be Interstate 5 as traffic moves south instead of turning Highway 99, and Highway 217 and Tualatin-Sherwood Road which will "pick up" the diverted east/west flow- The primary conclusions of this study are: ic 1. The or eof ththatigard will Tcreateeanwill unacceptabletlevelffOf volumesmea o Patterns service within the Triangle or on any of the three surrounding major highways. 2. Conclusion 1 is predicated on rns reationnes, atofeainteLsectiionn improvements, primarily left tu of the intersections with Highways 99W and 217 . 3. Level of service "E" will be maintained on Highway 99W despite the increase in trips generated within the Triangle. These new trips f i f t will serve to divert through trips to alternative routes, thereby stabilizing the total volume. I the le can roceed These co nclusions indicate that development th only Tthenrzaffic related In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan w , constraint of creation of the intersection improve- menta. however, that this only creates an acceptable I It is pointed out, Tigard to actually improve the situation, more drastic situation. For Ti � needed. These measures must focus on employment measures will b 6 on of these trips on the highways during related trips, and the reducti the peak hour. t r�rntttaFNQATIOtIS Rased on the above analysis and the data gathered during the course of ; this study the following recommendations are made. d within the Triangle in accordance with the i 1. Development procee + Comprehensive Plan. be 2. Intezaection requirements, as described earlier in the report, a developed at the intersections of Dartmouth and 69th with Highway � - 99W. lore the possibility of an additional route providing sdmay 3. The City exp employee trips access to the Triangle and oriented 217 and connection . to an f involve a new overcrossith The appropriate street south of 217 such as Hunziker. part determination of an appropriate route was not considered as p e Oregon of this study Transportationtimpzovementsion will eto thend Hwy 217/tly on hI-5/Lake 3 Department of Oswego interchange. 4. Tigard should develop a multi-pronged approach to improve, rather than just stabilize, traffic flow in this area. This program could include some or all of the following techniques: t a. Broadening the Peak Hour - The volume tthat pe oak uld normally flow in and out of the Triangle during period of time. The City could "spread-out" r can be over a longer so that mandate "flex hours" ezangeee period each. overor mploysna two totheedthree hour starting and quitting timescan be obtained directly through ordinance, or more indirectly through the land use approval process for individual uses. - Despite the C. Increase Density of Riders per Car P Comprehensive Plan assumption itnothat Increaseoling duringndthehplanning of alternative modes period, these may be the most viable answer to the congestion problem. i It is suggested that Tigard begin an active and aggressive alternative modes program that will involve employeestinn the; zideshazing for all current and future employees E'H.11-31T 5 _ TIGARD 9'RI�tiG r e• n+e�C�'TC' GIRCUr ATIDN STUDY FAG. �a E Ty OF r program should involve two components: The p Triangle area. carpooling, and incentives for the business S; r encouragement for carp ; owner. come in the form of the I The encouragement should City carp ool matching services, educational programs, providing and general promotion for zidesharing. P The incentives for the business owner should involve such things as credits for parking provision of a spaces for the permanent business-supported oz mandated ridesharu pvanpool qp assistance in obtaining tax credit for setting p programs for employees. d. Increase assignificantf Mass TIncl-Ase Again, despite the Compreheonsive the Triangle Area would make a # in Tri-Het ridership into significant difference in congestion levels. is encouraged to be very aggressive in its dealings The City with Tri-Het to help assure that demands for internal transit ard, and particularly into the Tigard circulation within Tiq cannot be, the Triangle Area, are met by Tri-Het. If they City could consider creiocatedtion ooutsidef its w "shuttle i of theTrianglearea s with park 6 ride 1 le's employment and convenient shuttle service into the Triang I centers. would result in the minimization � These recommendations, if all followed, would border . Any one of them of congestion along the Triangle's could also achieve this goal by itself. However, the social impacts be an effort to implement any single one solution would probably position by the City on three fronts is significant. An aggressive probably the most viable avenue. ystem within First, the City should work to have including thteeznnecessary street :intersection t the Triangle completed, incl g ezfozmed in advance improvements with Highway 99W. This work should be p . of or along with major development in the area. G the t .City should look to the development community to assist in Second, street projects and Participation in improving on this situation. port of implementation of flex hours The developer and nand ethe employer t :should be the developer and employer. :Wade to realize that ittbears a r sponsibilityn theleoAreasist the community in this way if it wa must continue to encourage greatly increased transit Third, the City be accomplished though service and ridership into the area. This may the decisions of the Tri-Met Board of Governors, or through the City's own provision of transit 1 � #T - �`;�air.'. t TIGARD TRIANGLE TRAFCIRCULATION 3TU Y PPGE 13 "`HAMPTON � �? amu° DARTMOUTH :HWY"99 i Io91 N P HWY 99 . t7ARTmoUT14 7Z"7 f 4 WAY k WAY slop MQIN�.S � (o°1-rrt HbN1PTQN . � tpBTH .... II.GARD TFYAWGL-`& r,MCULATION STUD'S : JMPP,(�VEMF.W r Rl:QutR�tAEtJTS Pf n n P,-f M r1 t I� t . I W�MP"f ON DARTMOUTH .HWY 99 _. ... . � � �?2 uo � • I i r I � -� ,,._ o,&wrMOU7N HWY 99 4 .109TH f 4 WAY 2 WAY r--- STO P sro p r .�� HdINE5 (o9T', HAMPTON �8 ? (.CgARD TRIANGLE CIRCULXTION S7UD`f .. ._IN+Pi�L)VE1�IEIJ'f P,EgUIP,EMEN'i5 `f EAR 2.005 EXHIBIT De�,'I:MOUTH � (08TH _ -NANIPTON ? 21° DARTMOUTP 4.v4wy-99 w OA.RTMOUTP 72ND I-fWY 99 .109 4 �-_ � s HAMPTON (o STN HQ.IN�S .(o9Tµ ? I.GAF,D -mIANGL j C I fiC U L:A7 I O IU . ST UDS( MJI ! .. .._,tApROVEMEW? RECILUIptiEMENTS An ..r 1 � �;�:c��1�'iT o75 � O= S►CaNAL Pl A t2."i s,IS E7! 1TN .d Ins" i f T I CARD TR I ANGLE C I FRCULAT I ON STUDY " fTECHN I CAL AF'F'END I X I I 1 I EXHMIT � ( COY QZ T;QARPi ORBOON I j APPENDIX TIGArD CIRCULATION STUDY , i ( STREET PLAN i ARTERIAL STREETS Highway 99W Highway 217 Interstate 5 fHighway 99W Currently Highway 99W is proposed to be widened to 6-lanes ,�nd left turn pockets. This improvement is expected to keep the level of service at LOS E and not degrade the existing operation through this area. As traffic increases, the more traffic diverts to the other arterials in the area thereby keeping the level of service at LOS E. Highway 217 Currently Highway 217 is proposed to be widened to 6-lanes. and is expected to operate at LOS E for some time to come. Interstate 5 No improvements are to be considered as part of this study. r f COLLECTOR STREETS The following streets are planned to function as collector streets within the Tigard Triangle (see street section dl) R I Hampton Street $ 68th Street ' 69th Avenue 70th Avenue ( 72nd Avenue 1 k 'Hampton Street east of 72nd Avenue currently functions as a Collector Street. Since it serves the existing office development to the east of 72nd Ave and is the main access point from the Triangle to Hwy 217 it is projected to carry a volume higher than a typical collector street. Currently it is a two lane roadway with left turn pockets at the Intersections. It is not anticipated the existing roadway configuration will be changed until the future "build out" of the triangle occurs and then additional left turn lanes will be required at Hamptons intersections with 72nd and 68th Avenues (see build out improvements) 68th was planned to function as a collector street between Hampton and Haines Road. The existing improvement will accommodate traffic in its present form until sometime after 1995 t when additional through lanes will be required (see "2005" improvement requirements) . E g T�tIANOLB IRMFIC CIRClTI.1l_ TION STUpY �9. I {EY'-€;fit i•��5 - • PAGE t t ( l 72nd currently functions as a collector street and runs between Highway 217 and Highway 99 to the north. 72nd should be improved ight of Way and a 42' improvement as shown in sketch to a bb' R dl. This wouuldhan al through lanesdle lwillrbegrequired,�ll�seet"buildnout" when addition improvement requirements) 72nd Avenue should be connected to Highway 99W at the present raffic signal . City engineering staff has reviewed Fred and iner T indicates that it is possible to construct this MeyerextMey this connection without much difficulty. Dartmouth as proposed will function as a collector street until ll the "build out" scenario Street rioccursdue to thetdirectAt timeDartmouth connection�to function as an Arterial Highway 99W and Interstate 5. ane As a collectora wittwothrough lanesdand abe onstructed as al continuous left turn lane facility with as shown in sketch dl. By the 2005 scenario, additional lanes will be required at certain intersections and asthe shownstreet in sketch bd2. (seedeveloped yearo full 2005 arterial street status improvement requirements) . 69th and 70th Avenues are currently unimproved streets and serve local residences only. When development occurs in this area, the street should be improved to the minor collector street status as shown in sketch dl . STREET SECTION IMPROVEMENTS STREET 1986 1995 2005 BLD OUT •as¢cca=cases==acc=saasa=zrs==c=- d i d l dl ' Hampton Street dl dl dl d2 d2 68th Parkway di di dl dl 69th Avenue di dl di dl 70th Avenue dldl di d2 72nd Avenue n/a dl d2 d2 Dartmouth di - MAJOR COLLECTOR WITH CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE 15' 3 5' 5' ----------- ----- - SW PLANT -TRAVEL -TURN TRAVEL PLANT SW d2 - 4-LANE ARTERIAL WITH CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE C14' 12' S 12' 1 5' 1 5' 12 S 12' /----------- ------ --------- --------------------- __ ------------------------ SW SW PLANT TRAVEL - TRAVEL -TURN TRAVEL TRAVEL PLANT t EXHIFily T I CARD TRI ANGLE JE<AFF I C C I RS:ULA'F I ON STUDY PAGE_ +. 1 ( POPpUILATION/EMPLOYMENT 1983-2005 r- Employment f Population 1983 2005 1983 2005 m��' (Change) 8 Change 390 Zone Pow _ Pop- (Change) $ Chg_ EmF''-- -E- -- { -32$ 0 0 -- -- 130 1,585 1,077 (-508) 213 1, 803 1,706 (-97) - 58 0 0 -- -- 224 1,1_22 1, 378 (+256) +23% 281 321 (+40) + 14% 225 1, 319 2,215 (+896) +688 55 55 -- -- 228 2, 378 4,512 (+2,134) +90% 1,549 2, 374 (+825) + 53% f 227 414 2,203 (+1,789) +432% 40 299 (+259) +648% __ 2,064 2, 286 (+222) + 11% i 111 336 336 -- _- I 322 3,723 (+3,401) +1,056% *226 363 363 -- 112 259 259 __ 1,272 1,533 (+261) + 21% 115 2,002 1, 883 (-119) 6% 1,596 2,217 (+621) + 39% 116 1,666 2,598 (+932) +56% 172 923 (+751) +4378 128 1,488 1,996 (+508) +34% 25 86 (+61) +244% "129 853 781 (-72) 8% 1,904 2 , 362 (+458) + 24% f Tigard Triangle. { C ' JAG:lmk p !S RAGS TIGARD TRIANGLE LAND USE INVENTORY - June, 1986 1 1 I / l Zone Fes ComFro ComGen School PGE Total ---1 --------------------------------------------- --------- 1 : 20.0 20.0 2 5. 1 I I 5. 1 4. 1 4. 1 4 : 3.4 3.4 5 6.9 : 6.9 6 5. 7 / I 5.7 7 : 5.7 : 5. 78 _ J ' G / 2.5 1 2.5 : 2.5 10 : 2.5 : 2.5 - 11 : 2.3 : 2.3 12 : 4. 8 4.0 13 12. 3 : 12.3 14 : 2.5 2.5 15 3.0 2.7 : 5.7 16 : 4. 13 4.B 17 : 5.0 : 5.() 1 ' 13. 6 13.8 19 : S.4 8.4 20 : 4. 8 4.8 4. 8 1 I : 4.8 22 : 1. 1 1. 1 23 i 5. 0 1 24 : 1. 1 5.0. 1. 1 25 : 2.9 : 2.9 26 : 13. 0 : 13.0 27 : 3.o 8.7 : 11.7 28 14.2 5.0 1 r 29 * S 15.7 19.2 34 : 8.815.7 7•2 1 16. 0 31 1 12.6 I 12.6 32 14.7 : 33 : 43.8 14.7 34 : 6.3 43.8 1 .,C5 1 1 6.3 3 �I. 1 9.5 i 9.5 36 : 6.3 : 6.3 37 14.6 i4.6 38 / • 39 ! 0.0 40 : 0.0 41 : 0.0 42 � 0.0 0.0 43 8.0 8.0 44 ' 45 e 18•fj : 18.0 /- O.0 .6 -- ---7.2 ----- TOTAL: 43.3 151. 1 132.9 12 I 347. 1 4 EXHISIT )5 PAGEp.17 i - � Tigard Triangle - Land use and population/Employment a a Year 1`386 f : '-----Employment-- F�: U1- Com Acres 1 SFDU q,Cori)P 1 : TAZ : SFDU : Office : Retail ration ------------ 1 20.0 0.0 j ----_- -- --0 494 : 0 1 0 0.0 0 5. 1 O ; 177 0 4. 1 2 0.0 O : 104 : 0 O 1 4.4 : 3.4 , 0 : 0 1 6.4 4 : O 1�4 1 1 0.4 1 5 Q : 128 : 0 0 0.E : 2.5 6 : 2 : 106 : 0 4 1.4 : 4.4 7 : 5 1 0 0 9 0.0 : 0.08 0 ; O : 0 4 4 0.6 0•" O 4.4 _ O : `} 0.0 1 � ) O 1 0.4 11 : O : 13 : 4 2.0 0.0 la 7 0 O 2� 1 -3 0.0 13 1 12 0 4 ; 0.6 0.0 2 1 0 : 0 6 : 0.t.) 14 1 O lE 1 9 0 1 2 1 0.3 : 0.0 16 1 0 01 18 : 2.9 : 4.0 17 ; 10 : 0 5 ; 0.9 ; 10.0 - 18 : 1 103 6- _ 2_tJ ; 4.i, ..J ' 1 t� 1 1.. ' O. 0 0 19 ; 7 1 � 1.4 1 24 : 5 : 100 : 0 ; 9 2.0 : 0.0 21 : 7 : 0 O 17 1. 1 3 0.0 0 1.7 0.0 f 22 4 0 : 0 11 ; 0.6 : i.).i 1 24 2 : O : 020 : 3. 1 : 0.0 25 : 11 : 0 ' t� � ; 4.6 : 0.0 0 1 0.0 27 1 13 : O : O 24 S 3.� 14. 1 i�. 28 0 ; 167 t C) : 0.0 : 4.4 0 4 : 1 16.0 - 300 4 : 0 U 0.0 1 0.0 1 ) 31 : O : 54 0 58 : 3. 1 : 0.4 �� 32 ! 0 U 1.4 333 : 0.0 31 0 t:r 1 S 5. 1 : 0.0 : -5+ 0 0 33 1 U.E : 0.0 34 : 18 35 0 11 0 : 4 0.^ 1 0.0 36 ; 1 ; 0 4 5 ; 4.0 : 0.0 �7 14 ; U : � ij.ij ; 0.0 1 38 ' 0 O i) : 0 : i).i) : 0.0 3rd 0 : 0 1 0 ; 0.0 : 0.0 !+ 40 ; O : 0 0 0 ; U.i� 0 : 0.0 1 41 ; O : 0 0 ; 0 4.0 : 0.4 1 : 42 0 1 440 : 284 : `' 43 ; 94 440 '6.9 8.0 440 284 : 26.9 18.0 44 : 94 440 284 1 26.9 t- 0.0 45 : 94 0 ---------:--------- - ----------------------- 1^7.8 --113 1 ------- 1976 : 138C) : 1'2U8 : .:. 1 - :.. Total : 482 32.6'!. Commercial Acres Developed - �,18 i Total Acres Develrlped (r'r(1. and Res. ) 72.3 PAGE �----- Year 1995 F SFDU corf, --- :Fo ul- -Acres - ;_ -Empl��yrr�ent-- p Acres Acres TAZ : SFDU : Office ! Retail-ration- -------- ,- .0 1 0 : 49th : 0.0 : 5. 1 ( ` ; 0 ; 200 : 0 ° ' 0.0 : 4. 1 0 iGa : 0 ° O.0 : 4 4• � 0 ; 150 : 0 O 6.9 0 ; 0.0 : t 5 : 0 : 150 : 0 0.6 : 5.7 0 4 2.5 7 E 185 : O : 9 Q 1.4 0 0.0 2.5 8 ; 0 : 200 : ° � 4 ; 0.6 2.5 9 2 ; 100 : 0 O.G : ..5 lU : G : 100 : 0 ' ° 0.0 : 2.3 - 11 ; 0 : 100 0 1It O 1 2.i� : G.0 . 12 : 7 ° p : 22 : 3.4 : 0.0 13 : 12 0U. 6 : 0.0 ° 0 4 0.0 14 : 2 0 Is 16 ; 2.6 15 90,^ ' ( 16 : 1 0 0 18 2.9 0.0.0 17 : 10 : 0 : 0 6.0 1x11 ; s : 0.9 18 ; 3 ; 150 1 :.0 : 4.0 0; '' 4.8 19 : 7 0 9 : 1.4 20 : 5 : aG 0 ; 1- : 2.0 0.0 21 ; 7 : 01. 1 : 0.0 ' 7 1.7 0.0 . 0 G 22 6 : 0 0 it; 0.6 : 0.0 23 : 2 : 0 2 3. 1 : 0.0 � 24 : `.5 11 : 0 0 �r� 4.6 : 0.0 ( 0 29 0.0 26 16 0 G : 24 : 3.7 ^ , 27 : 13 : 0 , G 0.o 28 ; G : 3Ca0 : 0 0 ; U.0 ; G.4 29 O : 0 1 . 1 : 0.0 ° 0.0 0.0 31 : G 55 : 0 9. 1 : 0.0 O 0 58 0.0 1 .4 . 33 : 5 : O 320 33 5. 1 : 0.0 34 : 18 : 0 ° J r ; 0.6 : 0.0 2 0 ° G.3 : 0.0 3 , , 6 1 0 ; 0 � 4.0 : 0.0 37 14 : 0 ° 1r : o.0 : 0.0 i 38 : 0 G 0 0 0.0 : 0.0 i 39 ; 0 : G O ; 4 0.0 : 0.0 40 : 0 0 0.0 : 0.0 i 41 O 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; G.0 0.0 42 : 0 8.0 43 ; 94 : 400 1 440 : 284 26.9 : 18.0 44 : 94 : G : 440 S 284 26.9 0.0 440 : x.84 I45 -- -'--------------- '----------:--------- ----------------- Total 48 ' : 2980 : 1740 : 1208 : 137.8 : 117.5 Commercial Acres Developed - Total Acres Developed (Com. and Res. ) 73.6% P. f EX't° IMT QL I PAGE �� - Year 2005 ( � SFDU Com ; ;-----Employment--.Fopul- Office ; Retail ration 0 Ai=res Acre.a T- S---FDU - ---------- -- -- ---- --------------- ------ - � 20.4 --------------------------------------- -- �-� 490 0 O 0.4 1r�' 0 0 0.0 5. 1 2 . 0 ; 200 O.O 4. 1 . [ 3O ; 3.4 t 10 4' O i5a 0 0.0 6.9 t 5 ; 4 150 S 0 O O.E 5.7 6 :z ; 3<70 0 4 1.4 2.5 ( 7 ; 5 385 O S 9 ' ' 300 0 O 0.0 2.5 8 0 " 4 ; 0.6 ! 2.5 92 200 ' 1 l00 ! 0 O 0.0 2.5 t 1 O .• tf 11 a : loo ; o 4 0.4 2.._, ' O 0 13 2.0 0.0 1 � 7 � O 2 4 0.0 13 � 1::: � 0 � � -+O.E � ^c.5 { 14 0 2 0 3 O 4 O ; 0 S 1E 2.6 7 0.0 15 9 0.3 S 0.0 16 1 0 q 18 2.9 5.a 17 f 10 7 140 0.9 ' ' 13.8 18 3 ; 270 200 f 3 4.0 19 ; 7 0 ; O 13 1.4 4.8 200 1.4 � 20 � 5 � � ; iy ; 2.4 ; 4.a 21 7 0 1. 1 0.0 4 0 0.0 2^ E ; q 0 11 1.7 23 E 2 0.6 ; 0.0 24 � r' q ; 0 25 ; 11 ; a i tJ ; 24 i 3. 1 0.0 26 q ; 0 9 4.6 O. 27 ! l3 q O 24 7 3.7 0' 1) 26 0 ; 390 ; 0 4 0.0 10.0 0 O 29 so 0 95 O.4 q ; O 1. 1 31 4 0 i JJ q 7 0 0.0 ; 0.0 31 i � 32 32 O ; 0 ! 58 9. 1 0.0 9 ; ; O.O 33 5 S O 440 9 1.4 q ; 0 33 5. 1 0.034 18 O loo 0.6 0.0 .E 2 q q 2 0.3 0.0 t y7 14 0 25 1. 4.0 0.0 f 38 ' 4 O 0 0 0.0 It 0.0 3 ; 0 q ; q O 0.0 0.0 ..� q 00 ; 0.0 0.0 4 0 • O 0. f 4S1 U S O S 0 '0 0.0 ( q ; 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 42 O 8.0 43 94 ; 400 440 284 l 2E.9 q ; 444 284 f 26.9 18.0 € 44 94 ---------------- -------- -------- 45 . 94 3 O ; 440 � 284 � 26.9 0.0 � ------------------ --- ' r Total 482 4425 2060 ; 1208 137.8 S 132.8 , tCommercial Acres Developed -- 38.3 Total Acres Developed (Com. and Res.) 78.0% P 20 PAGE i i - I FULL DEVELOPMENT r : SFDU :----No. of Acres-: Sch : Total TAZ :Acres : Office : Retail : Emp : Acres ' -------- ' j 1 : 0.0 : 20.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 20.0 : ` 2 : 0.0 : 5. 1 : 0.0 : 0 : 5. 1 3 : 0.0 : 4. 1 : 0.0 : 0 : 4. 1 : 4' : 0.0 : 3.4 : 0.0 : 0 : 3.4 5 : 0.0 : 6.9 : 0.0 : 0 : 6.9 6 : O.Q : 5.7 : 0.0 910 : 5.7 7 : 0.0� : 5.7 : 0.0 : O : 5.7 8 : 0.0 : 2.5 : 0.0 : O : 2.5 9 : 0.0 : 2.5 : 0.0 : 0 : 2.5 10 : 0.0 : 2.5 : 0.0 : 0 2.5 11 : 0.0 : 2.3 : 0.0 : 0 : 2.3 12 : 0.0 : 4.8 : 0.0 ; 0 : 4.8 : .. 13 0.0 : 12.3 : 0.0 : 0 121.3 ( 14 : 0.0 : 2.5 : 0.0 : 0 : 2..J ( 15 : 3.0 : 0.0 : 2.7 : u 5.7 16 : 0.0 : 4.8 : 0.0 : 0 : 4.8 17 : 0.0 : 5.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 5.0 18 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 1^.8 : 0 : 13.8 19 : 0.0 : 8.4 : 0.0 : 0 : 8.4 20 : 0.0 : 4.8 : 0.0 : 4) ; 4.8 j 21 : 0.0 : 4.8 : O.0 : O : 4.8 22 : 0.0 : 1. 1 : 0.0 : O : 1. 1 23 : 0.0 : 5.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 5.0 { 24 : 0.0 : 1. 1 : 0.0 : 0 : 1 . 1 i 25 : 0.0 : 2.9 : 0.0 : 0 : 2.9 26 : 13.0 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 13.0 r 27 : 0.0 : 3.0 : 8.7 : G : 11.7 28 : 0.0 : 14.2 : 5.0 : G : 13.2 29 : 0.0 : 15.7 : 0.0 : 0 : 15.7 3o : 4.0 : 0.0 : 8.8 : 0 : 12.8 31 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 55 : 0.0 32 : 14.7 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 14.7 33 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 43.8 : 0 : 43.8 34 1 6.3 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 6.3 35 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 9.5 : 0 : 9.5 36 : 6.3 : 0.0 : 0.0 : O : 6.3 '37 : 0.0 : 27.5 : 0.0 : O : 27.5 38 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 0.0 39 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 0.0 40 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 0.0 ( 41 : 0.0 ! 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 0.0 I 42 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0.0 : 0 : 0.0 43* : 30.0 : 10.0 : 3t.0 : 0 : 75.0 44* ' 30.0 : 0.0 ' 45.0 : 0 : 75.0 45:t : 30.0 : 0.0 : 45.0 : 0 : 75.0 ---------------------------------------:----------:- Total : 137.3 : 188.6 : 217.3 : 55 : 543.2 * These three zones include lands outside of the Trangle. P.2-1 EXHIBiT PAGE - E j� t . !E. �0,41 �lcoo o tA A DARTMOUTH -T. \ 4 v Ff,AOKLIN ST. E c tt1 � W H x �►— tog 4 Igo �, HAMPTON S?. r _ 0 3 3 40 'TIGAF%P 'TFlANGE;.E GIRGVLA'TtOm S'TUOY 1995 PM PEAK uoUP, TRAFFIC VOLUMES I Cb w PAGE MAP 5 p.2i 1 • I { o \ s00 W, a e- N nARTMoVTN gT• ! 1 s ' z t 3 E p O Fp,,ANKLIN ST. cl N O $ N N W H N�nnP7oN S?. !' - � 3 -TI&AFW ?AIANd.I-E GIAGUt,.bTloN 45,T, oy 1995 aV�RpGILY To'r4L r -f r-FIG \10 LU ((f i 1 W -a iC. N(aP 4 P 2 i 1995 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH AND 69TH DESIGN DAY: YEAR 1995 ----------------GEOMETRY --------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach lanes Lanes lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes ED 1 0 0 1 0 0 WB 1 0 0 1 0 0 N9 1 0 0 1 0 0 ` SB 1 ..0 0 1 0 0 t ----------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES--------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total EB 211 74 41 326 WB 3 61 49 113 NE 124 . 193 19 325 56 70 71 272 413 LANG DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFT/THRU LANES ON A MULTILA?7E APPFOACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) ----------`----------------------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Opposing EOUIV Volume lases On Volume Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The { Volume PCElt Vit PCE's (TH#RT) Total ApproachPer Lane in LT+TH lane Remaining Np11 Lane Lanes -------------------------------------------------- 110 1.1 211 232.1 115 347.1 1 347 0 0 347 113 0 0 113 115 1.1 3 3.3 110 113.3 343 2 124 248 201 449 1 449 0 0 449 201 2 70 140 343 493 1 483 0 0 433 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 , 800 -999 4 1000 & up 5 — CALCULATIONS OF STATUS--------------------- E9 LT= — 211 NB LT= 124 WB TH&RT= 113 SB TH&RT= 343 SUM= 324 SUM= 467 WB LT= 3 SB LT= 70 momEB TH&RT= 115 NH TH&RT= 201 . SUM= 119 SUM= 271 MAXIMUM CAPACITY RPM SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUTES Rom M,;XIM:3M SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 791 A CAPACITY--------------------------- O TO 1200 UNDER Right Turn Check GK 12'1 TO 1400 1404 KEAR OVER P Z EXHIBI T _ el-10Z -- _ i I ' - 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH AND 72ND i DESIGN DAY: YEAR 1995 ----------GEOMETRY -----—------—------------------ No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.hTh. Thru Rt.6Th. Rt. Rt,Th,BLt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 0 1 0 0 j KB 1 0 0 1 0 0 I NB 1 0 0 1 0 0 SB 0 ..0 0 0 0 1 ---------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES- -------------- ---- Left Right Turn. Thru Turn. Total EB 20 130 310 460 WB 261 172 14 447 HE 199 7 207 413 SB 2 0 2 4 i r LANE DISTRIBUTION FGR SHAREB LEFT/THRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APFROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURK LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) w — Vo - — LT Total No. of Egjiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Opposing EDU1V Voluse Lanes On Voluse Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Voluse PCElt Vit PCE's (TH+RT) Total ApproachPer Lane in LT+TH Lane Resaining Ivph) Lane Lanes ---—------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 166 1.1 20 22 440 462 1 462 0 0 462 440 2 261 522 186 703 1 706 0 0 708 2 1.1 199 218.9 214 432.9 1 433 0 0 433 214 2 2 4 2 6 1 6 0 0 6 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 800 -999 4 1000 & up S ------------ -CALC_LATIONS 0= STATUS------------------ EB LT= 20 NB LT= 199 YB TH6RT= 708 SB THhRT= 6 SUM= 728 SL'M= 205 VB LT= 261 SB LT= 0 EB THLRT= 4110 NB TH&RT= 214 SUM= 701 SUM= 214 MAXIMUM CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VDLUPES 1!AXIMUY SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 942 B CAPACITY----------------------- 0 TO 1200 UDDER Right Turn Check 6< 1> 1 TO 1400 1400 NEAR OVER p2 PA CE i f - 1985 f:IG'riiAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING pNAL1SIS ( PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE {1 INTERSECTION: HAMPTON .%D 72ND DESIGN DAY: YEAR 1995 ~----~_ No. of No. of No. of Ho. of No. of ► Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Ft.QTh. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lines O Lane:O Lanes0 Lanes0 Lines E8 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 F' 1 0 AB 0 1 0 0 SB i . 0 0 1 0 4 ____—----------—TRAFFIC VOLUMES-------------- -- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total - E8 0 0 0 0 .. M8 72 0 39 110 i RD 0 •379 14 393 Sb 22 506 0 528 LANE LISTRIBUT10N FOR SHARED LEFTITHF.0 LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH MITI? PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL MO?(SHEET) -------------------------------------------- --- - --- Vo LT Total Mn. of E Mule Thru Vol. Vol. n ----------- EGUIV voluve Lanes On Mule Vehicice LT*TH Ea. 0i The O-posing roa:l�Per Lane in LT+TH Lane Resaininq Voluee PCElt Vlt PC-c's (TH+R1) Total App Lane Lanes (vph) ---------------- ------------------ -------------0-----NO —! 0 0 0 0 -------0-----1.1 0 0 ( 0 1.1 72 79.2 0 79.2 1 79 0 0 79 506 2 0 0 379 379 1 374 0 0 379 379 2 22 44 506 550 1 550 0 0 551 PCE 1.004 Table 0 -199 1.1 200 599 2 600 -799 3 a00 -999 4 1000 & ap 5 { - r ---CALCULATIONS OF STATUS---~--'"---"---_"-"- — E9 LT= 0 NB LT= 0 UB TH'kRT= 79 58 THtRT= 506 j SW 79 sun= 506 V! LT= 72 S8 LT= 22 ( EE TH&RT= 0 10 iH&RT= 379 � SUM= 12 SUN= 401 MAxIML�M CAPACITY SW! OF CRi1ICRl LEVEL 1 VOLUMES ^ 505 A CAPACITY--------------------------- 11AXiMiI?4 SUN OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 0 TD 1200 UNDER Right Tura Check :K 1201 TO 1400 NEAR ( > 1400 OVER ^a [ EXH.81,T PAGE -�---- (. 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PRDJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH AND 99 DESIGN DAY: YEAR 1995 ------GEOMETRY —----- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Ih. Rt. Rt,lh,ELt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 2 1 0 0 M8 1 0 2 1 0 0 NB 2 0 0 1 0 0 SB 1 0 0 1 0 0 ----------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES------------------------ Left Right r Turn Thru Turn Total 3 EB 28 2359 233 2620 NB 69 2175 65 2308 € NB 365 . 49 82 496 f SB 147 111 99 357 i LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHAM LEFTITHRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH NIIH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL V09KSHEEI) — ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Opposing E@UJV Volute Volute PCElt Vit PCE's (THfRT) Total Ap?roachPer Lane :n Li+TH lane Regaining Lane Lanes (Yph) 1 --------------------------------------------------------- 2240 5 2E 140 259:. 2732 3 911 771 799 911 j 2592 56E 340 224'0 2580 3 DEC, 520 51-9 860 210 2 365 730 131 861 1 e61 0 0 861 131 1.1 147 161.7 210 371.7 1 372 0 0 372 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1•.1 - 200 -599 2 j 600 -799 3 800 -999 4 1000 & up 5 f _-- ------ -CALCULATIrNS OF STATUS--------------------- EB LT= 28 NB LT= 183 j NB TH&RT= 860 SB TH&RT= 210 SUM= 88B SUM= 39: NB LT= 68 53 l7= 147 E3 7H1RT= 864 NB TH&RT= 131 - SUM= 932 SUM= 278 MAXIMUM CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUMES N.AYIKUM SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 1325 CAPACITY--------------------------- 0 TO 1200 UNDER Right Turn Check OK 1201 TO 1400 NEP EXHIBIT 1480 07ER PAGE I i 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: HWY 99 AND 69TH f DESIGN DAY: YEAR 1995 »---------------GEOMETRY ---------------- ----- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.lTh. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes f E8 1 0 2 1 0 0 l WB1 0 2 1 0 0 NB 1 0 1 0 1 0 SB 0 .0 0 0 0 1 I TRi�FFIC VOLUMES--------- Left -Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total . EB 55 1760 126 1941 W3 273 2124 0 2391 NB 101 43 371 515 SB 0 99 112 211 j LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFTITHFU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) ----------------------------------- _Vo_ —----—__—----—------ ----------------------------- LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Opposing EPUIV Voluse Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Vcluae PCElt Vlt PCE's (TH+RT) Total ApproachPer Lane inLaneTH Lane Relanesn9 (vph) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ( --_2124 5 55 275 188b 2161 3 720 445 500 720 1856 5 273 1365 2124 3499 3 1163 0 273 1062 211 2 101 202 43 245 1 245 0 0 245 43 1.1 0 0 211 211 1 211 0 0 211 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 `99 2 600 -799 3 800 -999 4 1000 & up 5 CALCULATIONS OF STATUS--- ----- EB LT= 55 NB LT= 101 (i8 TH&RT= 106? SB TH&RT= 211 SUN= 1117 SUM= 312 NB LT= 273 SB LT= 0 EB TH&RT= 629 NB TH&RT= 43 i SLIM= 002 SUN= 43 MAXIMUM CAPACITY SUM OF EP171CAL LEVEL VOLUMES MIIMUM S•.;N 0= CRITICAL VOL:f".ES= 1424 CAPACITY-------------- ------------- 0 TO 1200 Uti:•ER Right Turn Check OY. 1201 TO 1400 NEAR EAHISIT > '•400 OVER ?28 PAGES a 1965 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS TIGARD TRIAHSLE FROJECT: f INTERSECTION: HAINES AND 66164TN DES-96H DAY: YEAR 1945 -------------------r------ ----GEOMETRY No. of No. of Na. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.1CTh. Thru RtXh. Rt. Rt%Th,'<Lt € LanesLanes Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes LanesO 0 1 EB 0 0 p 0 1 0 . MB 0 1 0 1 0 0 MB i 0 0 1 0 SH __---_-----TRAFF IC VOLUMES- ---------------- --------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total 43 3 23 b9Es E WB 47 1 113 161 441 5 .359 77 j Sa B 151 332 15 498 t D LEFTITHRU LANES ON A rULTILANE APPROACH LANE DIST WITH PER FOR SHARED --_- N LAN_S IOPTIGNAI WORKSHEET) _____________ In WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TUR _r__-------------- '-"'" Vol. In Vo... ��~.��-��~--------- Ll --- Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vo Ll Vole ) Lanes On Voluae Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The ERUng Opposing Vlt pCE's ITH+RT) Tota; ApproachPer Lane in LT+1H Lane ReLanes pCElt Lane Lanes I Volure _---- -71 ---------- lvph) ----------73--- 0 0 -------------- —------ 73.3 -------1 1.1 43 41.3 1 52.7 1 53 0 0 53 f 2b 1.1 47 51.7 436 446 2 223 213 216 223 i 347 2 155 to 1 302 347 649 1 649 4 4 6;4 436 2 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 3 r. 600 -199 e0O -999 4 4 1000 1 up ��----- CALCULATIDNS OF STATL'p L1 --_- r- EB LT= 0 SB THLRT= 347 bB THLRT= 53 SUN= 352 SUM= 53 SB LT= 151 aB LT= 47 HB TH1,P.T= 223 CAPACITY EB TH&PT= 73 SU4= 374 MAXIMUM SUM= 120 S•,-M OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUMES ' A CAPACITY----------'-""---- -- MAXIMUM SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 494 0 TO 1200 UNDER 1201 TD 1400 NEAR Right Turn Check OIC ) 1400 DYER 29 f EXHIBIT 05 _ PACE act I i t 4 UNSIGNALIIED INTERSECTION CAPACITY CALCULATION FORM FOUR—WAY STOP-CONTROLLED INTERSECTION CITY: T16ARD INTERSECTION: HAINES AND 58TH /69TH METRO SIZE: 100,000 TO 500,000 LANE CONFIGURATION: 2—LANE BY 2—LANE COUNT: YEAR'1995 ALTERNATE: LOCATION PLAN: „ ANALYST: DICK WOELK t ' N n W E ! o ------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPR : WEST ! EAST 1 SOUTH 1 NORTH 1 ------------------------------------ - -- --pt --yT—; WR ' EL '--ET : ER 1 SLS ST : SP. : NL 1 NT : NR : 1 MOVE ' 1 VOL 1 43 1 3 : 23 : 47 1 1 :113 : 5 1 359 : 77 : 151 : 332 1 15 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- : STEP I DEMAND LEG A AND LEG B = 230. VPH LEG C AND LE6 D = 939. VPH TOTAL DEMAND 2 1169. VFH k' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- STEP 2 SPLIT 30 I LEG A AND LEG B = 70 1 LEG C AND LES D = ------------------------------------;'------------1------------------------- STEP 3 1MTERSErTIOXS SERVICE I _ATUF.ATION LEVELS DELAY E LOS = 7E. 1 SATURATION LEVEL--------------------------------------------- STEP 4 LOS C VOLUMES 67, VPH FOR W LEG = 157. VPH FOR E LEG = 4 ` 4 FOR S LES = 96. VFH 495 FOR N LES : . VPH FOR INTERSECTION = 1140. VfH EXHiBIT- PAGPE �- k N 0 ti � Iro �� .c-ion I-J A I OF-5"E5 •ASD. Lo 8 T � � \ � DARTMovTN ST. F-F)A JKLIN ST. N d- N qD .K-211 a 2�8--► Y NAn�tP7oN S?• � 3 r z � i J a. ITJ&AP,D 'fFL1At��6 GI�VLQ'j101J `01UOY . 2oo5 PM PEAK 14OUF� t P,Ar F IG VOLUMES '16 � I .-. o AQP 9 j EX!•sR��!T`� -- z II PAGE . i i t D 0 \00 4 8 �. .. O00 G is c j h0° l ` 0 WAINE5 •�,D• 2tPoo-+- \ w oAR'TMOUTH ST- ILI a to ° o d FF,A?IKLIN ST. . SFO w H O a . 2350 WA m9oN B*T 2coSo—�- r r r � d -tt �o►�® -r�,,At��LE crt �, o G ac ve.�.-i ca+a 5?u 0 0 0 2006 AVERAGE Df 1,j& TOTAL Tp�,6FFIG VOLUM6� (ADT) c�c1 a a r?3.2- P;, __.- ( 1995 HI64WAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TISARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH AND b9TH DESIGN DAY: YEAR 2005 ----- _--_-----------GEOMETRY -------------------------- --- of No. of No. of No. of No. of Na. Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt' Rlanes&Lt c Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes 0 i EB i 0 0 1 I WB 0 0 0 0 0 ] NB 1 0 1 1 0 0 SB I ---—-------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES Left Right s Turn Thru Turn Total 7 EB 280 104 75 459 WB 6 86 76 169 NB 219 301 26 546 S9 97 94 322 513 { s f LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFTJTH&U LANES ON A MULTILANE AFF-ROACH i WITH PFRMISSI<;E LEFT TURN LAVES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) -------------------- No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. ,n Vol. in Vo LT Total Opposing EGUIV Volume Lanes On Voluee Vehicles LT47i Ea. Of The Voluve PC:-It Vit PCE's iTH+RTI Total ApproachPer Lane in Lane L747H Lane ReUini n; 4 f (vph) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 ---------------------------- 0 4&7 1 162 1.1 290 309 179 4B1 1 497 0 162 169.6 1 169 0 G 154 179 1.1 6 6.6 294 45 2K 294 4 94 1.1 219 240.9 327 567.9 2 t �8E 327 2 97 194 94 299 1 2289 0 ( ( PCE lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 L 600 -799 3 800 -599 4 1000 & up 5 ---- CALCULATIONS CF STATUS-------------------- E3 LT= 250 N5 LT= 219 W9 TH&RT= 169 SE TH&RT= 94 SUIT= 449 SUM= 313 E Wb LT= 0 S3 LT= 97 Ed TH&kT= 179 NS THuRT= 164 - SUM= 179 SUN= 261 MAXIMUM CAPACITY ; SUM OF CRITICAL LEV_L VOLUMES ------- -------- ----- MAXIMUM SUM OF CRITICAL VOLGMES= 762 A CAPACITY------ 0 TO 1200 UNDER 1201 TO 1400 NEAR Figrt T,rn Check DY. _ o�J _ ? 1400 OV=P ..sI�ETf i 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIX46LE IMTERSECTIGN: DARTMOUTH AND 99 DESIGN DAY: YEAR 2005 -- --EEGMETRY ---------~------~----~-Ho, of NO. of No. of 40. of No. of Lt. Lt Xh. Thru Rt.1Th. Rt. Rt,Th,ILL Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes l Lanes Lanes E6 1 0 2 1 0 0 WB 1 0 HB 2 0 1 0 1 0 SB 1 0 1 0 1 0 TRAFFIC VOLUMES---------"'''--- ---------- Lef t Right ( Tmrn Thru Turn Total EB 36 2251 333 2 62 0 . WB 57 2166 65 2308 NB 608 45 146 799 E SB 165 88 125 378 1 LANE DISTF.IBi.'710 i FOR SHnRED LEFTITHR'! LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (0?TIGVAL WORKSFEET) ----- ---.--_-•_--_____ LT Total No. of Equi v. Thru Vol. In Vel. In Vo Lanes On olLae Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Opposing EQUIV Volute Voluee FCEIt Vlt PCE's (TH+R1) iotal Apin LT•iH lane Rexaining proach=er Lane Lane Lanes i` frph) --------------------------- ------ --'BIO 630 ------•-------------- ------------------------ 656 810 2251 5 36 180 2251 24,.1 3 T251 5 57 285 2251 2536 3 845 560 617 645 51 1.1 b 7 658.8 45 713.8 1 714 0 0 714 45 1.1 165 181.5 88 269.5 1 210 0 0 210 . PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 a•1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 800 -999 4 1000 1 LP 5 I GF 51ATU:--~-----'---- EB LT= 36 NB LT= 304 WB 7H1RT= 845 SB THIRT= B8 SUM= 831 SL'M= 392 WB LT: 57 SB LT= 165 r EB Th'1RT= 750 NB TH1RT= 45 CAPACITY - SUM= 210 MAIiMU}4 SUM-- 807SUy OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUttES f MrXIM7lf SL'.f OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 1213 D CAPACITY--------------------------- 0 TO 1200 UNDER 1201 TG 1400 Ncpc Right Turn Check DK �;��l�i �•..---- > 1400 OVER PAGE -� _ _ ?.34 f ' • i 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSLCTION: HWY 99 AND 69TH DESIGN DAY: YEAR 2005 -----------------SEOf!E7RY -------------------------------- No. of No. of N.. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.i:h. Rt. Rt,Th,6Lt _ Approach Lanes Lanes j1 Lanes' Lanesl Lanes O LanesV EB 1 0 1 VB 1 0 2 1 0 0 115 1 0 1 4 1 0 S9 0 0 0 0 0 1 w ------------ TRAFFIC VOLUPES--------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total ES 56 1698 187 1941 US 426 1971 0 2397 N8 174 37 620 931 l 59 0 98 119 207 I ILANE D1STP.1bU7I0N FOR SHARED LEFTITI'RU LANES Oti A MLLTILASE AFPF:OaC". f WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL MDR%S40) f ------------------------- LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Opposing EQUIV Volute Lases On Voluse Vehicles L1 1.4 Ea. Of ire Volute PCEit Vit PCE's (T +p.1) Tata! ApproachPer Lane inLane Lane ReLvEin9 (vph) ------------- _ ---------------------------------- ------ --_-197i S 5 28+� 1885 21b5 3 722 442 495 722 j 1885 S 426 2130 1971 4101 3 1325 0 426 9E6 I 207 2 114 343 37 385 1 0 365 37 1.1 0 0 20? 207 1 207 G 0 107 ( PCE Lookup Table ' 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 1 600 -779 3 800 -999 4 6 up 5 -----1000-----------CAL:L'LATIONS OF STAT:IS--------------------- £8 LT= 56 N3 LT= 174 SE THEFT= 207 WB THLRT= 9E6 SUP= 381 . SUN= 1042 F i US LT= 426 S8 LT= t' . EH 7H3P.T= 628 NB TF.4ET= 31 Sun= 1054 SUP= 37 !lAYIrUP CAPACITY SUP OF C;ITICA: LEVEL VOLL•1SE5 -----_r-- . MRXiP•!P Slip rc CRITIC=L VOLUMES= 1435 E CAaAC1TY--------------- 0 TO 1200 UNDER "night Turn Check OK1201 TG 1400 NEAR F-XmBrr 25 > 1400 OVER PAC= HISi?aAY CAFACII'i P£OCED!RE PLANNING ANALYSIS PRCJECT: MARD TRIANGLE INTMECTION: HAINES AND 691HJ64TH DESiB4 DAY: YEAR 20,015 -------------------- —M--•-----fiEDMETRY ----------- • Ro. of No. �f io. of No. of No. of Rt.&-:h. Rt. Rt,Tti,6Lt !t. Lt.DTh. lhru Approach Lanes Lanes LanesO Lanes0 LanesLanes 0 j ` EB G i 0 0 1 0 l NB 0 1 0 1 0 0 Na 1 0 t, 1 0 0 ---3------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES- ------------------------ Lef! Right Turn Thru Turn 20 Total �l M9 EB 600 1 221 282 t NB g 531 111 656 t( S9 259 ' 424 21 70; LAME IIS,IFJIl0H FOR SHA=ED LEFTlTHRU LMES ON A MULTILANE RPFROACH c• TURN LAVES IO,TIONAL MORKS4EET) -------- NITH .cRK:SBIrc LEFT --------- -------- Vol. In {! ------------------------ Th.0 Vol. In ----------- LT Total Kc. of Egsiv. Vo E&�UIV Veiute Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT4TH Ea. Of The Opposing r- ylt EQUPCEIV oluse1 total ApproachPer Lana in L141H Lane Regia es g f Volute PC---It ------------------------------------------------ ane ----------------a (rphl ----- 98 0 0 9E 66 72.6 25 97.6 1 0 0 0 67 f 25 1.1 b0 66 1 61 1 b7 3Ib 3:; 332 1 8 16 649 664 2 0 12?2 642 2 259 777 445 1222 1 1222 b4? PCE Lookup Table - 0 -199 1.1 Z00 -599 2 600 -799 3 000 -971 a 1000 1 up __-- CR:CL•=ATI •.fS 1F STrT ?,�--•------------------- - EB i8 b S6 THIRT= 445 ME TH1RT= 07 G;mz 453 ,SUN= 73 { 2-B LT= 259 V? LT: 60 ED IHSRT= 93 NB TH3RI= 332 MAI IK•UI1 CAPACITY � SUNS591 SUN= 159 SUN OF CRITICAL LEVE! VOLUM,_ -------------- CAPACITY-------''---- Uil:•ER l'AXi .6K S:`K OF C=ITIC,L VrL�KES= 14R A 0 TO MO < < 1201 10 1400 NEAR j Right Turn Lneck OK ��1 �""� ) 11400 9Y-R t iso PAGE - (y 1985 HIGHNAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS 1 FROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: HAMPTON AND 68TH DESIGN DAY: YEAR 2005 -------BED'4ETRY --------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes { EB 1 0 0 1 0 0 { UP 1 0 0 1 0 0 NB 1 0 0 1 0 0 r SB 1 .0 0 1 0 0 i ' -----TRAFFIC VOLUMES----------------------------- LeftRight Tlrn -Thru Turn Total ES 57 3 3 63 UB 32 18 2 52 .113 9 160 Sb 9 46 38 93 LANE DISTRIEUIION FOR SHARED LEFTITHRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPF.OAC4 Y1Tw PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) -----------------------------------------------------------•--- Vo LT Total No. of Equir. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Orpcsing EDUIV Volume Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of the Volute PCEIt Vit PCE's (1H+RT) Total AprroachFer Lane in LT+1H Lane Remaining I (vph) Lar._ Lanes ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2G 1.1 57 62.7 6 68.7 1 69 0 0 69 6 1.1 32 35.2 20 55.2 1 55 0 0 55 1 84 1.1 38 41.8 122 163.9 1 164 0 0 164 122 1.1 9 9.? 84 93.9 1 9; 0 0 94 i PCE Lookup Table 0 -19? I.1 200 5599 2 600 -75? 3 80p -999 4 10v0 b up 5 I -- i --------CALCULATIONS Cr' STATUS---------------------- E8 LT= 57 H: LT= 3? qB TN&nT= 5:i SB TH&RT= 8; 1 SUM= 112 SUM= 122 M5 LT= 32 SB LT= ? EB THrRT= 6 NB TS6RT= 122 SL•?t= 38 SUM= 13: 1AX!MVM CAPACITY ! SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VC.'UMES (I MAxImUM S.'?! Gr CRITICAL VGLUrtES= 24; A CAFACITf------------------------- _ 0 70 1200 UNnrD Right Turn Check OK EX ,It B1` 07, 12r1 TO 1400 NEi,R PAGE 7 i 1400 OVER 3� � . 1985 HIEHIIAY CAPACITY PROCE9llRE PLANNING ANALYSIS , PROJECT: 71BARD TRIANGLE s INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH AND 722ND 1 DESIGN DAY: YEAR 2005 ------------------GEOMETRY — ------------------------ Na. of No. ^4 , No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.17h. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,kLt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 1 0 1 0 WE 1 0 0 1 0 0 NB ! 0 0 1 0 0 SB 0 ,. 0 0 0 0 1 1 -----------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES- --------------------------- Left Right mrn Thru Turn Total E9 18 197 321 53b W9 302 302 21 625 } NB 247 7 254 503 SB 11 B 0 19 I LANE DISTRIBUTICN FOR SHARED LEFTITHRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APFF-OACH MITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL NOnKSHEET) _ VO---------------------------WLT------Total----------- No. of E;uiv. Thru --Val. In Vol. In Opposing EOJIV Voluae Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Valuee PCEIt Vlt PCE's (TH+RT) Total ApproachPer Lane in LT+TH Lane Resaining - Lane Lanes (v;h) -- -------------------- --- 0 233 _ 18 3b 147 23. 1 233 0 0 S`.5 197 1.1 Z02 3.,21.2 323 655-2 1 655 0 a 1.1 242 266.2 261 527.2 1 527 00 0 527 261 2 it 22 8 30 1 30 PCE Lookup Table U -199 1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 (300 -999 4 1000 : up 5 -----------------CALCULATiONS Or STATUS---------------- ------ E's LT= 19 NB LT= 242 WE TPIRT= 6.55 S3 T:f6Ri= 30 Sun= 673 SUM= 272 G3 LT= 302 S9 LT= 0 EB THZ:RT= 197 N9 THIRT= 2261 SUN= 49? SUM- 251 MMIXIMUM CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VO:UME3 i MAAXIMGM SUM OF CRITICAL VGLUMES= 945 B CAPACITY--------------------------- 0 TO 12v0 UyPER Right 'urn Chert OK eIt ti. S 1201 T2 1400 NEAR 7 E;K i ._ i 14,0 OVER PAM � _ 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PHCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS t PRO 3ECT: TISARO TRIANGLE INTERSE-^TIOii: HAMPTON AND 72N-!%DESIGN ray: YEAR 2005 --------------6EO!ETRY ---------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 0 0 0 0 0 1 MB ' 1 0 1 0 1 0 NB 0 It 0 0 i 0 SB 1 „0 0 1 0 0 ------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES------------------------- Left Right i Turn Thru Turn Total _ EB 0 0 0 0 NB 79 0 42 121 NB 0 .4541 l6 478 SB 19 564 0 583 LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SRAREB LEFTlTHRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH Yl"H PEFMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) ----------------------------------------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equ"v. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Opposing EOUIV tvoluae Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT+TS Ea. Of The Volume PCElt Vit PCE's (TH+R1) Total ApproachPer Lane in LT+TH Lane Remaining f i (vph) Lane Lanes ----------------- ------------------------------------------ 0 1.1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 19 B6.9 0 86.9 1 87 0 0 87 C 56i 2 0 0 462 462 1 462 0 0 462 462 2 19 38 564 602 1 602 0 u 602 PCE Lookup Tale _ 0 -1?9 1.1 200 -5?9 2 600 -194 3 800 -?94 4 5 1000 & up - ' ----------------CAL%ULATID�S OF STATUS---------------------- ED LT= 0 NB LT= 0 1!B TE&F1= 81 SB TH&R1= 564 SUM= ' 87 SUM= 564 i NB LT= 79 SB LT= 19 + EB TH&FT= 0 NB Th&RT= 462 - i S7N= 79 SUM= 491 MAXIMUM CAPACITY I SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLUMES � MAXIMUM SUM OF C?JTIC�! VOLUMES= 651 A CAPACITY--------------------------- 0 TO 12u0 I;HGc. Right turn Chet! Oi: 1201 TO !400 HEAR EXHIB i PS > 1400 C;-)ER PAG'ra- 3`� - A � N x N coo o� WAINEs •ay. 7 VIP7 N � � N o � � `� OARTMOUTN ST• '2011 a Ff�Qh1KLlN 5T. �- t O N � H tLn -e- 'l9 Co 4 s 333—► � NGMPToN VTI r t; -i'I C®AP40 ?RIAP1l�trE N r GlaauLA'itcrt STul7'{ oUT PM t?>UILD- -�Cyp,�r IG VD'vUMES 11 t t�fTao �t�1t1,� PP•,oJfG�lo�s - ; w Q MAP 7 - PAGE _ �� I " I l r �v 2100 s 1 — 0 .. 00� d- .�o S m t 0 _ 4505 WAINES •RD. I oo \R i to CA N > N DARTMOUTH ST• fi S � o 1 PP,ANKLIN ST. a 3'710 —a- a NG MPTot4 S?. J fi TI CvAFW 'TRIAKdPLE p Gl�cvLA-T OW 5't tiOY QQ LSU ILD-OUT AVEP,4&r= DAILY SO i AL O t Nto 'i P,AF r;G VOLUMI J (401) - Pt�.oJEGTIot•a [ r w i > _< a F 8 E - 4 a r 10.8.. HI8H6�MY CAPACITY PRC..ErLF._ PLAHYIN6 ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIBARD TRIANnLE INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH. AND 68TH 9ESi8N DAY: TOTAL BLD PM PK ------------------GEOMETRY ----------------------------------- E No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of r Lt. Lt.&1h. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Ft,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 2 0 ? 0 1 0 WD 1 0 2 0 1 0 NB ! .. 0 ! 1 0 0 Sb 1 0 1 1 1 0 E -------_----- TRAFFIC VOLUTES----------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total ) EDM 3!4 226 aB 41 585 517 !143 KB 343 472 41 956 SB 233 ' 226 773 1232 i f LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SKRED LEFTITHRU LANES 3N A MULTILA4E APPROACH ---------i--PER-ISS N-- LEFT-TURN-LANES-(-=TION--- Fi------ ; — yM-------------------------------- E Vo LT Total No. of Equir. Thru Vol. Io Vol. In Opposing EEUIV Volume Lanes On Vo1Lme Vehicles LT*TH Ea. Of The Volume PCE!t Vit PCE': (TH+RT) Total Ap;roachfer Lanz in LT4TH Lane Remaining E -- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------• Lane------------- Lanes-- � 585 2 845 169f 314 2004 2 1002 0 84P 314 4 e 314 2 41 8: SBS 667 2 334 252 293 334 226 2 343 686 513 1199 2 600 0 343 5!3 € 513 2 233 466 226 692 2 346 0 2;3 226 PEE Lookup Table 0 -199 J.1 - 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 BOO -999 4 1000 & up 5 ------------------CALCULATIONS .r,F STATUS--------------------- EB LT= 423 N9 LT= 343 aB 7H6RT= 334 SE TH&RT= 113 S".1M= 756 SLM= 456 HB LT= 41 SB LT= 233 EE TH&RT= 157 NB THIRT= 257 t SUN= 198 SUN= 490 MAXIMUM CAPACITY � (4 SUN OF CRITICAL LEVEL VC•LUNES f rAXIFUN SUN OF CRITICAL VOLjM.= 1246 D CAPACITY--------------------------- 0 TO 12V0 UNDER Right Turn Chest OK L-Xi. 1StY rj w 1201 TO !400 NEAR j M ? 1400 OVER 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: HWY 99 AND 69TH DESIGN DAY: TOTAL SLP PM PK ------------------GEOMETRY ----------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt Xh. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 3 1 0 0 NB . 1 0 3 1 0 0 NB 1 0 1 0 1 0 SS 0 0 0 0 0 1 ------------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES----------------------------- Left Right r Turn Thru Turn Total (t ES 63 1910 210 2183 HB 419 1939 0 2353 NB 214 46 76Z 1023 SB 0 133 180 313 LANE DISTRIEUTION FOR SHARED LEFT/THRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (iPTICNAL WORKSHEET) t ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Val. In t Opposing EQ,+IV Voluse Lanes On Muse Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Volume PCElt Vit PC'B's (TH+RT) Total ApproachPer Lane in LT+TH Lane Reaaining F (vph) Lane Lines ------ --------- ------- ------ ----- ---------------- ------ -------------- --------- - 5 63 315 2120 2435 4 609 2S4 357 21:05 419 2095 1939 4034 4 1009 0 419 645 013 2 214 428 46 47-1 1 474 0 0 474 46 1.1 0 0 313 313 1 313 0 0 313 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 2?0 -599 2 600 -799 3 B00 -999 4 1000 1 up 5 ----------------CALCULATIONS OF 3TATU5---------------------- ` EB LT= 63 NB LT= 214 WB TH&RT= 646 SB TH&RT= 31:, S SUM= 709 SUM= 527 89 LT= 419 SB LT= 0 EB TH&RT= 530 NB ThBRT= 46 - SLM= 949 SUM= 46 MA11MU" CAPACITY SUM OF CRITICAL LEVEL p VOLUMES 1 MAXIMUM S0 OF CRITICAL MURES= 147L• E rAPr,CI7V--------------------------- 0 TO IKO UNDER. Rigrt Tern Check OK 101 TO 1400 NEAR. 140 OVER v ti 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERSECTION: DARTMOUTH AND 99 DESIGN DAY: TOTAL BLL P? PK ------------------GEOMETRY ---------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Ih. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 2 1 1 ti WB 1 0 2 1 0 0 NB 2 0 1 0 1 0 5B 2 0 1 1 1 0 ------------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES----------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Tarn Total r EB 45 2821 417 3263 . WB 62 2373 71 2506 N9 945 70 227 1242 ( SB 742 ' 396 562 1700 1 LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFT/THRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH FERNISSIVE LEFT MIN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Vol. In Op-osin- EOUIV Voluee Lanes On Volute Vehicles LT47H Ea. Of 7ne Voluse PCElt Vlt PCE's ITH#RT) Tctal ApproachPer Lane in LT4TH Lan: €esairing 1v h) Lane Lanes -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2444 5 45 225 2821 3046 3 1015 790 87.5 1015 r 2821 5 62 310 2444 2754 3 918 608 670 913 396 2 945 1830 70 1960 1 1960 0 4 1960 70 1.1 742 816.2 396 1:12.2 2 606 0 742 395 PCE Lockup Table 0 -199 .1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 800 -999 4 1000 & up 5 i ----------------CAi_CU:AIICNS OF STATUS--------------------- EB LT= 45 N9 LT= 473 WB iH&RT= 918 SB TH&RT= 19E SUM= 963 SUN= 674 ' WB LT= 62 S9 LT= 37i EB TH&P.T= 940 NB TH!RT= 70 i SUM= 1002 SUM= 441 "4 14VA CAPACiT7 SUN OF CRITICAL LEVEL VOLU:!E3 I :AIaY--------------------------- MAXIl:UM S'-:NOF CRITICAL VOLeMES= 1673 E o.ACr 0 TO 0 0 UNDER Pight Turn: Check OK 1201 TO 1463 NEAR 1400 OVER t�I"1 ism 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNIN'S ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANSLE INTERSECTION: HAINES AND 69TH?68TH DESIGN DAY: TOTAL BLD PM PK ----------------GEOMETRY ----------------------------------- { No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of ,J Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt Xh. Rt. Rt,Th,6Lt - Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EB 1 0 0 1 0 0 i MB 1 0 1 0 1 G } i NB 0 1 1 0 1 0 S8 1 0 0 1 0 0 -----------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES--------------------------- 3 Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total EB 329 25 100 459 UB ill 2 410 523 ND 16 1088 225 1329 SB 233 381 19 633 LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFT/THRU LANES ON A MLLTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (DPTIDNAL WORKSHEET) ------------------------------------—--------------------------;---------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Eguiv. Thru Vc!. In Vol. In Opposing EOUIV Volume Lanes On Vc,cne Vehicles LT+TN Ea. Of The Vol.rae PCElt Vit PCE's (TH#RT) Total ApproachPer Lane :n LI4TH Lane Remaining lv h} ------- ---Lan- --- Lanes-- 2 1.1 329 311.9 125 496.9 1 437 0 0 487 R 125 1.1 111 122.1 2 124.1 1 1:4 0 0 124 400 2 16 32 1089 1120 2 560 528 544 560 3088 5 233 1165 400 1565 1 15:5 0 0 1565 FCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 =99 2 s 600 -194 3 800 -9?9 4 10"o5up -----------------CALCULATIONS OF STATES---------------------- p E3 LT= 329 NB LT= 16 Y8 7".4RT= 124 SP TH�RT= 400 ® SUM-- 453 SUN= 416 ® M3 LT= 111 SE LT= 233 EB iHIRT= 125 RD THERT= 560 - g S10C 236 SUM= 793 Mb11M:;M CAPACITY SUN OF CRITICAL LEVEL - VOLUMES------------------- i MNX;C:UM =UM CSF CRITICAL VOLUMES= Lob D CAPACITY--------------------------- Tn- 12:0 UNDER Right Turn Check 9Y. 1_01 TO 1400 NEAR • 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEOUP.E PLANNING ANALYSIS ( PROJECT: 71BARD TRIANGLE ( INTERSECTION: HAMPTON AND 72ND DESIS4 DAY: TOTAL BLD TRAFFIC PA ------------------BEOMrTRY ------------------------------------ No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes ' EB 1 0 0 1 0 0 NB 2 0 1 0 1 0 ( NB 1 0 1 1 0 0 SB 1 0 1 1 0 0 f -----------------IRAFFIC VOLUMES----------------------------- j Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total EB L 1 0 1 pB 947 0 503 1450 Nb 0 1056 37 110: SE 16 487 0 50 } t LAME DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFTlTH£U LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) -------------------------------:------ Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. In Jot. In t Opposing EOUIV Voluee Lanes On Volume Vehicles lT TH Ea. Of Tne Volute PC---It Vit PCE's (THtRT) Total Approach Per Lane inlar•eTH Lane Remaining IYph1 Lanes 0 1.1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1.1 947 104;.7 0 1041.7 1 1042 0 0 1042 487 2 0 0 1103 116.3 2 552 552 552 552 1103 5 16 80 4E7 56' 2 284 204 220 2E4 PC= Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 - 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 900 -999 4 1000 & up 5 s i - -_----------—CALCULATIONS OF STATUS---------------------- EB LT= 0 NB LT= 0 Q WIRT= 0 SB 14PT= 244 SUP= 0 SUM= 244 - WB LT= 474 SB LT= 16 E? TH&=T= 1 NB TH&F.T= 552 SUM= 475 4'!M= 568 MAYIAUM SUM OF CMITICAL VOLUF1S= 1042 LOS = B 51 T PACE ��.----_ _� )tight Tura Check nK 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE j INTERSECTION: HAMPTON AND 68TH ( DESIGN DAY: TOTAL BLD TRAFFIC PM -"�-----------nEOMETF.'Y ------------------------------- s No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thru Rt.tTh. Rt. Rt,Th,&lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes I EB 2 0 0 1 0 0 IIB 1 0 0 1 0 0 i ED 1 0 1 1 0 0 SB 1 0 2 0 1 0 s ---------------TRAFFIC VOLUMES-------------------------- Left •• Right r - Turn Thru Turn Total EB 905 48 48 1001 ` MB 12 104 165 301 f Na 103 605 48 856 I S8 140 717 592 1441 t t [ LANE DISTRIBUTION FOR SHARED LEFT/THRU LANES ON A MULTILANE APPROACH WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURN LANES (OPTIONAL WORKSHEET) 1 ----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru Vol. in Vol. In opposing EOUIV Volese Lanes On Volume Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Voluee PCElt Vit PCE's (TH+RT) Total Approach Per lane in LT+TH Lane Rasaining (vphlLaneLanes ----- ----------------------------------------------------------- —------------ - --- -- 289 2 905 1810 96 1906 1 1906 0 0 1906 ' 96 1.1 12 13.2 289 302.2 1 302 0 0 302 717 3 203 609 653 1262 2 631 2: 225 631 653 3 140 420 717 1137 2 569 149 229 564 ( PCE Lookup Table ` 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 2 600 -799 3 800 -999 4 1000 & up 5 ---------- -CALCULATIONS OF STATUS----------------------- EB LT= 453 NB LT= 203 19 TH&RT= 2B9 SB TM&RT= 359 SUM= 742 SUM= 562 WB LT- 12 SB LT= 140 EE TH&RT% 96 NB TH&RT= 327 SU112 108 SUM= 467 C MAXI!I.JA SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 1:.03 LOS = D Right Turn Che--k OK , PAGE ?4_7 I . • t+' 1985 HIGHWAY CAPACITY PROCEDURE PLANNING ANALYSIS PROJECT: TIGARD TRIANGLE INTERS--CTION: DARTMOUTH AND 72ND DESIGN DAY: TOTAL BLD TRAFFIC PM ---------- ----GEOMETRY -------------------------------- No. of No. of No. of No. of No. of Lt. Lt.&Th. Thr: Rt.&Th. Rt. Rt,Th,&Lt Approach Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes Lanes EF 1 0 1 1 1 0 N9 2 0 1 1 0 0 N9 1 0 1 0 1 0 SO 1 0 0 1 0 0 -----------------TRAFF+C VDLUMES----------------------------- Left Right Turn Thru Turn Total E8 34 373 607 1014 Na 1004 1004 70 207a _ NO 258 7 271 536 SO 204 149 0 IV53 { 1 LANE DISTRI6lTION FOR SHARED LEFT!THRU LANES Or A MULTILANE AFPROACH 4 _-- WITH PERMISSIVE LEFT TURNLANES-- DPT----- ------=E_1 ---- -------------------------------------- Vo LT Total No. of Equiv. Thru VC1. In Vol. in Opposing E7.UIV Valuse Lanes On Voluee Vehicles LT+TH Ea. Of The Voluae PCElt Vit PCE's (TH+RT) Total Approach Per Lane in LT+Th Lane Regaining lvphl Lane Lanes --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i 1074 5 34 170 373 543 2 272 102 13;. 272 375 2 1004 2003 1074 3092 2 1541 0 1004 1074 149 1.1 253 283.6 7 230.8 1 291 0 0 291 7 1.1 204 224.: 149 373.4 1 373 0 4 373 PCE Lookup Table 0 -199 1.1 200 -599 _ 2 - 600 -799 3 90 -997 4 j 1000 & up 5 r -----------------CALLULATIG4S CF STAT-L-3----------------------- EP LT- 34 N9 LT= 253 f V9 TH&RT= 5Z7 55 TH&RT= 149 SUM= 571 S::N= 401 Na LT= 202 S8 LT= 204 E3 TH&RT= 187 N? IH&RT= 7 SUM= 669 SUM= 1211 MAX1ML.1 SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES= 1096 LOS = C I Right Turn Check OK i • }_. 1• . . __ _ - .' _ _._ . . . • '' . PORE` I L ! 1_ • . '•L'•-i 1. 1'_,. � - mi Q = / 1, I •�(' , j ice,Q _ •.'..`�=� \� AT I L - •, HIL E W6,D 6m=I C IT"" EXHIPMT 11 Is ' t - i � r CITY OF TIGARD[ OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: November 17, 1986 DATE SUBMITTED: November 7, 1986_ ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Tigard Triangle PREVIOUS ACTION: Traffic Circulation Study s PREPARED BY: Randall R. Woole DEPT HEAD OQILnj CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Review of the traffic circulation plan for the Tigard Triangle area. INFORMATION SUMMARY The transportation analysis for the Tigard Triangle area has been completed. A copy of the report is attached. The report reaches the following conclusions: 1. The Tigard Triangle can be developed in accordance with the land uses and street patterns shown in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Traffic will remain at acceptable levels of service within the Triangle and on adjoining streets if certain street improvements are completed. The report outlines the improvements needed. 3. The improvements can be staged over the next 20 years or more as development occurs. The report describes the improvements needed at j various stages of development. ( 4. The level of service on Highway 99W will remain about the same as it is today. As more local traffic uses 99W, through traffic will divert to other roads (such as the Tualatin—Sherwood Road) . It is I assumed that 99W in the Triangle area will be widened during the next ten years to provide six through traffic lanes; this assumption is consistent with current planning by the State for 99W. (NOTE: Widening of 99W between I-5 and Route 217 requires little additional right—of—way. Recent development has been designed with room for future widening. In some locations, the pavement for an additional lane is already in place.) 4 5. An additional roadway between the Triangle and Hunziker Street may be required in the future. The need for this street and its appropriate alignment will depend on the final design of the Highway 217/I-5/Kruse Way interchange revisions. (NOTE: The State Highway Division has begun preliminary engineering work on the proposed new interchange. When the I-5/217 interchange is reconstructed, it will probably also be necessary to revise the ramp configuration at the 217/72nd Ave. interchange. Reconstruction of the 72nd overpass may be necessary. Planning for these projects will occur over the next two years.) 6. The improvements described in the report are adequate to maintain existing levels of service. If the City wants to upgra#�,- levels of service, the report suggests that the City consider other programs (such as promoting carpooling or improving transit service). Suggested programs are included in the recommendations on page 12 of the report. At the November 17th meeting, we will be prepared for a general discussion of the report but not a detailed review of the technical material. If the Council should wish to discuss in detail the technical aspects of the study, we would request a future meeting be scheduled with the engineering consultant. The report provides data to be used in future planning for the Triangle and for preparation of our Public Facilities Plan and Capital Improvement Plan. It provides data which can be utilized immediately in preparing the final plans for the Dartmouth Street LID. 366.505 HIGHWAe;, ROADS, BRIDGES AND FERRI( Oregon Transportation Commission. The crite- STATE HIGHWAY FUND ria for selection of projects will be established parti 366.:.05 Composition and use of high- after public hearings that allow citizens an oppor. subov way fund. (1) The State Highway Fund shall tunity to review the criteria. suba• consist oh (4) In developing criteria for selection of shall (a) All moneys and revenues derived under projects, the commission shall consider the fol• in a and by virtue of the sale of bonds, the sale of lowing: whic which is authorized by law and the proceeds (a) Projects be of significance to the state t thereof to be dedicated to highway purposes. highway system. thus or (b) All moneys and revenues accruing from (b) Projects not be selected on the interstate (" the licensing of motor vehicles, operators and highway system. this chauffeurs. this (c)Projects be equitably distributed through. Recr (c) Moneys and revenues derived from any out Oregon. mer. tax levied upon gasoline,distillate,liberty fuel or (d)Projects may be on county or city arterial recrt other volatile and inflammable liquid fuels. roads connecting to or supporting a state high• unde j (d) Moneys and revenues derived from or way. ratel I made available by the Federal Government for (e) Priority be given to projects which and . road construction, maintenance or betterment encourage economic development where: i purposes. trail% (A)There is commitment by private industry state (e)All moneys and revenues received from all to construct a facility. other sources which by law are allocated or dedi- with Gated for highway purposes. cies.(B) There is support from other state agen- appy J conn (•2) The highway fund shall be deemed and held as a trust fund and may be used only for the (f) Priority be given where there is local the s authorized by law and hereby is con- government or private sector financial participa. acco purposes for such purposes. tion, or both, in the improvement in addition to the c improvements adjacent to the project. (3) All interest earnings on any of the funds (g) Priority be given where there is strong amo desi-nated in subsection (1) of this section shall local support.(1985c.209§9J desc be placed to the credit of the highway fund. shalt (Amended by 1913 c.125§5) 366.510 Turning over highway funds to State Treasurer. All state officials charged men 366.507:Modernization program;fund- with in>;; conditions and criteria. The Depart- w'th the collection of highway funds shall,upon the first of each month after collection,unless a t ment of Transportation shall use an amount different time is otherwise provided, turn the tion `+ equal to the moneys in the State Highway Fund same over to the State Treasurer,who shall enter the s that become available for its use from the such revenues in the account of the highway fund. increase in tax rates created by the amendments (Amended by 1967 c.454§1061 advi i to ORS 319.020,319.530,767.820 and 767.825 by the i sections 1, 2 and 10 to 15, chapter 209, Oregon 366.512 Parks Division Account; sources;use;advisory committee;local gov. Laws 1985, exclusively to establish a state mod- und, ernization program for highways. The program ernment s . The Parks Division the established under this section and the use of Account is established a sas a separate account in moneys in the program are subject to the follow- the State Highway Fund.The following apply to mQ7 in,-: the account established by this section: y (1)The account shall consist of the following: repr (1) The moneys may be used by the depart- witl ment to retire bonds that the department issues (a) All moneys placed in the account as recr for the modernization program under bonding provided by law. authority of the department. (b)All registration fees received by the Motor pro; (2)The intent of the modernization program Vehicles Division for campers, mobile homes, acq,, is to accelerate improvements from the backlog of motor homes and travel trailers that are pro- use needs on the state highways and to fund moderni- cessed and then transferred to the State Highway und nation of highways and local roads to support Fund as provided in ORS 802.110.The money in tior. economic development in Oregon. Projects both the account shall be accounted for separately. dep on and off the state highway system are eligible. (2) The money in the account shall not be the (3) Projects to be implemented by the mod- subject to the appropriations provided for in ORS pro, ernization program shall be selected by the 366.525 to 366.540 and 366.785 to 366.820. and 828 � ��\ � ��. ��} �f / �� 7 . � f ��\ _ ��« � \ ® \ ��\ � ��\ - \ �/� �: \ � © ' \ ��\ �\ \ �� \ � /< � ��\ mt : �« » � , .�:. �� \ _ �� \ . . v w>, . „ . . ��\ �\ � �». �� ^` ��\ � : �': �\ \ �' � \ \ ��; �\ � � \ �� . ��\ . \�\ }� � ® - �\ � �� : �ƒ ?2t �\ �� \ ��. �\ \ : ! -: e , „ � , . , , , , . . �� \ � � . . � . � , . - e , - �� w Z > N Q t F-- O ti CD OCIO r.- ' N IBM 92 19 2175 2234 PACIFIC HIGHWAY 9 C7 r N Q Q Lu fL _? d � f O EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC PACIFIC HIGHWAY/ 78Th AVENUE PAZE � f- ! W r� ui N Q t H co ti 0 0 uo co i E 150 300 1315 1555 PACIFIC HIGHWAY l 455 X05 r aw ! o N co i O o~C I ODOT — PROJECTED 2005 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC r PACIFIC HIGHWAY / DARTMOUTH DRIVE - �•�� , •# 2y 1 Y i 6 !� ,r C� Y .r: r _ lyry .w Y; ,Y A �• 1. Iri t� L }. y ( f i c aw a •. < :t � -• 3 �.: r �:' v �1 x 5 J.. .-x i�� .. k ♦ r Y � }4� � •t �� , �� ,� y *,,.f „ n!rf .. 4,. _. .,,.�. ..a. Y'D: ..� ... "{ .. ._. ...�._. .. _.l,- }�w .cl �^" ._ ... .....,r,.'.. _ ,. .i ;:'s; ..__. ...y.. +._rte..:V.•1` .... / DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L PALMOUIST' W.RANDOLPH MILLER ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN C.CAHALAN rr ROBERT R CARNEY ! R 831 S.W•SIXTH AVENUE,SUITE 1300 RUSSELL R.KILKENNY OBERT L.ALLEN FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING HELLS RODE JOyN J.HIGGINS PACIFIC i THOMAS H.TONGUE MARSHA ITELE Y•LUSBY TELEG OPIER 13031 22 .732• ANNE yyMITELEV I ( GEORGE J.COOPER.III PORTLAND. CR 97204 PETER R.SGRO.JR. CHARLES D.RUTTAN ' ROBERT K WINGER DONALD E. 'EAN OY ON' TELEPHONE(3031 2z4.644D OOUOl.A9 V.vAn DVK p.KENNETH SHIROISHI' { SALLY R.LI FORE GILBERT E.PARKER.JR. SHANNON I �!.OPIL JOAN O'NEILL.P.G. ANDREW S-CRAIG R JEFFREY N A.S E NET BRADLEY O.BAKER March 3, 1987 JONATHAN A.BENNETT JACK O.HOFFMAN k MICHAEL-1.FRANCIS WILLIAM H.MORRISON `t IIS97-19831 j RALPH R.BAILEY JACK H.DUNN 11902.19761 i f JAMES G.SMITH NATHAN L COHEN OF COUNSEL 'ADMITTED INOREGON ANO WASHINGTON I DELIVERED BY MESSENGER Mr. Gerald R. Edwards I Tigard City Council President ! Tigard City Hall 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Dartmouth LID Project t Dear Mr. Edwards: The Dartmouth LID Project has been the subjectLiterally litigation ndredsand of considerable controversy for several Y by the City and our clients, thousands of dollars have been expended in Gordon R. Martin and Gordon S. Martine -i!n ardeTr angles to construct rim i this major transportation component int g 1 I Several meetings have been held with officials of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Tigard City Staff and dmoLNeclients, in € probable buyer of Homer Williams' property holdings, . an effort to reach a satisfactory resolution of the adtffe Inst instigating the x the parties. Homer Williams was the primary party ; Dartmouth LID several years ago. f In a recent meeting with Rick Kuehn, Regional Engineer for ODOT, he suggested that,t due intoebetween thesCity,of h affected propertye Dartmouth LID owners an agreement be entered and the State as to any road net toonCity`St Staff that the a work Subsequent to that meeting, we suggested deve session be held he Lfactsth tand ihe Cmplicat'onsity cregail �ding the construction gof understanding of t such road network. Rick Kuehn of ODOT has indicated that the State will participate in a work session and has suggested that it be scheduledHe will the ng Tom of April 6 or April 13, 1987 comweek mencing at 4:00 p. in Schwab, the cState hultetr he ODaffic OTe employee neer most d,designat d involved tod afththe rfinal and Wayne Sc Jim Neuman has indicated a willingness to attend and we Agreement. E ::':#E�iT a� PAGE �- Page 2 Mr. Gerald R. Edwards March 3, 1987 suggest all affected property owners be invited to such work session. would expect the meeting to la= four to five hc:jrs. j To enhance the efficiency of such work session, we are preparing a list of traffic and land use issues that arise if a major transportation component is to be constructed in the Tigard Triangle area. Such list may serve as an agenda for the work session. The answers to the issue ` may provide the direction needed for the parties to enter into the "Agreement" requested by the State. Additionally, since the City is relying heavily on the ATEP traffic study to support its position on the Dauth LID, ur consulting of the ATEP traffic engineer, Wayne Kittelson, has prepared th s study. This document, together with the list of issues, will be provided 1 to the City Council within the next two weeks. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please advise your Iwishes at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours, I Charles D. Ruttan CDR/sib cc: Tigard City Council members Timothy Ramis, Tigard City Attorney Rick Kuehn, ODOT ( Wayne Kittelson f Randy Wooley Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin Jim Neuman I i PAGE -�----- C KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES KL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING f 512 S.W.BROADWAY • PORTLAND.OREGON 97205 • (503)228-5230 t March 16, 1987 ' Mayor Tom Brian Members of the City Council Tigard, Oregon SUBJECT: Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Issues Dear Mr. Mayor and City Councilors: Over the past two years, a substantial amount of work has been conducted to evaluate projected travel demands and roadway requirements within the Tigard Triangle. This work has been performed on both an independent and a joint basis by the following agencies/consultants: e o City of Tigard engineering and planning staff; o Associated Transportation Engineering and Planning, Inc. (ATEP) , under contract to the City of Tigard; j o Kittelson & Associates, as a representative of Gordon l R. Martin and Gordon S. Martin; and o Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) , in a review and advisory function ( In preparation for an upcoming work session with the City Council on issues related to the future development of the Tigard Triangle, these agencies/consultants have reviewed their respective analyses of the transportation facilities needs associated with this very important part of Tigard. While there is still some disagreement among the involved professionals with regard to the specific assumptions, analysis methodology, and evaluation criteria that should be used, there is unaniw..-)us ( agreement on the following key findings: 1) The construction of a new collector/distributor roadway 'system within the Tigard Triangle connecting Pacific Highway, I-5, and Highway 217 is an integral part of f any future development scenavio for the area. t EXH1NvT_3c_f --- PAGE Tigard City Council rr March 16, 1987 1 Page Two 2) Within this context, the most appropriate point to connect to I-5 within the Triangle is at the Haines Road interchange. 3) The most appropriate point for a new connection to Pacific Highway is at the existing S.W. 78th Avenue/Pacific Highway intersection. . 4) Given current allowable development levels within the Tigard Triangle, a collector/distributor road that only connects I-5 and Pacific Highway will not be sufficient to accommodate future travel demands into and out of the Tigard Triangle at a significant percentage of build-out. It is necessary to provide at least one additional major entry/exit point to the Triangle area . The precise location of this new access point is not yet clear; however, projected traffic flow patterns show a need for an additional connection and/or crossing of Highway 217 by the new collector/distributor . 5) The specific location and design specifications of such a collector/distributor is dependent in part on the results of the I-5/Kruse Way interchange study. Therefore, the appropriate steps should be taken to preserve the right-of-way and flexibility necessary in r completing this internal system. It is recommended that the City Council also accept these findings, and use them as a starting point for discussions on how to most effectively address the future tr_ nsportation needs of the Tigard Triangle. � ^ r Ric and Woelk Rick Kuehn President Region 1 Engineer Associated Transportation Oregon Dept. of Transportation Engineering and Planning , i Randy Wooly Wa sbn— Tigard City Engineer lson & Associates 3� PAGE � -- c � 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD. P.O. BOX 23397 F Tim' RD TIGARD, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 OREGON O: FROM: �..ESSAGE -q"el(46r ale le 14 �i jG/17 D�7 i �— i i SIGNED DATE ,r! REPLY SIGNED DATE PLEASE RETURN OF [ ' ►:' ? -� PY FOR YOUR RECORDS. 'Y -• �kGB :T Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION f>If NEdGOLoSCHM'0t Region I C-0VER•41 9002 SE McLOUGHLIN, MILWAUKIE, OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 1.March 16, 1987 F.'«NNo e ��«�« To F.'«au t Tom Brian, Mayor I City of Tigard l 12755 SW Ash Tigard, OR 97223 This is to confirm the conversation that we had last week regarding access to the Tigard Trianqle. A work session with the City Council has been proposed by Gordon Martin and as I stated, the Highway Division would be very willing to partici- pate in such an effort. Over the past several months, we have participated in separate and joint meetings with your city staff and Gordon Martin. There are some areas of agreement. Those being that the triangle will be accessed from I-5 at Haines Road, a new access point to 99W will be constructed at 18th Avenue and that the triangle area will most likely need access within the southerly portion. How this southerly access will be provided is still the open question that will not be answered until our I-51217 Interchange Study is completed and the city of Tiqard does additional looking at the circulation pattern for the triangle. Our interchange study comes into play because it will most likely revise the 72nd Avenue/217 Interchange. Again, if you feel that a work session would be of some bene- fit towards answering these unanswered questions, we would be most happy to be apart of that effort. r " RICHARD KUEHN Region Engineer, P.E. r- cc Gordon Martin 734.1650 (1.671 PAP E . C C • h KIITELSON & ASSOCIATES TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 512 SW.BROADWAY • PORTLAND.OREGON 9720.5 • (503)228-5230 l March 31 , 1987 Mr. Charles D. Ruttan Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins & Tongue t Attorneys at Law (I 851 S.W. 6th, Suite 1500 Portland, Oregon 97204 { SUBJECT: Tigard Triangle Circulation Study t Dear Mr. Ruttan: At your request, I have reviewed the report recently prepared by Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc. (ATEP) and entitled, "Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Study". In general, I agree with the report's conclusion that serious consideration should be given to developing an additional access route into the Tigard Triangle. Based on the results of my review, however, I find that the report underestimates the traffic generation potential of the Tigard Triangle. This is very significant because the assumed trip generation characteristics represent the basis for the entire traffic analysis. Also, the report does not identify a number of significant bottlenecks and points of peak hour congestion, nor does it describe a future internal street circulation system capable of accommodating the expected future travel demands. These findings are described more fully in the following paragraphs. Current Land Use Characteristics The ATEP report is not accurate in its description of current (1986) land uses within the Tigard Triangle, and has actually overstated the current buildout of the Tigard Triangle. A detailed comparison between the assumptions made in the ATEP report and actual conditions revealed several signifi.:ant errors of fact, including the following: o The ATEP report assumes that the site of the existing Farmers Insurance building contains 20.0 acres, 490 employees, and is completely built out. None of these three assumption3 is correct. In fact, the site _ 33 E r Mr. Charles D. Ruttan # March 31, 1987 Page 2 i contains 25.3 acres, currently houses only 320 employees, and includes only about six developed acres (i.e. , there is still the capacity to accommodate about 1,800 additional employees) . Therefore, the net effect : of these errors is to underestimate the additional trip-making potential associated with future development of this particular site. ! i o The ATEP report assumes that Traffic Analysis Zone #18 t (TAZ) , which contains the ex:: ting Landmark Ford i dealership consists of 13.8 acres. It further assumes that 10 of these acres are fully developed. In fact, ' only 5.8 acres of this TAZ are currently developed. The net effect of this error is to underestimate the ` additional trip-making potential associated with future development of this TAZ. f o The ATEP report assumes that TAZ #19, which contains F !, the offices of Cooper Consultants, consists of 8.4 acres, four of which are developed. It also assumes 3 that there is currently no office or retail employment within this TAZ. In fact, only about one acre of TAZ #19 is currently developed, and a field survey revealed r that there are currently 45 office employees within this TAZ. g t o The ATEP report assumes that TAZ #28, which contains the existing OEA facility, consists of 14.2 acres of } land that is designated for commercial-professional (CP) development. It also assumes that this TAZ is fully built out. In fact, only 6.5 acres of this TAZ are currently developed. 4. i o The ATEP report assumes that TAZ #30, which contains the Portland General Electric substation, the Crab Bowl, Coco's Restaurant, and the Wayside Inn, consists of 16 fully-developed acres, but without any office or retail employment. In fact, a field survey revealed r that only about seven acres of this TAZ are developed, and that there are currently 91 office and/or retail employees. ' x, o The ATEP report assumes that the property currently held by Gordon R. Martin and Gordon S. Martin within TAZ #33 contains only 43.8 acres of land designated for commercial general (CG) development. In fact, there are 15 additional acres within this TAZ that are discounted by the ATEP report. Even though these 15 ! acres are designated as sensitive lands, they should G J:412 -- 1 C C Mr. Charles D. Ruttan March 31, 1987 Page 3 i have been included in the trip generation analysis because they are either buildable or can be used to meet minimum landscaping, bufferi„g, and/or parking requirements associated with a large-scale development. The effect of this oversight is to underestimate the additional trip-making potential associated with future Idevelopment of the Tigard Triangle. Therefore, the cumulative effect of these arrors is a significant underestimate of the Tigard Triangle's additional trip generation potential. _Study Area Boundaries and Future Percent Buildout Estimates As noted above, the ATEP report assumes that a number of TAZ's within the Triangle are already built out, when in fact there is still room for a substantial amount of additional development. Thus, the errors of fact identified above have the additional effect of overstating the percentage of the Tigard Triangle's land area that is currently developed. Beyond this effect, there is an additional error/inconsistency in the ATEP report that cause a further overstatement of the current and future buildout percentages. This error can be seen by examining the June 1986 Tigard Triangle land use inventory data that is provided in the ATEP report, and comparing it with the 1986 land use and population/employment data, which is provided on the following page of the report. As these tables show, the ATEP analysis includes three TAZ's located either partially or entirely outside the Tigard Triangle (viz. , TAZ 43, 44, and 45) . In and of itself, the inclusion of these three external TAZ's in any calculation of the Tigard Triangle buildout percentages is a questionable procedure. Even if this is ignored, however, the 1986 land use inventory indicates that these three TAZ's have a combined total of only 26 acres, all of which is in a CG zone designation. However, the 1986 land use and population/employment data shows these three TAZ's to also contain an additional 80.7 acres of land designated JIM for residential development. Thus, there are 80.7 acres included in the 1986 land use and population/employment data (and in all subsequent development scenarios) that were not included in the existing land use inventory. Since the existing land use inventory is used as the basis for determining percent buildout under each analysis scenario, this error causes an overstatement of the buildout percentage, and is reflected in every buildout percentage calculation that is contained within the ATEP report. Mr. Charles D. Ruttan March 31, 1987 Page 4 I In summary, the ATEP report errs in its estimate of the total amount of land available within the Tigard Triangle. It also errs in its estimate of the total amount of land within the 1 Tigard Triangle that is already developed. Finally, it errs in its calculation of the percent buildout parameter. If only the t errors of fact identified thus far are taken into account, then the following effect can be seen: . ATEP Corrected Estimate Estimate Current Buildout of the Tigard 72.3% 35.9 Triangle (including commercial and residential land areas) 2005 Buildout of the Tigard 78.0 41 .3 Triangle (including commercial and residential land areas) e Because the difference between the ATEP estimate and the 4 icorrected estimate is so large, even for existing conditions, there is another reasonableness check that can be performed. This reasonableness check involves driving through the Tigard 1 Triangle and developing an overall feeling for the current 1 percent buildout. This final reasonableness check was also performed, and it was found that the corrected estimate is more representative of existing conditions than is the ATEP estimate. i The net effect of the errors thus far identified is shown in the above table. Clearly, the ATEP report predicts much less potential for additional traffic into and out of the Tigard Triangle than is actually the case. 's Calculation of Intersection Levels of Service The ATEP report is predicated upon the assumption that the City of Tigard is willing to accept an "E" level of service (LOS) at critical intersections. This is an inappropriate assumption for the following reasons: o Even if the City were willing to accept an "E" LOS, it must be remembered that the maintenance and operation of Pacific Highway is the responsibility of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) . ODOT's policy is that a "D" LOS represents the minimum acceptable g service level for design purposes. ,A i .sem.i PAGE Mr. Charles D. Rur,,an March 31, 1987 Page 5 i o An "E" LOS represents near-capacity conditions with unstable traffic flow characteristics. Traffic delays at each intersection are typically between 40 and 60 seconds per vehicle, and non-equilibrium traffic flow conditions are likely (i.e. , the queues or backups of vehicles waiting at an intersection can actually lengthen over time rather than remaining stable) . Motorists usually do not find these conditions to be acceptable anywhere but in the most dense urban areas. Whether or not an "Ell LOS is considered to be acceptable during evening peak hour conditions, it is doubtful that either the City or motorists would find an "E" LOS to be acceptable during off- peak conditions. Unfortunately, the ATEP report does not address the possibility that an "E" LOS might exist along Pacific Highway or elsewhere within the Tigard Triangle for more than just the morning and evening peak hours. However, an examination of ''►-.he analysis results shows that a significant percentage of the existing p.m. peak hour traffic on Pacific Highway will have to divert to alternate routes if an "E" LOS is to be retained under the various build scenarios. The additional delay, E inconvenience, and frustration that this diversion will cause to off-site traffic is not discussed in the ATEP report, even though it represents a potentially significant impact to both off-site drivers and the surrounding street system. Furthermore, this required diversion of off-site vehicles also indicates that an I "E" LOS is likely to occur during other hours of the day as well. x t r It is also important to remember that ATEP's projections of an l "E" LOS at key intersections along Pacific Highway do not account for the additional trip-making potential of the Tigard Triangle as discussed in previous sections. Therefore, if ATEP's understatement of the Triangle's total trip-making potential is r taken into account, the LOS at key intersections can be expected f to be further degraded during both peak hour and off-peak hour ( conditions. 4 Assignment of Triangle-Generated Traffic The computer model that was used by ATEP to project traffic volumes and turning movement patterns within the study area a resulted in a number of unreasonable assignments between specific origin-destination pairs. As an example, consider the Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway intersection, which is a primary focal point for the ATEP analysis. Following is a comparison between existing p.m. peak hour turning movement volumes and the 2005 buildout projections contained within the ATEP report for all existing legs of this intersection: s 1 Mr. Charles D. Ruf..dn March 31, 1987 Page 6 i E Dartmouth Drive/Pacific Highway Intersection: P.M. Peak Hour Conditions Net Turning Existing Projected Difference Movement Volume (vph) Volume (vph) (vph) EASTBOUND Left 92 36 -56 Through 2, 175 2,251 +76 Right -NA- 333 -NA- WESTBOUND j Left 9 57 +48 Through 2,234 2, 186 -48 Right 19 65 +46 SOUTHBOUND Left 270 165 -105 Through 1 88 +87 Right 136 125 -11 In the above table, a negative net difference indicates that the j existing movement volume already exceeds the projections made in i the ATEP report under the 2005 scenario. A brief examination suggests that the ATEP projections should be considered to be highly suspect: There is no reason to expect traffic volumes to decrease on Pacific Highway in the future (especially if, as the ATEP report assumes, Pacific Highway is widened to a six- or seven-lane facility) . Yet ATEP's projected 2005 volume for the westbound through movement is less than existing traffic volumes by almost 50 vehicles, even after development of the Tigard Triangle has been taken into account. Similarly, it is { unreasonable to expect the Tigard Triangle, which contains over 300 acres of developable property, to generate only 46 additional westbound-to-southbound left turn movements by the year 2005, especially when one considers that this intersection will serve as a primary entrance to the Triangle area. Despite the clear understatement of 2005 peak hour traffic volumes noted above, the ATEP report projects this intersection to operate at an "E" LOS under the 2005 buildout scenario. Therefore, it is concluded that a more reasonable estimate of the turning movement volumes at this location would cause the a intersection to operate in a forced flow mode (i.e. , at an "F" LOS) . Of course, the cumulative effects of the other issues identified earlier would have an additioril and significant I C. Mr. Charles D. Rutuan March 31 , 1987 Page 7 adverse effect on the operation of this intersection. Trip Generation Rate Assumptions The ATEP report is inconsistent in the trip generation rates that are used to project traffic volumes likely to be generated by the Tigard Triangle under the various scenarios. In particular, the report assumes that the peak hour trip generation rate for commercial properties inside the Tigard Triangle drops about 60 percent (from about 1, 180 daily vehicle trip ends per acre to only 460 daily vehicle trip ends per acre) between 2005 and the time that full buildout conditions are reached. There is no reason to assume that trip generation rates will change significantly over time for land uses located within the Triangle, and certainly not by the magnitude identified above. Aside from making it difficult to compare the alternatives, this variability in the assumed trip generation rates also understates the number of vehicle trips likely to be generated by commercial establishments under full buildout conditions. SUMMARY In summary, the ATEP report deficiencies identified in the previous paragraphs serve to: 1) underestimate the trip generating potential of the Tigard Triangle; 2) overstate the percent buildout associated with any given level of development within the Triangle; and 3) underestimate the traffic operational impacts of the assumed circulation system on the surrounding transportation facilities. j These deficiencies cause the report to significantly E underestimate the true trip generating potential of the Tigard Triangle, and to minimize the operational impacts of future Triangle development on the surrounding transportation system. Perhaps because of these deficiencies, the report also does not provide any direction regarding the development of a t comprehensive internal vehicle circulation system that will be adequate to meet future travel demand requirements. .r,�., PAG F Mr. Charles D. Ruttan March 31, 1987 Page 8 If you have additional comments or questions related to this matter that I might be able to answer, I would be happy to meet with you at your convenience in order to discuss the matter further. Sincerely, K. k* Ls— Kittelson� Pri cipal f i I I I I i f MAR 3 1 1°87 ��99�� , March 30, 1987 �; Z?��;c� Ciel(OF /I17ARD OREGON 1: 25 Years of Service Rick Kuehn, Region Engineer 9961-1986 Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. Milwaukie, OR 97222 Tigard's Transportation Advisory Committee has voted to recommend to the City Council certain projects for inclusion in the City's 1987-88 Capital Improvement Program. The recommendation will be considered by the Council on April 20, 1987. Three of the new projects recommended will affect the State highway system. Those projects are: 1. Tigard Triangle South Access Study. Provides funding for the City to work with the State in planning for street access from the Triangle to Highway 217 and to the industrial area south of Highway 217. 2. 72nd Avenue/Highway 99W Intersection Improvements. Provides funding for design and right-of-way acquisition for a direct connection of 72nd Avenue to Highway 99W and revision of the existing frontage road access. Road Turn Lane at Hall Boulevard. Provides funding for 3. Durham or westbound traffic on Durham Road at construction of 'a right turn lane f Hall Boulevard (Beaverton-Tualatin Highway). The purpose is to increase capacity and reduce the long queue which now occurs at morning and even!ng peak hours. In addition, the Committee indicated suport for preliminary engineering of Highway 99W intersection improvements between McDonald Street and Bull Mountain Road. This is basically the project already funded by ODOT and MSTIP as 99W/Canterbury Lane intersection improvements. a If you see any problems with their proposed projects, please let me know by April 20th. Sincerely, Randall R. W 'oley, P.E. City Engine9- /br 3103P ENO 13125 SW Hall Blvd-P.O.Box 23397,Tigard.Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 r..rE - f } C DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE ( ROBERT R.CARNEY JENNIFER L PALMOUIST' ROBERT L ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER JOHN J.HIGGINS 831 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE 1700 JOHN C.CAHAL.AN THOMAS H.TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY r T[LlC OP![R 17021 224•7724 HELLE RODE GEORGE J.COOPER.111 r CHARLES D.RUTTAN C MARSHA MURRAY•LUSDY i PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 PETER R.SGRO.JR. ROBERT K.WINGER G.KENNETH SHIROISHV TELEPHONE(703)224-6440 DONALD E.TE MPLETON' DOUGLAS V.VAN DYK GILBCRT[.PARKER.JR. fALLY R.LEISURE JOAN O•NEILL.P.C. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE THAN NON 1.SKOPI L' ROBERT L.NASH" 709 N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 DELMAN ANDR[ JONATHAN W B.CRAIG BEND.OREGON 97701 JEFFREY N A..SENNETT BRADLEY O.BAKER NT T TELEPHONE('3031 362-9241 JACK O.HOFFMAN MICHAEL J.FRANCIS April 1, 1987 wILL1AM H.MORRISON 11897.198]1 r RALPH R.BAILEY I11902.19741 JACK H.DUNN *ADMITTED IN OREGON JAMES O.SMITH ANO WASHINGTON NATHAN L.COHEN "R[tID[NT PARTNER. OF COUNSEL RENO OFFICE 7 t Mr. Kenneth M. Elliott Attorney at Law Ballow & Wright Building 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 RE: Bidding Procedures for Dartmouth LID Dear Mr. Elliott: As you are aware, it is our position that the City of Tigard is required by ordinance to put the Dartmouth LID Project out to bid. Improvements with estimated costs greater than $50,000, f such as the Dartmouth LID, are required to be let out for bids: "The city council may determine that an improvement with an estimated cost of less than $50,000 shall be done at the direction of the council by purchasing the materials and hiring the labor." Tigard Muni. Code 513.04.180. E It is not until after such projects have been let out for bids, and the contracts signed, that benefited property owners may be assessed for the coscs of improvements: ra 3-- s "Upon signing a contract or upon a determination by the city council to i. make the improvement under its own supervision . . . or as soon thereafter as is reasonably convenient, the city 1 F I EX)4 S T PAGE i f � f council shall determine whether the 1 property benefited shall bear all or a 1 portion of the cost and shall direct the city engineer to apportion and assess the cost of making such improvement . Tigard Muni. Code §13.04.080. Accordingly, the Dartmouth LID Project must be submitted to bid and the contracts must be signed before the property owners may be assessed. I Please confirm whether the City of Tigard will be following the procedures outlined in this letter in assessing benefited A property owners of the Dartmouth LID, if the City dtermines to Iproceed with such project ` Thank you for your courtesies in this regard. E Very truly yours, CHARLES D. RUTTAN CDR:lko cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin r i t EXHIBIT i � PAGE C, C woflRT RL.CARNEY DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE FER 1ERT ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW JENNIL.PALMOUIS NT' JOHN J.NIOOIS SIII f.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE f 900 W.RANDOLPH MILLEROH THOMAS N. OOPE TONGUE PACIFICJOHN C.CAHALAN FIRST FEDERAL SUILOING OHNC R. LJ( OtORGE J.CR.III TELCCOPIER 99031 224-7324 RUS, RCLLE RODE DE ENNY CHARLEDwurrAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 MARSHA IAURRAY•IUSSV ROStRT K WINDER P[TCR R,SONO JR. 0.KENNETH SHIROISHI' TELEPHONE 1303)224-6440 DONALD It.TEMPLETON* OILSCRT C.PARKER.J041. DOUGLAS V.VAN 0 K .,04-4 N OAO'NEILL,P.C. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE 1164'"y PI LClauwC ROS[RT L.NAS"" 709 M.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 SHANNON 1,SKOPIL' A01ACK. f. Ift"a SEND.OREGON 97701 Jt FFRCY F.NUDCLMAN ACK 0.Y O rNAN JONATHAN A.SENNETT TELEPHONE(303)382-0241 JACK 0.MOPPMAN p MICHAEL J.FRANCIS April 17 1907 WILLIAM H.MORRISON P , _ II0*7-19031 RALPH R,NA1LCY JACK H.OUNN IISO3.1 D741 JAMES O.SMITH •^OMITTED IN O"ZOON NATHAN L.COHEN ANO WASHINOTON OF COUNSEL "RCSIDCNT PARTNER, SEND OFFICE HAND DELIVERED Mr. Richard Kuehn Regional Engineer Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 SE McLoughlin Blvd. to Milwaukie, OR 97222 RE: Access Permit for Dartmouth Connection to 99W Dear Rick: On March 30, Tom Schwab asked our thoughts concerning conditions to be attached to a permit for access to 99W for the above project. On September 4, 1985, Ed Hardt wrote to the City of Tigard - advising that .a circulation plan for the entire Triangle should be developed in cooperation with the State prior to issuance of an access permit to Pacific Highway (See Exhibit 1) . Mr. Hardt' s request was based on his conclusion that "the proposed Dartmouth connection to 99W will cause an unacceptable level of service for that intersection based on the study and # assumptions generated by Tom Schwab and Wayne Kittelson. This statement is consistent with the position of Mr. Hardt's letter of April 30, 1985, in which he stated "as a condition of the State granting a permit for this new connection that we would 4 have to see a traffic circulation plan showing that the new connection would not create undue traffic problems on 99W. " (See Exhibit 2) . . e AMk 1 t M PAW Mr. Richard Kue(- April 17, 1987 -, Page 2 i On March 16, 1987, Randy Wooley forwarded letters and agreements to the City Council wherein Tigard's consulting engineer, Dick Woelk (ATEP) , and Wayne Kittelson agreed that: "Given current allowable development levels within the Tigard Triangle, a collector/ I - distributor road that only connects I-5 and Pacific Highway will not be sufficient to , accommodate future significant percentage of buildout. It is necessary to provide at I lease one additional major entry/ exit point to the Triangle area." Additionally, you and Randy Wooley agreed that the question of southerly access to the Triangle would not be answered until the I-5/217 Interchange Study is completed and the City of Tigard does additional looking at circulation for the area. (See Exhibit 3) . I The City Staff advised ODOT March 30, 1987, that the City Council will decide on April 20 whether to prepare a Tigard Triangle South Access Study during the 1987-1988 fiscal year. In light of the consistent position of Mr. Hardt's letters, the position of the City' s consulting engineer, Dick Woelk (ATEP) , and the recognized need and opportunity for further analysis of the access issue, it is our position that ODOT must advise the City that it's review of the proposed project is conditioned upon receipt of a new circulation plan. Such a plan must reasonably accommodate future traffic demand in the Triangle. V truly ours, V harles D. Ruttan CDR:Iko Enclosures 1. Letter of 9/4/85 from Ed Hardt 2. Letter of 4/30/85 from Ed Hardt 3. Letters/agreements re: southerly access �. cc: Gordon S. Martin Gordon R. Martin Thomas Schwab Department of Transportation t P S Y�•1-�;Z HIGHWAY DIVISION W10ft•II^TN Metro Region 9002 SE.McLOUGHLIN BLVD..MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 September 4, 1985 IMF r? r • n Reply Reler To E FJe No- r a' SEP 61985 Robert Jean— City City Administra or City of Tigard/ DUNN, CARNEY P. 0. Box 23397 :_; l•:.::. Tigard, OR 97223 You may recall a visit I had in your office several months ago -- about Tigard's proposed Dartmouth Extension connection to 99W. At that time I indicated that we would have to see a traffic , :-; circulation plan showing that the new construction would not create undue traffic problems on 99W before a permit could be i 1 issued. So far, the City has not submitted a plan. Under date of August 20, 1985 I received a report from Wayne } Kittleson, traffic engineer engaged by Gordon Martin. I have attached a copy of that report. This report has been reviewed and the assumptions agreed to by the members of my staff. The conclusion of this report is that the Dartmouth connection, as ( currently conceived, would result in an undesirable level of service on 99W. It appears to me that providing suitable access to the Tigard Triangle, assuming either build-out conditions or even a significant percent of build-out, will be very difficult given the fact that all three state highways principally involved are presently, or soon will be, operating at capacity levels. Highways 217 and 99W are experiencing current problems and are expected 4 to have much more severe traffic problems in the future. Interstate 5, both north and south of the Haines section, is anticipated to experience increasing difficulties, as well. s= P My analysis is that two major areas need to be addressed: �- The first need is for the city to develop a local circulation system within the Tigard Triangle to minimize transportation problems within the area itself. This should include the consideration of major north/south and/or east/west transportation spines. _ s The second major need to be addressed is to identify with the Metropolitan Service District and other jurisdictions the necessary improvements to the major x state highways in order to serve the Triangle area. (over) E} IIBIT l (Page Z of 2) -- -r PAGE -1 c � Robert Jean Page 2 September 4, 1985 r Based on the information I have to date, I have come to two conclusions: (1) The proposed Dartmouth connection to 99W (plans which have not been formally presented to us) will cause an unacceptable level of service for that intersection, so the Dartmouth Street connection plan needs to be reconsidered by the city. What. is needed F is a local circulation plan for the entire triangle, t which should be developed by the city. (2) The broader issue of how the Tigard Triangle is E to be accessed in the future needs to be addressed. I This access requires an adequate internal circulation plan by the city, as well as coordination with the Metropolitan Service District and NOT to develop iproposals for the improvements needed to the highway and road systems serving the Triangle area. I would suggest that Ted Spence, from my office, Andy Cotugno, from the Metropolitan Service District, and someone from your ' office get together to discuss how this problem is to be Iapproached, both in terms of developing an internal circulation system, as well as defining the regional transportation requirements. Possibly, work on the Southwest Corridor study could address the overall major question of the regional system and related needs in the Tigard Tringle area. { .. 6s:':.':�►;sluts er . ZWO L W,-T Edward L. Hardt Metro Region Engineer Attachment c Chuck Ruttan Andy Cotugno Ted Spence i f =BIT 1 (page 2 of 2) PAGE .� f or% o F .•.•: :o Department of Transportation - +ea+ HIGHWAY DIVISION V*C?- SEM Metro Region {` 9002 SE.McLOUGHLIN BLVD.,MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 April 30, 1985 In Reply RNP To F"No.: 1 • � 1 Robert Jean t City of Tigard Administrator City Hall Tigard, OR "' 97223 - ( This will confirm a conversation I had with you and Frank Currie on April 18th regarding the City's plans for a new connection of Dartmouth Street to Highway 99W. I said that as a condition of the State granting a permit-for this new connection that we would have to see a traffic circulation plan showing that the new con- nection would not create undue traffic problems on 99W. It is my understanding that in order to produce this study that you are considering hiring a traffic consultant. As I mentioned on the 18th, this study should be coordinated with traffic and land use projections from the Metropolitan Service District and the param- eters of the study should be coordinated with Tom Schwab, of my office. f {,. Edward L. Hardt Metro Region Engineer- -- --- -cc ngineer• -- -- • • •cc Chuck Ruttan • •• . . V � t� -U Lti. iCA,RNEY DUN�� r- XHIMT 9 =BIT 2 {`(({ ::�'-_'• �<`` ;.^ _ -,. '� 13125 S.W. HALL BLVD.. -P.O. BOX 23397 E �Jl�.: . ... :TIGARD, OR 97223 ,,. " ..503) 639-417 OREGON . . •SIA r .q•� .. __ • _ .. TO: y • FROM: ep G�we .' y�y + .�"M[• .� �• �- �;•'9!'�2~.Y ni•'....•„rt'dliery'+lJ� G �:-'�.�"'rJ^�7ra'.�'.R.��.•'`i{o.J7.• ..J•�Y'-r✓'r'+d��y. �t.:. �yu,• 'r ��5��,�. •`— •_ "'fir 'i'f'tir y�'�t:�'�'• �/ r�i..��..� .;rlv'-i/;{��.q.:�� 1,r,"�� I '•�:�'.af�C�/X ay /•7CI�'�5�.~ r�� ,��5� , � f. ^r ��fd� �� S',��! ��`�^��/r al 1-t Al �. YF('`��-�S�t9~J��, ..�=._ ''lY,. 1%.•l:+~.�..1W�::X.q..'.��-'A:��jyLf•'�"={,? .r ��. �1.r•I•L.. �-�.-.i y'�•." .' � r�M= ..�. 11l'/�� '��•'��," ,�','�� i.^'.wi�t. �rty;sJ.�. ^f.�': ..:i= .7 ..x.� .r.. .'�..a`.. ,i ..rte.-'� '_'.`"K,t,. ♦ .-t:f Y-.• .+. �af�t. •T�../„� ..�"a � .�._r:'�•. .. �. � .x� •rte ..� ..i a'('t�' ''�•�.. f+!2^'c7• .tJ'.'r.. '��.?.ynw.;•-�:i. �?�Yti� ';T'.s' � S•• - r �v •�•d= �.. '^ y..i�'1!'r�?!C":wSF`"ty,' '::l -Ly'.r :J a �w;^_";'�' vi�'ir• rS•d'��' 1 '.'i::.:' � _ .' '` i9'xw� �•'[. =:. r.,:}�� fE __F `,. e.�'��'�a`'v`�.t:�i�.4.aY.., i..-.�i:lea:«�'`-•�c+moi��ta-'►�ti�fa.::4,`•-..a.ir1:!• 3r"F�',•}•�. ct��•:;:�t.: ��j~�� ,j•:�=+•�ior• •+::.��e•'x�-.ds'�="-'y _-y..�i�•��. .-�.�ry±at�• •*�i..j e�•.w .+.r+ _~� ~ ..�LA7"t* .�_ �1 '+��'L+. -�'Y`L �i.•��34Gi.�•.r.`aa•'•�W y •..��"��- • 1 N � 'fsAN.S3�,�J.'' tk�•�•` yw.�.��I•��. •�.a�� .��_�y.�. ••V .'o .r �v.•z;'^i.'`�,-•rl.Mr.�-• .l;,�S'r, ,?': N' �'••'Iii ♦+' tiP'a •1!. .it ... r^nt:T:�.•: rt i•3_�i"r"^:•^; ,7• �f a d� i _ �S ]�C ' ,L�rw �'�;.-. •rtL::s'�.!�s�,.ss. •I•:•F:ti t 'wk•_i+t��^C.f,�.'C':�'T_•d`t,�`'�_ y (((( R•.`•Ta'�fr+ �y;j;�Gi%�',t r t� '� ^�7.V. '•�f�6.l"_ ..• �; ..�•�. �'} A��5��. f �a;�ry's, - .a .. •.=, - __ •••rte n. .. ,w a#•�� •z_��.:�+_:•' 1 It .1.7 �tiI-.� .::L•.;►;!'+'+t...t .•,�:....t;. •.�I'y' ^�''� .g• •3.i; .� S'dAT '�'; '• ti _� REPLY EaUBIT 3 (page 1 of 4) fSIGNED DATE z PLEASE RETURN ORIGINAL COPY WITH REPLY. KEEP PINK COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS. EXNf8JT____o( FILE COPY PAGE C's KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES • TRANSPORTATION PLANNING/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING $12 SW 8F40AOyNwr • PORTLANO.OREGON grM • C=720.57]0 March 16, 1987 i Mayor Tom Brian Members of the City Council Tigard, Oregon SUBJECT: Tigard Triangle Traffic Circulation Issues Dear Mr. Mayor and City Councilors: Over the past two years, a substantial amount of Work has been conducted to evaluate projected travel demands and roadway I requirements within the Tigard Triangle. This work has been performed on both an independent and a joint basis by the following agencies/consultants: o City of Tigard engineering and planning staff; o Associated Transportation Engineering and Planning, Inc. (ATEP) , under contract to the City of Tigard; ( o Rittelson & Associates, as a representative of Gordon ( R. Martin and Gordon S. Martin; and o Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) , in a review and advisory function In preparation for an upcoming work session with the City Council ( on issues related to the future development of the Tigard [ Triangle, these agencies/consultants have reviewed their respective analyses of the transportation facilities needs associated with this very important part of Tigard. While there is still some disagreement among the involved professionals with regard to the specific assumptions, analysis methodology, and evaluation criteria that should be used, there is unanimous agreement on the following key findings: 1) The construction of a new collector/distributor roadway system within the Tigard Triangle connecting Pacific Highway, I-5, and Highway 217 is an integral part of any future development scenario for the area. E}gilal2 3 ( EXHISIT_ Page 2 of 4) PAGE ��r (wI jTigard City Council March 16, 1987 E' Page Two i 2) Within this context, the most appropriate point to connect to I-5 within the Triangle is at the Haines Road interchange. 3) The most appropriate point for a new connection to Pacific Highway is at the existing S.W. 78th ( Avenue/Pacific Highway intersection. 4) Given current allowable development levels within the Tigard Triangle, a collector/distributor road ..that only connects I-5 and Pacific Highway will not be sufficient to accommodate future travel demands into and out of the Tigard Triangle at a significant percentage of build-out. It is necessary to provide at least one additional major entry/exit point to the Triangle area. The precise location of this new access point is not yet clear; however, projected traffic flow patterns shov a need for an additional connection and/or crossing of Highway 217 by the new collector/distributor. 5) The specific location and design specifications of such a collector/distributor is dependent in part on the_ • results of the I-5/Kruse Way interchange study. Therefore, the appropriate steps should be taken to preserve the right-of-vay and flexibility necessary in completing this internal system. It is recommended that the City Council also accept these findings, and use them as a starting point for discussions on how to most effectively address the future transportation needs of the Tigard Triangle. Richard Woelk Rick Kuehn President Region 1 Engineer Associated Transportation Oregon Dept. of Transportation Engineering and Planning ` Randy Wooly Way�n Kit tels _ / Tigard City Engineer ison S Associates EXHIBIT 3 (page 3 of 4) PAGE Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION ( •� Region 1 R 9002 SE McLOUGH LIN, MILWAUKIE.OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 In Ft"Aetw TO March 16, 1987 ,"No., Tom Brian, Mayor City of Tigard 12755 SW Ash Tigard, OR 97223 This is to confirm the conversation that we had last week regarding access to the Tigard Triangle. A work session with the City Council has been proposed by Gordon Martin and as I stated, the Highway Division would be very willing to partici- pate in such an effort. _ E Over the past several months, we have participated in separate and joint meetings with your city staff and Gordon Martin. There are some areas of agreement. Those being that the triangle will be accessed from 1-5 at Haines Road, a new ' access point to 99W will be constructed at 78th Avenue and that the triangle area will most likely need access within the southerly portion. How this southerly access will be provided t is still the open question that will not be answered until our I-5/217 Interchange Study is completed and the city of Tigard does additional looking at the circulation pattern for the triangle. Our interchange study comes into play because it will most likely revise the 72nd Avenue/217 Interchange. Again, if you feel that a work session would be of some bene- , fit towards answering these unanswered questions, we would be most happy to be apart of that effort. n RICHARD KUEHN Region Engineer, P.E. cc Gordon Martin 3UBIT 3 (page 4 of 4) Ei\`i s4 r J� DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L.PALMOUIST' RO/ERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ROOERT L.ALLEN 071 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE 1500 JOHN C.CAMALAN JOHN J.HIGGIN3RUSSELL R.KILKENNY THOMAS M.TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING TELECO PIER 1703)224-7324 MELLE RODE GEORGE J.COOPER.111 MARSHA MURRAY-LUSBY CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 PETER R.SGRO.JR. ROBERT K.WINO[R TELEPHONE(303)224-6440 DONALD E. O.KENNETH SHIROISHI• DOUGLAS V..VVAN AN OYK /ALLY R.LEISURE SURC GILBERT E.PARKER.JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SHANNON 1.0K0►IL' JOAN O'NEILL.P.C. ROBERT L NA/M'• )'JS N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 JEFFREY F. .BENN T ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND.OREGON 97701 JONATHAN A.BEN NETT BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(503)362.9241 JACK O.HO'"MAN WILLIAM H.MORRISON MICMAELJ.FRANCIS April 22 / 1987 (1097-1953) RALPH R.BAILEY (1 D02.1 Y741 JACK H.DUNN 'ADMITTED IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON JAMES G.SMIT14 ••RESIDENT PARTNER. NATHAN L.COH[N BEND OFFICE OF COONS[L HAND DELIVERED Mr. Tom Schwab Transportation Analysis Manager 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 Re: Dartmouth Street/99W Intersection Dear Tom: It has been suggested by ODOT through the course of our recent discussions that the ATEP report could provide a sufficient basis for granting the City of Tigard a connection permit to 99W. As you are aware, it is our position that ATEP' s report has significant errors and that " [t)hese deficiencies cause the report to significantly underestimate the true trip generating potential of the Tigard Triangle, and to minimize the operational impacts of future Triangle development on the surrounding transportation system." (See Exhibit "A" , at p. 7) . t The ATEP report projects that the Dartmouth/99W intersection will operate at either an "E" or "D" level of service under the 2005 buildout scenario. (See attached Exhibit "B" at p. 10, Y Chart 3, p. 11, Chart 4, compared with Appendix at p. 34) . it is clear that traffic moving west and making the left " turn from 99W to Dartmouth Street is severely underestimated in the ATEP study. The ATEP study identifies 57 such left turns tl k t_ ECWS11 _�� t Mr. Tom Schwab C ` April 22 , 1987 Page 2 ( under 2005 p.m. peak hour conditions,34 ased on a 388 buildout (see Exhibit "B" at p. 20 and p. However, both the Kittelson study, which assessed the same left turns at this intersection to be 440 cars during the 2005 p.m. peak hour based on a 558 buildout (Exhibit "C" at p. 1 and p. 9) , and your own analysis which identifies these p.m. peak hour traffic movements at 305 cars based on a 398 buildout, refute ATEP' s co-tentions (see attached computations at p. 3 of this letter) . If a reasonable number of such left turn movements is attributed to ` the subject intersection (such as 305) , then the result will be an unacceptable level of service and a volume/capacity ratio greater than 1.0, based on procedures established by the Transportation Research Board. t As you know, Mr. Hardt stated in September of 1985 that the "proposed Dartmouth connection to 99W . . . will cause an unacceptable level of service for that intersection. " Since Mr. Hardt wrote his letter, no information that we are aware of has been received by ODOT which proves that the traffic concerns have been addressed. ODOT, however, has suggested recently that the subject intersection will function at an acceptable level of service. Please advise in writing the basis of ODOT's reversal of its position indicated in the Hard'-. letter dated September 4, 1985. As you are aware, ODOT has an obligation, imposed by state law, to reject a permit application if the circumstances described in Mr. Hardt' s letter exist. r Very truly yours, Charles D. Ruttan CDR/mlw cc: Gordon S. Martin Gordon R. Martin i Jack Sollis Rick Kuehn Enc. 1. Exhibit "A" : Kittelson Analysis of ATEP study 2. Exhibit "B": ATEP Study 3. Exhibit "C" : Kittelson Study 4. Exhibit "D": Schwab Analysis _-tt,,H�irrt�(( PACE a Mr. Tom Schwab April 22 , 1987 j Page 3 ( ATTACHMENT Your handwritten analysis of the traffic issue is attached as Exhibit "D". The following deductions were made to establish the buildout percentage: 1) 580 GSF per employee; 2) 27% lot i coverage per acre (11,761 GSF/acre) ; 3) 551,000 GSF divided by 11,761 GSF/acre = 47 acres of new retail buildout; 4) office w employees = 1,375 employees divided by 85 employees/acre = 16 acres of new office buildout; 5) current commercial buildout equals 68 acres; 6) 68 current acres + 47 retail acres + 16 office acres = 131 total commercial acres; 7) 131 total commercial acres divided by 333 total Triangle acres = 39% buildout in year 2005. (See Exhibit "D" at pp. 5, 6, and 7) . i I i I � 1 � 1 t i t r f C C Cp� WAGE 3 r DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE ROBERT R.CARNCY JENNIFER L PA T' !1{ ROBERT L ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ! JOHN J.HIGGINS 111S1 f..W.fl%TH AVENUE. SUITE I500 JOHN C.CAHALAN 1 - THOMAS M.TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY MERLE ROBE GEORGE J.COOPER.111 TELECOPIER 1303)224.7324 {{{�. -NARLKS D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 MARSHA MURRAY-LUSSY R. ROBERT K.WINGER PETER R..TEM LE O.KENNETH SHIROISHI' TELEPHONE (503)224.6440 DOUGLADONALD E..VAN OYK GILBERT E.PARKER.JR. SALLY RS LE SURE JOAN O-NEILL P.C. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SHANNON 1.SKOPIL• ROBERT L NASH— 700 N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 JEFFREY F.NUDELMAN ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND.OREGON 97701 JONATHAN A.BENNETT BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(307)362.9241 JACK D.84OFFMAN WILLIAM H.MORRISON IAICHAEL J.FRANCIS April 21 , 1987 9ea) RALPH R.BAILEY 41002.1974) JACK H.DUNN 'ADMITTED IN OREGON JAMES O.SMITH AND WASHINGTON NATHAN L BECOHEN "REfI a NT PARTNER. -- OF COUNSEL NO OFFlCC Mr. Timothy Ramis Attorney at Law ` 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 E RE: Dartmouth LID 1 Dear Mr. Ramis: I In our letter of April 1, 1987 addressed to Mr. Elliott, we set forth our position that the City of Tigard is required by ordinance to put the Dartmouth LID project out to bid. We stated that improvements with estimated costs greater than $50,000, such as the Dartmouth LID, are required to be let for bids pursuant to Tigard Municipal Code 513.04.180. That section was in force at the time that the Dartmouth LID was approved. It is our position that the same code provisions in force at the time that the project was approved are the proper ordinances to apply to r reassessment procedures for the Dartmouth LID. [ In addition, the Dartmouth LID project, as it was approved by the Tigard City Council, requires condemnation of land owned by Mr. Gordon R. Martin and transfer of a portion of that land to Mr. Homer G. Williams. Please respond to our letter of April 1, 1987 and, in doing _ so, please state whether the City of Tigard intends to implement the LID pursuant to provisions of the Tigard Municipal Code as it existed at 11--he time that the LID was approved. Also, please Lf H!3!T 3 PAGE _ •. ' Mr. Timothy Rami( Page 2 April 21, 1987 i confirm whether the City intends to condemn a portion of Mr. Martin's land and transfer it to Mr. Williams. truly o i Charles D. Ruttan Douglas V. Van Dyk Attorneys for Gordon R. Martin, and Gordon S. Martin DVD:lko cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin r I r l 1 .. f 4� t bH!971T� / D'DONNELL, RAMIS, ELLIOTT & UREW r- MARK P.O'DONNELL ATTORNEYS AT LAW CANNY Ofr= TIMOTHY V.RAMISBALLOW SI WRIGHT BUILDING IBI N GRANT.SUITE?02 KENNETH M. ELLIOTT CANBY.OREGON 97013 STEPHEN F.CREW 1727 N W HOYT STREET 15031 266-1149 CHARLES E.CORRIGAN• PORTLAND.OREGON 97209 r JOSEPH M.SULLIVAN' 15031 222.4402 ADMINISMATMEASSLSTANT ( KENNETH H FOX MARGARET C HAND ` JEFF BACHRACH PLEASE RCPLY To PORTLAND OFrICE SHARON L.WILLIAMS I STEPHANY WATSON MARK D.WHITLOW MICHAEL REDDEN Or COUNSEL •ALSO ADMITTCD TO PRACTICE IN STATE Of WASHINGTON April 24, 1987 f i I Mr. Charles D. Ruttan Attorney at Law 1 851 SW Sixth Ave. , Suite 1500 Portland, Oregon 97204 i RE: , Dartmouth LID 1 Dear Mr. Ruttan: Thank you for your letter of April 1, 1987 , regarding the procedure to be used for assessment of property owners in the Dartmouth LID. At this point, no decision has been made regarding any procedures or methods that will be used for assessment. To wour knowledge, the propery owners who initiated the LID have not ,yet decided whether or not they wish to continue with the process. I would note, however, that both the Circuit Court and the Court of Appeals in prior litigation in this matter rejected the { position stated in your letter that contracts must be signed i before property owners are assessed. Therefore, a pre-assessment procedure may be considered by the property owners and the city if the process is continued. Very truly yours, Titmoth^i V. Ramis TVF:se r cc: City of Tigard DUN !, c.-.:: " .0 C". ( PAG _ � :L O'DONNELL, RAMIS, ELLIOTT & CREW MARK P O-DONNELL ATTORNEYS AT LAW CANOT orrlcE TIMOTHY V RAMIS191 N GRAW Su-IF 202 KENNETH M ELLIOTT BALLOW b WRIGHT BUILDING CANBY.OREGON 1?7013 STEPHEN E CREW 1727 N W HO+T STRFET 1503126r,1144 CHARLES E CORRIGAN' PORTLAND.OREGON 97209 I JOSEPH M SULLIVAN' 15031222-4402 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT KENNETH H FOX MARGARET C TIAND SHARON L WILLIAMS JEFF BACHRACH PLEASE PEPLT TO POPTLANO OrrIC[ STEPHANY WATSON MARK O WHITLOW MICHAEL REDDEN OF COUNSEL { •ALSO AONITTEO TO PNACTICE 11{ IN STATE Or WASHINGTON May 4, 1967 Mr. Charles Ruttan Attorney at Law t 851 SW Sixth Ave. Suite 1500 Portland, Oregon 97204 RE: Dartmouth Local Improvement District Dear Mr. Ruttan: In your letters of April 1 and April 21 , 1987 , you inquired as to the City of Tigard's intentions with regard to the Local Improvement District . The simple answer is that at this point , the city has no specific intentions at all in that the property owners in the district have not yet decided whether they will continue the LID process. Once that determination is made, the City will begin to address the questions raised in your letters. If the LID goes forward, the issues regarding condemnation will be decided by the Council after an open hearing process taking into consideration the property owners' proposals, the engineer's report and whether or not offers of purchase have been made and rejected. We cannot forecast what the Council will do at that time. The issues you raise with regard to assessment procedures will be ' up to the City Council 's determination as well . Again, we cannot forecast whatthe Council will do. however, we do believe it will f be our obligation to point out to the Council that your position regarding obtaining bids prior to assessment was already considered by the Circuit Court and the Court of Appeals and was ( rejected by both. Ver. trul 'yours, i TimcithY V. Ramis TVP.:se T ( 1� f C C DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JFNNIFFR L.PALMOVIST' 1-- ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPII MILLER ROBERT L.ALLEN JOHN C.CAHAI,.AN SSt S.W.SIXTH AVENUE. SUITE ISOO RUSSELL R.KILKENNY JOHN J.HIGGINS PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING THOMAS H.TONGUE HELLS ROOF j- TCL[COPIER ISOl1 25LA•7]2• MARSHA MURRAYLUSBY i\\ GEORO[J.COOPER.III CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 1 PETER R.F. TFM JR. DONALD E.TFAN DYK N' ROBERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE 13031 224.6440 DOUGLAS V.VAN YK G.KENNETH SHIROIS"I• SALLY R.LEISURE GILBERT K.PARKER.JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SHANNON I.SKOPtL- JOAN O'NE/Ll..P.C. JEFFREY F.NUDELMAN ROBERT L NASH•' 700 N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 10] r BEND.OREGON 97701 JONATHAN A.Bf NNETT ANDREW S.CRAIG i BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(3031 392-9241 WILLIAM H.I./ORR130N JACK D.HO"MAN 11097•IOS]t MICHAEL J.FRANCIS RALPH R.BAILEY 1- May 5, 1987 1DO2 79741 �I •ADMITTED IN OREGON ` JACK H.DUNN AND WASHINGTON JAMES G.BMITH -'RESIDENT PARTNER. NATHAN L.COHEN OEND OFFICE """'Mr. Nor. Tim Ramis l 1727 M.W. Hoyt Street Portland, OR 97209 Re: Dartmouth Local Improvement District C Dear Tim: Thank you for your letters of April 24, 1987, and May 4, 1987. It is stated in such letters that your office will be under an "obligation to point out to the council that (our] position regarding obtaining bids prior to assessment was already considered by the Circuit Court and the Court of Appeals and was rejected by both." The Court of Appeals ruled against our challenges to the formation of the LID, not to the assessment. The court found that the assessment was improper because "a portion of the planned improvement is not fwithin the legal boundaries of the LID." For this reason, the court held t that the assessment was void. it was unnecessary for the court to reach the arguments presented in our assignment of error on the assessment issue, therefore, no decision has been made on the question of whether contracts must be signed before property owners are assessed. The letter dated May 4, 1987, makes the statement concerning going forward with the LID that "at this point, the city has no specific intentions at all in that the property owners in the district have not yet decided whether they will continue the LID process." Please be advised that our clients, owners of a significant portion of the area affected by the proposed LID, do not wish to continue the instant LID process. Please call if there are any questions. ` Very truly yours, i Charles D. Ruttan ( CDR/mbr ` cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin EH P -E _ �- DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L.PALMOUIST' ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ROBERT L.ALLEN GINS 631 S.W.SIXTH AVEi.0 E.SUITE /300 JOHN C.CAHALAN JOHN J.HIG THOMAS H.GI TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILCING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY y- T[LECO PICK(7031 224-7324 HELLE RODE .(A GEORGE J.COOPER.111 MARSHA MURRAY•LUSBY > CHARLES O.RUITTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 PETER R.SGRO.JR. ROG FIT K.WINGER TELEPHONE(303)224-8440 DONALD E.TEMPLETON* G.KENNETH SHIROISHI' DOUGLAS V.VAN 0 RT G PARKER.JR. SALLY R.LEISURE OILBL JOAN RT r- L.P.C. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SHANNON 1.SKOPIL' ROBERT L.NH' 700 N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 JEFFREY F.NUDCLMAN AS ANOR[W S.CRAIG BEND.OREGON 97701 _ JONATHAN A.BENNETT BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(303)382.9241 JACK 0.HOFFMAN WILLIAM M.MORRISON MKHAELJ.FRANCIS /1507.10831 May 27, 1987 RALPH 11002.-1107.9741 EV 1 JACK M.DUNN 'ADMITTED IN OREGON JAMES G.SMITH AND WASHINGTON •'RCSID[NTPARTNER, NATHAN L.COHEN BEND OFFICE OF COUNSEL Mr. Richard Kuehn Region Engineer, P.E. { Oregon Department of Transportation Region 1 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. I Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 Re: Access Permit for Dartmouth LID t 1 Dear Rick: t As you know, based on the studies which have been completed to date all parties recognize that an additional access out of the southerly portion of the Tigard Triangle to Highway 217 will have to be built in order to accommodate Triangle traffic at relatively low levels of build-out. (See letter of April 22, 1987 ) . Allow us now to draw your attention to an additional matter which also bears consideration in this regard. i { The Dartmouth LID was not designed with a southerly portal in mind that will serve not only the subject property, but also be a primary bypass for traffic generated outside the Triangle area. When the southerly portal is built, it will accommodate traffic moving from Interstate 5 to Highway 217 to Hunsiker and Hall Boulevard. This i traffic presently utilizes either the I-5/217 interchange , or the cut- across from I-5 to Highway 217 via Pacific Highway. The Dartmouth LID has not been designed to provide for these traffic movements. Please call so that we may discuss this issue in detail. i Very truly yours, V " ! �JjCharles D. Ruttan CDR/mlw 1 _ cc: Mr. Tom Schwab Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin Randy Wooley )l� Timothy Ramis ►'.�(, ":iM I -T - PAGE I- i � c CARNEY DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE RO [RT R. RO:INT L ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW J[N NIFCR L.PALMOUIST' W. JOHN J.MIGGINf 071 f..W,{IXTH AVENUE.SUITE 1700 JO HRANDOLPH MILLER N C.CAHALAN k THOMAS H.TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY GEORGE J.COOPER,111 T[LCCOPIER 1703)224-7324 HELL[RBOC 1 CHARLES O.INTERN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 MARSHA MURRAY-LUSBV j ROBlRT K WINGER PlTER R.SGRO.JR. f G.KENNETH SHIROISHI' TELEPHONE(903)224-6440 DONALDC.TEM►LCTON' l) GILBERT C,PARKER.JR. DOUGLAS V.VAN OTK JOAN O•NEI1.L.P.C. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SALLY R.LEISURE ROS[RT L.NASH- 700 N.W.WALL STREET.SUIT[ 103 SHANNON I.SKOPIL' ANDREW S.CRAIG SEND,OREGON 97701 JEFFREY F.NUD[LMAN BRADLEY O.BAKER JONATHAN A.■CNNCTT JACK D,HOFFMAN TELEPHONE(303)382-9241 MICHA[LJ.FRANCIS WILLIAM H.MORRISON i May 29, 1987 RALPH w BAILEY 4 JACK H.DUNN JAMES G.SMITH 'ADMITTED IN OREGON NATHAN L.COHEN AND WASHINGTON OF COUNSEL "RESBlND OFFICE Mr. Randy Wooley Street Engineer 3 City of Tigard P.O. Dox 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Access Permit for Dartmouth LID Dear Mr. Wooley: The stated purpose of our meeting on May 15, 1987 was to discuss projected traffic movement out of the Triangle based on } current comprehensive plan and zoning designations for the t area. In this regard, Mr. Schwab said at the meeting that the ATEP report is not based on existing comprehensive plan designations for the Triangle. Figures utilized in the ATEP j report are based on MSD projections which do not reflect the I current comprehensive plan for the Triangle. As a result, the current road design will not accommodate a significant level of buildout based on densities provided for under the comprehen- sive plan. , In order for the City to accurately project such traffic volumes, it is necessary to correct figures in the ATEP study to conform with existing land use and zoning requirements for the Triangle. Otherwise, the City will be unable to meet its burden of showing that the LID will not unduly interfere with traffic movements on the surrounding state highways. Please advise whether such corrections are going to be made. Very truly ours �r Charles D. Ruttan I CDR/mlw s cc: Richard Kuehn Thomas Schwab Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin E'dIT �3 Timothy Ramis J 7830A PAGE _,t l ` Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION V=0A ArnEN Region 1 owew.oA r- 1 9002 SE McLOUGHLIN BLVD., MILWAUKIE,OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 June 1, 1987 In Rept Refer 7o i F"No Charlesttan Attorney At aw 851 SW(('Sixt Avenue Suite 1500 Portl ari OR 97 i Subject: Letter Dated May 29, 1987 Tigard Triangle I would like to clarifyseveral statements in your letter of May 29, 1987. The purpose of the meeting on May 15, 1987 was to esablish, for all interested parties, the status of the Dartmouth Street design and the City/State agreement for the proposed connection to Hwy. 99W. The ATEP report "Full Development" forecast is in fact, based upon the current Comprehensive Plan for the Tigard Triangle. Figures in the ATEP report utilize an assumed 1995, 2005 and full development level of the Tigard Triangle area. The 2005 forecast data is based upon the currently adopted Regional Transportation Plan developed by MSD. The 2005 year traffic is the end product of the growth allocation to the 384 traffic assignment zones in the region and is based upon input from all local jurisdictions. Since the 2005 year RTP is the currently adopted regional growth allocation and transportation plan, it is only fitting that this plan be used as a benchmark for the Tigard Triangle Analysis. 1 do not feel that the circulation within the entire Tigard Triangle area should be designed to accommodate only the 2005 year forecast. I have advocated all along that it is in the best interest of the City to look beyond the 2005 year forecast to some near full development level of the Triangle. The ATEP report attempted to do this. One of the recommendations in the ATEP report states that added capacity is needed to serve future development in the Tigard Triangle. It is my interpretation that the City of Tigard intends to analyze future { possible routes or capacity increases on existing routes to satisfy the future needs of the Tigard Triangle. The outcome of the capacity needs would be a recommended future Transportation Plan for the Tigard Triangle i based upon the current Comprehensive Plan. I would expect this to be concurrent with our design for the reconstruction of the 1-5/217 interchange. This work should w I underway within 3 to 4 months. r f TO �CHWA Transportation Analysis Manager TS/ds cc: Richar �d � Kuehn Gordon R. Martie su-taro(s-N) T TQt'�i..�`YIn.I� -- - C C DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L PALMOU15T' ROO ERT R.CAVNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ROBERT L.ALLENJOHN C.CAHALAN RUSSELL R.KILKENNY JOHN J.HIGGINS i31 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUIT[ 1300 PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING ( THOMAS N.TONGUE 'ELLE RODE GEORGE J.COOPER.111 TCLECOPIER 17031 224.732• MARSHA MURRAY-LUSSY t CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DONALD E.TEMPLETON' `!( DYK ROBERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE(503)22A-SAAO DOUGLAR.S EVAN` G.KENNETH SHIROISHV SALLY O LEISURE GILBERT E. PARKER.JR. SHANNON 1.SKOPI CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F.NU DELMAN JOAN O•NEIL.P.C.• 705 N.W.WALL STR[[T,SUITE 103 JONATHAN A.BlNNETT ROBERT L.NASH" i ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND,OREGON 97701 BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE(503)382.9241 WILLIAM H. MOR RISON JACK D.HOFFMAN .1097-19831 MICHAELJ.FRANCIS RALPH R.BAILEY 11902-197x, t June 12, 1987 I IN OREGON JACK N.DUNN 'ADMITTED 1 AND WASHINGTON JAMES G.SMITH "RESIDENT PARTNER. NATHAN L COHEN SENO OFFICE OF COUNSEL HAND DELIVERED I Ms. Ann E. Thompson i Vice President, General Counsel HGW, Inc. 17 S.W. Taylor Portland, OR 97204 Re: Dartmouth L.I.D. Dear Ann: Thank you for presenting HGW's proposal for realignment of the ' Dartmouth L.I.D., which involves the complete construction of the road. Your proposal does have merit in that it partially addresses preserving the right of way for the necessary interchange connection to Highway 217. Nevertheless, you have rejected the concept of equitably limiting development densities until the interchange connection to Highway 217 can be guaranteed. This restriction would help prevent Triangle traffic from exceeding capacity at a crucial state-controlled intersection if the interchange connection to Highway 217 is never built. ! Therefore, without interim density restrictions, we cannot find a basis at this time for further consideration of your proposal. I ery truly yours, I ( Charles D. Ruttan CDR/mbr i cc: Gordon R. Martin Gordon S. Martin 1` Randy Wooley Tim Ramis Richard Kuehn Thomas SchwabCIL 000010, tu , `.r Department of Transportation i HIGHWAY DIVISION VICTOR.TIVEm Region 1 9002 SE McLOUGHLIN BLVD.. MILWAUKIE. OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 June 12, 1987 1t� In ReDly Role,Tp I ixe NO Cha/res . Ruttan Atte at Law 85}' SW sixth Avenue, Suite 1500 Po tl�ORaSub ' e to letter of May 26, 1987 Tigard Triangle City of Tigard i Your letter of May 27, 1987, states that all parties recognize that an additional access out of the southerly portion of the Triangle will have to be built to accommodate the Triangle traffic upon a build-out condition. I believe this is generally true, however, the studies to date have concentrated only in identifying generated traffic within the Triangle. This traffic generation was compared to the calculated capacity available on existing or planned streets serving the Triangle area. ODOT, Washington County and the City of Tigard, along with other agencies, have been working with the Metropolitan Service District in evaluating the future transportation needs for the Southwest Corridor. This study was completed in March Of this year. The findings of this Southwest Corridor Study identified a number of highway and transit improvements required over the next 20 years. Improvements in the immediate area include: Widen Pacific Highway between I-5 and Greenburg Road, widen Highway 217, auxiliary lanes on 1-5, reconstruct the I-5/217 interchange, and modify the Highway 217/99W interchange. In addition, a new Westside bypass route is also proposed to provide relief to the highways in the area. �&�L 1 1 Page 2 Charles D. Ruttan ` June 12, 1987 ir The Southwest Corridor Transportation Plan has been endorsed by all agencies involved. It is our conclusion that the improvements identified in the Southwest Corridor Plan will provide adequate capacity on area highways to carry the forecast traffic, thus it is doubtful that a large volume of through traffic would cut across the Tigard Triangle as you suggested. t 1 TO SCF{WAB, i Transportation Analysis Manager TS/ds ! cc: Gordon R. Martin ! Gordon S. Martin Randy Wooley Timothy Ramis Rick Kuehn i �. r: i7J�• 4q(I A 1t n n w RD 72?Yeofs REGON June 15, 1987 of Service 1961-1986 i { l Charles D. Ruttan Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins Tongue Attorneys at Law 851 SW Sixth Avenue, Suite 1500 . Portland, OR 97204 RE: Dartmouth Street LID Your May 27, 1987 letter to Rick Kuehn of ODOT suggests that a roadway should be provided in the Dartmouth Street area to serve as a primary bypass for traffic generated outside the Triangle area." I am not aware of any studies to date to support this suggestion. ! Studies do suggest that we should plan for additional capacity for vehicular access to the Triangle area to provide for trips originating or terminating in the Triangle area. The alignment of any additional access roadway has not yet 1 been determined. We expect the planning for south access to the Triangle to be accomplished in conjunction with the I-5/217 Interchange study being initiated by ODOT. i The proposed Dartmouth Street LID would in no way preclude future construction of an additional access road to the youth. , In planning for a primary bypass route, the City of Tigard supports the recommendations of the Southwest Corridor Study recently completed by Metro. The Study recommends that the primary bypass route for through traffic should be constructed in the Tualatin-Sherwood area. The Study also recommends improvements to Highway 217 and 99W in the Triangle area. The Study does not propose any bypass route through the Tigard Triangle. Sincerely, Randall R. Wooley, P.E. City Engineer RRW:sb/3248P cc: Rick Kuehn Tom Schwab %,dordon Martin Tim Ramis 13125 SW Mall Bhfd.P.O.Box 23397,Tggard,Oregon 97223 [503)639-4171 -4 _.... j PAGE �- t-� rA4 �CIIYOFTIVARD OREGON June 15 1987 25 Years of Service i ' 1961-1986 i Charles D. Ruttan - Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins Tongue ( Attorneys at Law 851 SW Sixth Avenue, Suite 1500 « Portland, OR 97204 RE: Dartmouth Street LID Your letter of May 29, 1987, spoke of the ATEP traffic analysis of the Tigard Triangle area. A June 1, 1987 letter from Mr. Tom Schwab explains the basis of the ATEP study and the ongoing traffic planning process being pursued cooperatively by the State and the City. ` I I I trust that Mr. Schwab'a letter has corrected any misunderstanding of the ATEP analysis. Sincerely, Randall R. Wooley, P.E. City Engineer l RRW:sb/177951 cc: Rick Kuehn Tom Schwab Gordon Martin Tim Ramis t i t 13125 SW Ball Blvd,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (5031639-4171 PAGE a _ (' 70W S W.Fust Avenue _ fI Poctdand 0997201-53% �: SQ'1l2Z3-lE.r6 ;p tai .k., � i ..� t =air rv•- �r �'w. ' .. June 18, 1987 Mr. Gordon Martin 12265 SW 72nd Avenue tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Gordon: t In a-memo dated June 15, 1987, you asked the following ques- tion' -- ues ;t ' ? tion -- "Were the population, em to ment 'and land use file . P P P Y .. ti�.::•, revisions 'resulting from Dick Bolen's recommendations and : Mr. Gordon Martin :,..June 18, .19 87;, Page 2 '' ; T t a' � � ,; ~ . •_.. ti consistent with the May 1985 forecast. . . Hence, our latest travel forecasts in- y corporate the following land use assump ` tions: 2005 Employment l' Retail other Total .: •. I .Zone 129 i'. ' 1 444 1,433 + " !• ; ,r .x a.'• ;Zone 226 X480 4,487 4,967 ;� r ' : Should you have any further questions, please call. ' ! Sincerely, :a '. - ��,• 9 Dick Walker Senior Analyst t` DW:lmk INNINERF- CC: Dick Bolen ' Trish LeightonWSIT ` - - - — • .. EIS' � x �g,.lL�= •_ti�'` - - �: }'� •.`s: .. DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE - ROBERT R.CARNEY JENNIFER L. PALMOUIST' ROOERT L ALLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER JOHN J.HIGGINS 051 S.W.SIXTH AVCNUE. SUITE 1500 JOHN C.CAHALAN THOMAS H.TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R. KILKENNY GEORGE J.COOPER,111 TELECOPIER 13031 22 732 ME LLE RODE CHAR LKS O.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 MARSHA MURRAY•LUSOY ROBERT K.WINGER 00ALO E.TEMPLETOW { 0.KCNNETH SHIROISmV TELEPHONE (5031 224-6440 DOUGLAS V.VAN DYK DIL.BERT E.PARKER.JR. SALLY R.LEISURE JOAN O'NEILL.►.c.• CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SHANNON I. SKOPIL• ROBERT L NASH" 700 N.W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 JEFFREY F. NUOELMAN • wr+DREw 5.cwwra BEND.OREGON 97701 JONATHAN A.BENNETT BRADLEY O.OAKCR TELEPHONE(503)382.8241 JACK 0.HOFFMAN WILLIAM H.MORRISON MICHAEL J.FRANCIS 11057.10531 RALPHR.BAILEY July 9, 1987 11 502.157.1 IJACK H.DUNN JAMES O.SMITH -ADMITTED IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON NATHAN L COHEN ••RESIDENTPART NCR, OF COUNS[L BEND OFFI CCl Mr. Tom Schwab Oregon Department of Transportation Highway Division Region 1 t 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. 1 Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 Re: Dartmouth Street LID: Subject -- Request to ODOT to Respond to Issues Raised in Prior Correspondence Submitted on Behalf of Martins Dear Tom: Thank you for your letter of June 12, 1987, in which you respond to our letter of May 27, 1987. We appreciate your acknowlegment of the accuracy of the statement in our May 27, 1987 letter that all parties recognize that an additional access out of the southerly portion of the Triangle will have to be built to accommodate traffic at relatively low levels of build- out as opposed to full build-out. In this regard, we would like to direct your attention once again to our letter dated April 22, 1987. We focused in that letter on the conclusion of the ATEP report regarding the level of service at the proposed intersection of Dartmouth and 99W. Our letter states that the ATEP report severely underestimates the number of left turns that will be made onto Dartmouth from 99W *westbound. Please respond to the concerns raised by the t April 22nd letter. We would also appreciate your response to the errors in the ATEP report identified by Wayne Kittelson in his analysis dated March 31, 1987. Mr. Kittelson 's analysis is attached as Exhibit "A" to our letter of April 22, 1987. _ -- Additionally, ODOT has suggested that its concern is with the flexibility of the proposed LID as it related to the compatability with a southerly access, as much as it is with the L OH?IV!1" 44cl - Mr. Tom Schwab July 9, 1987 f Page 2 t 1 ` specific impacts of the LID on the surrounding state highways. No one, however, has grappled with the consequences of this approach if a southerly access out of the Triangle is never f built. Unless the construction of a southerly access is made a condition of the grant of access to 99W, there is no guarantee the southerly access will ever be built. It was ODOT's position (see Ed Hardt 's letter, dated September 4, 1985) that the Dartmouth LID, as designed, will result in an unacceptable level of service at the intersection of Dartmouth and 99W. Please advise us of your throughts on this issue. If they differ from f Ochange. prior position, please include data that supports the In fact, the Oregon Administrative Rules do not allow for hypothetical situations in setting forth the standard of review of a request for access to a state highway. OAR 734-50-080 (5 ) states: "Grant of access to aubli as a city or county for a city entity stret such county road where the Oregon Transportation Commission has previously established limited control access : A new connection under the above condition may be considered after all following provisions or requirements are r met: 1 "(a) Justification for the connection t must be made based on the following: "(A) Is not in conflict with local comprehensive plans for this class of highway. i "(g) The county or city has explored all possible alternatives to the connection including parallel streets which might include the purchase of addi- tional right-of-way. " (C) Current geometric design stan- dards can be met [which] consider such items as safety , ca acit a nment Lades, left turn lanes, signals, etc. II " (b) Plans and specifications which adhere to the geometric 4esign standards _ sently or contemplated being used on Lea facility--ID4�bie prepared by the applicant. LI �;r• L: d Mr. Tom Schwab C July 9, 1987 Page 3 i` " (c) An agreement detailing responsibi- lities is prepared and executed before work begins." (Emphasis added). In addition, OAR 734-50-030(3) requires the Department to evaluate whether a particular access point will result in "undue interference or hazard to the free movement of normal highway or pedestrian traffic. " These standards of review are intended to be applied to specific proposals based on plans and specifica- tions submitted to the Department. The standards established by these rules cannot be satisfied by submitting applications for ( access which leave for some later date the solutions to problems caused by such proposals. Mr. Wooley's (the City of Tigard's ) j June 15, 1987 letter in paragLaLn cwo verifies that the solutions to problems have not been determined. Finally, we ask that you recall your letter of May 6, 1985, in which you confirm with Wayne Kittelson the proper assumptions which should be utilized for the traffic circulation analysis of the Tigard Triangle area. It is stated: "The population and employment associated with these two forecast years are assumed to f be: { E Retail Dwelling Year. Employment Office Unit i t 2000 1855 4519 100 2005 2103 5123 100" The ATEP report apparently does not utilize these assumptions. (See ATEP report at page 20) . Although ATEP does not detail its methodology, ATEP appears to have assumed only 1,180 retail employees and 3,825 office employees within the Triangle in the year 2005. Please provide your evaluation of the ATEP assumptions in light of your previous determinations in this regard. Thank you for your consideration. On receipt of your € response to the above inquiries, and the issues which we will be raising in reply to your letter of June 1, 1987, we will discuss the same with the Martins. If it is shown that development of the Triangle will not be severely impaired by implementation of € _ t CEY H - ..�.rZ.VIr 3 S' C Mr. Tom Schwab July 9, 1987 Page 4 the Dartmouth L.I.D. without additional access to 217 or density restrictions, we will recommend that opposition to the L.I.D. cease. Vrryy truly yours, Charles D. Ruttan It is not stated in the ATEP Report how employment in Traffic t Analysis Zones 43 and 44 are allocated to reflect the fact that portions of the zones are within the Triangle and portion of the zones are outside the Triangle. For purposes of this comparison, then, we assume that half of the TAZs Nos. 43 and 44 employment are allocated by ATEP to the area within the Triangle. The totals, then, equal the sum of all TAZs listed on page 20 of the ATEP Report (2,060 retail and 4, 025 office) , minus half of the employees allocated to TAZ No. 43 (220 retail and 200 office employees) and minus half of the employees allocated to TAZ No. 44 (220 retail employes) , and minus TAZ No. 45 (440 employees) which is completely outside the Triangle. CDR/mlw cc: Richard Kuehn Gordon R. Martin Gordon 9. Martin cros7964 { t r V,T, DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE JENNIFER L►ALM OVIST' ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W.RANDOLPH MILLER ROBERT L.ALLEN 891 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE.SUITE 1900 JOHN C.CAM ALAN JOHN J.HIGGINS i THOMAS M.TONGUE P^C1FIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY GEORGE J.COOPER.III TELCCOPIER 19031 224.7324 H"LE RODE MARSHA MURRAY.LUSBY CHARLES D.RUTTAN PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DONALD E.TEMPLETON' RODERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE 15031 224.6440 DOUGLAS V.VAN 0 O.KENNETH SMIROISHO SALLY R. LEISURE OILDERT E.PARKER,JR. SHANNON 1.SKO►IL' JOAN O'NEILL.►.C.- CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F.NUOKLMAN RODENT L.HASH'. 708 N W.WALL STREET.SUITE 103 JONATHAN A. BENNETT ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND.OREGON 97701 BRADLEY O.MAKER TELEPHONE 13031 302.9241 JACK O.HOFFMAN WILLIAM M.MORRISON 983 MICH^EL J.FRANCIS July 24 , 1987 RA11697-LPH R. A1L*AI 7 lV 1 1802.19741 i i JACK N.DUNN 'ADMIT7[D IN OREGON JAMES O.SMITH AND WASHINGTON "RESIDENT PARTNER. NATHAN L.COMEN B[NO OFFICE OF COUNSEL Mr . Randall R. Wooley City Engineer City of Tigard PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Dartmouth Street LID: Your letter dated June 15, 1987 in response to our letter date May 27, 1987 Dear Randy: Our letter of May 27 discusses the impact that traffic generated outside the Triangle will have on traffic circulation within the Triangle. Traffic moving from I-5 to Highway 217 j and Hall Boulevard presently utilizes either the I-5/Highway ! 217 Interchange, or the cut-across from I-5 to Highway 217 via Pacific Highway. It is this traffic which may bypass Pacific Highway and pass through the Triangle. Studies to date have not adequately considered the impact that this traffic will have on the Triangle traffic circulation system. The Tualatin/Sherwood bypass recommended in the Southwest Corridor i Study is not intended to accommodate this traffic movement. In addition, traffic projections in Southwest Corridor Study "Scenario 205211 identify Pacific Highway as functioning 1 at capacity in the year 2005 with six lanes. As a result, if the southerly access out of the Triangle is constructed, then 1 westbound traffic moving from I-5 to Highway 217 and Hall Boulevard may utilize Dartmouth Street instead of Pacific Highway to avoid traffic jamming that will exist when Pacific Highway is at full capacity. Regarding the possibility of connecting Dartmouth Street to Highway 217, the question for public officials is not f whether a future connection is "precluded" by the proposed LID, S _ Page 2 Mr. Randall R. Wooley { July 24, 1987 r I l but rather, whether the proposed connection will optimize the use of Triangle property, as well as 150 acres of industrial property south of Hunziker, for the benefit of both the City of Tigard and property owners. According to MSD travel forecasts, traffic moving out of the Triangle will be oriented in a northwesterly direction. Traffic will move toward the Dartmouth Street/Highway 217 interchange to avoid jamming that will occur at the i Dartmouth/Pacific Highway intersection. A Dartmouth Street/Highway 217 interchange will provide traffic capacity far in excess of the Dartmouth/99W intersection. Therefore, { the primary traffic movement out of the Triangle will be t westbound towards the Highway 217 interchange rather than 99W if the Highway 217 interchange is constructed. fHowever, if a connection with Highway 217 in the form of a "stub road" off of the current LID design is built, it will require such westbound traffic on Dartmouth Street to make a left turn in order to reach the interchange with Highway 217 . ' Such a left turn movement will greatly reduce the efficiency of the Triangle traffic circulation system by forcing westbound traffic to queue up in left turn lanes on Dartmouth Street in order to make the turn necessary to reach Highway 217. j As suggested by Tom Schwab in his letter dated December 7, i 1984, traffic volume assignments, projecting both traffic volumes and general traffic direction, are essential to evaluate the design and workability of any road system. Such traffic assignments will soon be available from the I-5,/217 interchange study. This will allow the City to coordinate the final design and construction of the Dartmouth LID with the r State ' s Study and improvements. C I -pip i Page 3 Mr. Randall R. Wooley July 24, 1987 t f In part, Washington Square 's success is directly related to the superior access it has due to its two separate access points on Highway 217. The City of Tigard should design such superior access for the Triangle. i truly yours, 1 -y /Charles D. Ruttan CDR: lko cc: Cordon R. Martin Cordon S. Martin Tom Schwab Rick Keuhn Mayor Tom Brian Timothy Ramis 1 EXHISIT MR i { i t i i I i DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE ( . ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW W NRAINDOLPH MIFER L. LLER T• ROBERT L.ALLEN JOHN J. HIGGINS ESI S.W. SIXTH AVENUE. SUITE 1500 JOHN C.CAHALAN THOMAS H. TONGUE PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING RUSSELL R.KILKENNY j GEORGE J.COOPER,111 TELECO 'IER I5031 224-7324 HELLE RODE MARSHA CHARLES D.RUTTAN E. DONALD E.PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 ETEMP ETON ROBERT K.WINGER G.KENNETH SHIROISHI• TELEPHONE 15031 224-6440 DOUGLAS V. VAN DrK SALLY R. VAN LEISURE I GILBERT E. PARKER,JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE SHANNON 1.SKOPII' JOAN O'N EILL,P.0' JEFFREY F. NUDEIMAN ROBERT L. NASH•• 709 N.W.WALL STREET,SUITE 103 JONATHAN A.BENNETT ANDREW S.CRAIG BEND,OREGON 97701 BRADLEY O.BAKER TELEPHONE 15031 362.9241 JACK D.HOFFMAN WILLIAM H. MORRISON MICHAEL J.FRANCIS 11897.1983, RALPH q.BAILEr 7� I 19021 974 J JACK N. DUNN August 6, 1987 *ADMITTED IN OREGON JAMES G.SMITH AND WASHINGTON NATHAN L.COHEN --RESIDENT PARTNER OF COUNSEL BEND OFFICE t Mr. Rick Keuhn r State Dept. of Transportation j 9002 S. E. McLaughlin Blvd. Portland, Oregon 97222 RE: Dartmouth LID Dear Rick: The City of Tigard has submitted a proposed form of agreement for issuance of an access permit to connect the Dartmouth LID with Pacific Highway. The State Department of Transportation has previ- ously taken the position that the "proposed Dartmouth connection to 9911 . . . will cause an unacceptable level of service for that intersection . . . " based on assumptions agreed to by Tom Schwab. (See Ed Hardt letter dated Sep- tember 4, 1985. ) It has been the position of the Department that "as a condition of the state granting a permit for this new connection that we would have to see a traffic circu- lation plan showing that the new connection would not create undue traffic problems on 99W. " (See Ed Hardt letter dated April 30, 1985. ) In support of its application for a permit, the City of Tigard has submitted a Traffic Circulation Study prepared by ATEP, Inc. The assumptions upon which the ( conclusions in the ATEP study are based are so far at odds ( with assumptions previously acknowledged by the State as accurate that the ATEP conclusions cannot provide a rea- sonable basis for the State to grant an access permit to the City. Based on assumptions agreed to by the State, Wayne Kittelson identified 14,670 total p.m. peak-hour Triangle trips during the year 2005. Of these, 4,140 vehicles are [� moving from the Triangle to Pacific Highway during the 2005 EX f- 1 5 4 AG � -- Mr. Rick Keuhn August 6, 1987 Page 2 staff has acknowledged the accuracy of p.m. peak hour. State Kittelson's conclusion. (Letter from Ed Hardt, eakthour 1985 ) . ATEP, however, identified 4,270 total p.m. p Triangle trips during the year 2005, which is 1Kitt lson ess than �nOf third the number. of vehicles identified by ATEP's 4, 270 vehicles, only 1,600 are moving from the Triangle to Pacific Highway during the 2005 p.m. peak hour. Still, ATEP P figures are just barely low enough to allow ATEP to conclude that the intersection of Dartmouth/Pacific Highway will function at an "E" level of service during the 2005 p.m. peak hour. In fact , were it not for unreasonably low single phased left-turn movements which are below current } levels being assumed by ATEP at the intersection during the 2005 p.m. peak hour, Tat the would have been intersection to forcedto "projeo� the level of service completely jammed. ` Kittelson's study, based on the assumptions agreed to in advance by the State, found that traffic generated from the Tigard Triangle will cause Pacific Highway to functions at an unacceptable level of service during the year 2005 p.m. peak hour. If the Kittelson assumptions are in error, please If the assumptions are not in explain the error to us. r error, please explain how Triangle traffic could enter. Pacific Highway without unduly interfering with traffic on } that highway. It has been suggested that a permit might be granted if it was made conditional upon planning additional access to Highway 217. It has not, at this date , been deter- mined whether a southerly access out of the Triangle to c Highway 217 can or will be designed into the Highway 217 system. If a permit is granted, but a southerly access to Highway 217 is never built, then the Dartmouth connection will cause unacceptable traffic congestion on Pacific High- way. It has also been suggested that through traffic on Pacific Highway could be diverted to allow Triangle traffic to enter Pacific at the Dartmouth intersection while maintaining an "E" level of service at that intersection. The ATEP study, based on the computer traffic model, assumes t I Mr. Rick Keuhn August 6, 1987 Page 3 that such diversion will allow Pacific Highway to function at an "E" level of service in the years 1995, 2005, and when the ( Triangle reaches full buildout. (See ATEP Study at p. 11. ) To cause the diversion, the signal must provide Triangle traffic with all of the green time it requires, while impeding eastbound and westbound Pacific Highway traffic by red lights at the Dartmouth intersection. Forcing traffic on state highways to divert to other routes by giving Triangle streets, such as Dartmouth, priority at intersections from 1995 onward is an "undue j interference . . . to the free movement of normal highway . . . traffic" , which is prohibited by the Oregon Administrative Rules. Therefore , based on the criteria set forth in OAR 734-50-030( 3) , the State cannot allow an access permit at this time. We would like to meet with you to discuss our position further_ . Please advise as to a convenient time to meet prior to ODOT's review of Tigard 's permit application. Further, we would appreciate being kept advised of the time line involved with Tigard 's permit application. Thank you for your continued consideration of our position in this matter. Very truly yours, Charles D. Ruttan f CDR:DVD0805-5;dr cc: Mr. Gordon R. Martin Mr. Gordon S. Martin € Mr. Tom Schwab t DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS Be TONGUE'. JENNIFER L PALMOUIST' W.RANDOLPH MILLER ' ROBERT R.CARNEY ATTORNEYS AT LAW JOHN C.CAHALA.N ROBERT L.ALLEN 051 S.W.SIXTH AVENUE. SUITE 1500 RUSSELL R.KILKENNY JOHN J.HIGGINS PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING HELLE RODE THOMAS M.TONGUE TELECOPIER 15031 24'7324 MARSHA MURRAY LUSBY GEORf.E J.COOPER.III DONALD E.TEMPLETON* PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 DOUGLAS V VAN 0- CHARLES D.RUTTAN SALLY R. LEISURE ROBERT K.WINGER TELEPHONE (5031 224-6440 SHANNON 1.SKOPIL' G.KENNETH SHIROISHI' JEFFREY F. NUDELMAN GILBERT E.PARKER.JR. CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JONATHAN A. SENNETT JOAN O'NEILL.P.C.' 709 N.W.WALL STREET,SUITE 103 ROBERT L.NASH" BEND.OREGON 97701 ANDREW s.CRAIG TELEPHONE(503)362-9241 WILLIAM H. MORRISON BRADLEY O.BAKER .1897 1983, R. JACK D. HOFFMAN RALPH 12 19 A41LEv 90 MICHAEL J.FRANCIS August 6, 1987 'ADMITTED IN OREGON AND WASHINGTON JACK H.DUNN "RESIDENT PARTNER JAMES G.SMITH BEND OFFICE NATHAN L COHEN OF COUNSEL HAND DELIVERED Mr . Thomas Schwab Oregon Department of Transportation Highway Division Region 1 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Blvd. Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 - Re: Dartmouth LID: Subject - Response to ODOT Letter dated June 1, 1987 Dear Tom: This letter establishestheRegional tsive PlanPlan are for the City of Tigard and Transportation ted in the ATEP Report. only partially reflec 1. MSD em to ment forecasts used in the 1985 SW Corridor Study are not used in the ATEP Re ort. Employment forecasts in ATEP's year 2005 scenario are not the year 2005 employment forecasts prepared by the Metropolitan F Service District (MSD) and utilized in the SW Corridor Study. psp k is- �^ The ATEP Report departs rOthointhe Traffic Zone Nos.Study 129 andd226 counting MSD's employment gw by 20%, or 664 employees: z F Page 2 Mr. Tom Schwab August 4, 1987 E { i t ATEP Retail Other TZ Current 2005 Change Current 2005 Change 129 1,320 1,640 320* 667 1,085 418 226 60 420 360* 1,309 2,940 1,631 1,380 2,060 680 1,976 4,025 2,049 * Retail employment growth for Traffic Analysis 'Lone #33 was split between Traffic Zones 129 and 226. (220 employees in TZ 129 and 220 employees in TZ 226) . MSD (May 16, 1985) Retail Other TZ Current 2005 Change Current 2005 Change 129 751 812 61 1,513 1,550 37 226 105 742 637 323 2,981 2,658 856 1, 554 698 1,836 4, 531 2,695 Therefore, ATEP's growth forecasts are not the same as those provided by MSD and used in the SW Corridor Study. Furthermore, the currently adopted Regional Transportation Plan covering the Triangle Area is the 1987 Washington County Transportation Plan Update, not the Southwest Corridor Study of 1985. The 1987 Washington County Transportation Plan Update contains substantial employment growth increases in Traffic Zone Nos. 129 and 226 -- the Tigard Triangle Area -- which MSD now relies on. The updates increase MSD's prior employment forecasts for the traffic zones by 1,389 new office employees (a 525 in- crease) , and 370 new retail employees (a 53% increase) . The following data shows the current employment growth forecast gen- erated by the 1987 Washington County Transportation Plan Update: Washington County Updates Retail Other TZ Current 2005 Change Current 2005 Change 129 751 1,444 693 1,513 1,433 -80 ! 226 105 480 375 323 4,487 4,164 f 856 1,924 1,068 1,836 5,920 4,084 Buildout calculations for the Triangle based on employment forecasts used in the Washington County Transpc2rtation Plan Up- date produce a 50% buildout in the year 2005. 011 This build-out Page 3 Mr . Tom Schwab August 4, 1987 {r I represents a 10% increase in Triangle buildout over the buildout in the SW Corridor Study, using the study's employment forecasts and MSD's densities. j ATEP did not use the SW Corridor Study figure for westbound 1 traffic on Pacific Highway during the 2005 p.m. peak hour. Assuming six lanes with a center turning lane, the SW Corridor Study Scenario 2052 identified 2,672 westbound through vehicles on Pacific Highway during the 2005 p.m. peak hour. ATEP, on the other hand, projects only 2,186 westbound through vehicles on Pacific Highway during the 2005 p.m. peak hour . This reduction apparently is generated by the computer model used by ATEP. The EMME/2 model is programmed to redistribute traffic off of Pacific Highway once the proposed intersection of Dartmouth/Pacific Highway approaches its capacity for vehicles leaving the Triangle. The model reduces through traffic on Paci- fic Highway with six lanes in order to balance the system and to allow Triangle traffic to enter the roadway. The model will reduce through traffic on Pacific Highway to levels that are below even the current level with four lanes in order to allow ' traffic to exit from the Triangle. In this respect , the model is unreasonable. Also, the model makes no attempt to quantify the social and economic costs of diverting such large volumes of traffic from Pacific Highway in order to accommodate exiting Triangle traffic. The model forecasts an "undue interference . . . to the free movement of normal . . . traffic" on Pacific Highway. (See OAR 734-50-030(3) . ) 2. ATEP Report Does Not Fully Reflect the City of Tigard Compre- hensive Plan Concerning Land Uses and Inventory. The ATEP Report fails to reflect the current comprehensive plan in other particulars as well. For example, in the full development forecast, Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) No. 37 iden- tifies 27. 5 acres of land available for commercial professional r s i [1] MSD's standard employment build-out densities of 20 retail employees/acre and 85 office employees/acre are assumed in this calculation. In addition, it is assumed that 96% of the retail employment in TZ 129 is applied to the Triangle. Of the 72.5 acres of vacant retail land in TZ 129, only 2.7 acres are outside the Triangle. Page 4 Mr. Tom Schwab August 4, 1987 r development. (See ATEP Report at p. 21) In fact, this area is designated commercial general in the Comprehensive Plan. ATEP also identifies 43.8 acres of land in TAZ No. 33 as designated for commercial general development. (ATEP Report at p. 21) . The i Comprehensive Plan designates 58.5 acres of land within TAZ No. 33 as having full commercial general traffic generating poten- tial. TAZ No. 30 shows the PGE substation using 7.2 acres, when in fact, the station uses only 2 acres. This leaves an addi- tional 5.2 acres of commercial general land available for development. Lastly, TAZ No. 1 is identified by ATEP as con- taining 20 acres of commercial professional land whereas the Comprehensive Plan designates 25.33 such acres. 3. Traffic Generating Potential of the Triangle at Full Develop- mentis Discounted in the ATEP Report. It iias been the ongoing trend that developed residential arers in the Triangle eventually convert to commercial, when the neighborhood livability decreases and demand for corrumercial land increa-pegs. It has been the policy of the city to protect the units T2 (47 acres) from commercial encroachment by requiring as a condition of conversion that each unit completely convert to commercial at cne time. To date, one unit consisting of 17 acres of residential development has converted to commercial, with another 5-acre unit requesting conversion. This policy and trend indicates that under a full development scenario, residential areas must be treated as commercial traffic generating areas. ATEP acknowledges this conversion trend, but fails to account for it in 4ts full development scenario. (See ATEP study at p.12. ) Note, as well, that the 12 acres at the school should also be treated the same way, especially since it is designated "Commer- cial General Planned Development." i t The combined acreage omissions found in the ATEP Full Devel- opment Scenario and the exclusion of the currently developed i residential land and school shows that the ATEP report is not based on the existing comprehensive plan. These deviations (ex- cluding the error in TAZ No. 33) represent 83.45 acres (25%) of the Triangle being unaccounted for in terms of commercial traffic generating potential. i/ [2) Units are residential subdivisions currently platted within the Triangle. I PAGE -- i Page 5 Mr. Tom Schwab August 4, 1987 `r f l I 4. Employment Forecast Used in ATEP Report are not Based on Local Jurisdiction Input. MSD's growth allocations were not based on input from all local jurisdictions. Gordon R. Martin's March 29, 1985, letter to Ed Hardt alerted him to the fact that MSD was still fore- casting industrial employment growth and residential growth in the Triangle even though industrial and residential land use designations had been changed in the Comprehensive Plan. On May 16, 1985 Dick Bolen at MSD updated employment forecasts in i Traffic Zone Nos. 129 and 226 to correct the inconsistency between these employment forecasts and land use designations. These updates were implemented without input from the City of Tigard. Mr. Bolen increased the employment growth in the two traffic zones by 464 new retail and 831 new office employees. The update was completed without any detailed investigation or study, since it was the responsibility of the local juris- dictions, not MSD, to allocate employment growth at the traffic zone levels. ( In June of 1986 Gordon S. Martin and Wayne Kittelson met with Randy Wooley at the City of Tigard to explain the need for further study of the future employment growth allocations to the Triangle. Mr. Wooley responded by stating that "predicting future employment levels is really not a critical part of the [ATEPI study", and that "I will depend on ATEP to evaluate the data you have provided and to determine the extent to which your suggestion should be included in the final report. " Apparently, The City had little or no input on Mr . Bolen's updates, nor did the City seem to want to investigate the issue any further. Meetings between Gordon S. Martin and Mark Brown at ` Washington County detailed the need for further employment fore- cast updates to the Triangle area. This meeting generated an investigation into the employment forecast for the Triangle area ( which led to the employment increases contained in the Washington County Transportation Plan Update. E i i 1 ( PAGE s - Page 6 { Mr. Tom Schwab August 4, 1987 r- i In conclusion, we certainly appreciate your recognition of { the importance of designing a road system in the Triangle which _ accommodates traffic beyond the year 2005. We hope you will continue your advocacy with the City on this point. Unfortu- nately, it seemed all too apparent at our May 15, 1987 meeting with the City that the City does not intend to analyze alterna- tives to the design of the Dartmouth L.I.D. which will optimize 1� the service of a southerly connection to Highway 217 . { It appears now that the state will ultimately be forced to decide whether the Dartmouth L.I.D. as proposed will interfere with the surrounding state highways. We had expected that the May 15 meeting would be used to assist you in developing rea- sonable employment and travel forecasts for the Triangle area to be used in the I-5/217 interchange study. In any event, the ATEP Report cannot withstand scrutiny and should not be relied upon by ODOT in making its decision. The state has the power to deny a request for access if s incorrect information is provided in support of the request. See OAR 734-50-025(10) . The state may also deny access if it con- cludes that the Dartmouth LID will unduly interfere with traffic movements on the surrounding state highways. Rather than allow the City access for a road that is clearly inadequate and is { certain to have adverse impacts on Pacific Highway, ODOT should either deny the City's application for access based on the ATEP Report or continue the application until such time as the City submits adequate supporting materials. Please respond to the issues raised herein at your earliest convenience. ry truly yours, Charles D. Ruttan 1 CDR/mlw 7975 cc: Mr. Rick Keuhn Mr. Gordon R. Martin Mr. Gordon S. Martin t ki I ( S �tiA�:ZEC I'�T=R5ECT10'vS FE=--- !DENT IFy INFORMATION S TR=E' . . . . . .FAC - IC � NAME 0.F THE to ''/W.S � . . . . - NAMT- CF 7H=- N'C'R-H/50-7H STREET . . . . . . .CAZ-"CL'T-, 57 PEE j AREA TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .C7H-7= ` NAME CF THE ANA.-vS7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .w':Y ^A'.. CF THE ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i �E TE=I Cu AP:w"YZ� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ t OTHER INFORMATION: MSO Mr,- 'F :CATION NO. 2 FROM ATEF REPOT TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1 E? W3 NS S= I LEFT --15C 3^5 6CE 3C- i THR' 225: 2186 45 Be t RIGHT 333 65 146 125 4 RTCR D C C ;RTOR voiume must be less than cr ect::a ' to RIG"•7 :ter ` � IuRe` 1 MIN HOM 4 i I FAG" - �- C_ ({ �� _ _... E0"ETP'' Kli-BER OF AN;r= PE= ^•F=CT:ON I NrLL:C :NG TJRti SAYS' i EASTBO::ND = 5 WES?BCUN- = 4 NORrTr-30UNC = 4 SOJTHEOUND = 3 E WB J uAti= Ty-r W I✓ -y W T L__ _r__ K---- - I-- W I 2 12. 0 12 .0 L 3 .2 . _ 12. 0 i 5 R 12 . 0 12. 0 • ^ 12 • - 6 i% . 0 i2. 5 _ �` . ` L - EXCLUSIVE LE=T LANE T - =XCLL'S;VE THROUGH LAN. LT - LEF7/THRO`•15Gi LANE TP _ THROUGH/R:GHT LANE LR - LEFT/RIGHT ONLY LANE R EXCLUSIVE RIGF7 LANE LTR - !E,=T/THROUGH/RIu!•?T LANE i A0�. 5'�'EhT FAC70PS GRACE HEAVY VEH. ACJACENT PKK BUSES Y/N (Nr-.) (tib ) PHF -- ----- --- -�- - 0 9D EAS'723UND 0 . C • `" N :: .9c WES'SO'UNC 0 . 00 2.0C 0 Z .90 n NORTHBOUND 0 .00 Z .CC N _ 2. CZ N C .9^_ Nm = number :f Park irs maneuvers/hr ; Nb = n::Rbe' - buses stop: ns nr E CON=LICTINC PEDS PEDE[TRIAN $'.TION _ ) ( Y/N) (rr , -i7 ) APR=_�,A'_ --- ( ----------------- ----------------- EASTBOUND �- v 2p A WES7SOUND 5C - 3 NORT-4BOUNC SC y 34 . 8 SOt2TH30_'NC 5r Y 34 .8 m n T_- _wee- t re =e=5s - a-5 OP==A?iONA' ANA-`'_ 'S ==-� A � ^-_-------`0_-T TIM �FrP.c_ - _ . _ CYCLt LENGT`'� � ::A_E- =AE-/WES- PHAS=-1 PHASE-2 PHASE-3 PHASE-4 A ` =T - X X ?HRS K REDS Wc�??OJND X X X NCR7HBOUND RT X X SO' ITHBO' 'Nm RT X GREEN 16 . 0 3. 0 S: .s: .:: O . 0 YE_:..OW + ALL RED 3. 0 3. 0 3 . 0 0 r N. - /SOT H. PHAS'A NG — -- _—F------------------------------------------------------------ PHASE-2 PHASE-2 PHASE-3 PHA==-4 n;ORT-;BOUND LE=T X s T H;; X RIGHT X PZEClS SOL''. -i3CLitiD X `E X SHR R1G. 'T X PERS j EASTBOUND RT X I WESTBOUND RT X GREEN 23.0 22. : C. = 0 • � ' YELLOW + ALL RED D 3 G 0 • = _ i r ' PAGE 3 _ L N L NE A� _ NO. LT" GROWTH GRP . PROs r-TF MVT . AD_ . SANE GR GK= =ACT . VO_ . Lr V7-- P�'__ VG _ G4-- ---- -- -P--- ------ ---- ---- ---- a. 67 1 1 .O 1 ^n- 167 1 `. E LT 15D 0 .9C 25 7 TR 25x1 3 1 .C�^ 1 . 00_ 2`I 0 : " TH 2251 0 .90 770 1 _ DCC 3 RT 333 0.9C 37- R wE 9 -T 305 0 - '?0 339 L 33S 2=^ 0. . 7-: :_i56 0 .90 2429 TR 25:1 3 1 . 00Z RT 65 C . 9C 72 NE ^° 0 .90 676 L 676 2 1 . � 50 1 ZZ R' 146 2 .90 16 2 - - --- I S9 `T 322 0 .973 0 333 L 33'_ 1 1 . 020 1 :G�G 3�B C .CO C . T 6c 0 .9'' 95 T 93 1 1 .D 139 D . CC : .^_z .H 139 i 1 . 020 : .DCS y RT 125 0 .9C 139 R i Denotes a Defa=t= Lejt La-e t 'i t I CQ Cy_ •.` Cf rl ul 7 V Q1.: .E «•J'J%C_:�— _c =- _ 1V�_ :DEAL j S A T . NO. f t + j • j 1— C Q T (`f FLOW LNS w L:. G r 22 A RT T _7w �s L 19,12 1 CCC C 992 1 .222 1 . 02C 1 . CDC 1 . 222 : . CCC 2 . 952 1093 TR 1920 3 1 . 000 0 .99, 1 .0=C _ . 0=^ 1 . 0 , _ .CCC 1 . 00 s- R 18CC 1 1 . 000 0.990 : .2,2 1 . E-- 1 . 022 1 . 07 _ .R=- i • -^-- 1`-_= Wr1 . ,C 0 .992 2 .202 i .C_C 1 r^ 1@20 ? 1 . CC2 0 .992 1 .000 + . 20 c , . L+2- C . 990c-- f _R 1 C 1 D�� C ---- --- i tia _ iSC_ .CC 0 .99= . ..^_CC 1 .C,C ' . CC= . . ,C= . . '.2 = .92_^ =='.5. _ 2 1 r,2 _ - -- _ _ _ . ---- leCO 1 1 CC2 C 99_ 0CC 0' i C_^: C � ��_ =z .eCC 1 . 000 0.q9, = .CC^ 1 ,"r 0" r-_ 1 . 000 0 .990 , . Ccc ^-_ 1 . 0== - • _-_ = . ==c = y== --_- T 1eJ2 1 1 .000 0 .992 - .CCC 1 . 000 1 . 0=_ 1 . C,n2 1 . 022 i . CDC e2 I R 1e C i 1 . 200 2 .99= - .CC _ .,C, 1 . 0cc 1 . 0=C 0 . eE0 1 . 000 ;=_C i 1 i I i r i I PAGE 5 r TY A'vA-Y5!S 410Pti"SuF`_ f =�Cw RAT �.:w - `�� c F 0`J RATE 84710 GREEN .r�.ATIv CPpALD 1 TY /c --------- --------- _ (� ) PA' 67 16s� e f ESL . �� ----------- ---------- ----- TP 2--,• 534E C . 123 2�a �. e�= 0 . 468 e , 3q. R 1515 0. 24 =<c 2097 1 370 0. E : i5'= 62 4 Z5 w= �R 25C15323 C. 2GC G . .6S X36 f G . 470 3E G . 4 ��34 tic 676 3279 0.226 0 . 1 :6_ 5' 1-ez a c2e , _c_ y �6t .515 C. f SB 33 333 1693 ..L T 96 17P_2 J - . . _ 6 1 . :6.. 0 . 055 R 139 1515 0 . 092 � .7ES 322 C .324 -9- 443 x. 3:4 Cycle Length, C = 130. 0 sec . Sum (v/s ) critics ! J Los: Time Per Cyc ' e, L = 12. 0 sec . X criti =a ; _ : . 18C - 1 . 07: f f f PAGE CZRY ICG ��!'I"t•G-=- ----- -"-=co==ncc=c=====v===_v=ccc==c==on==== i LANE r= G`J LANE Lo'` E DELL\`' _C.= Y' DELALA GRF . '"=P . BY o/C C'Y'CLE G GROUP F" C• RA-110 RA7.70 LEN .v/c -- -_--- ----- CA�-- ----- FACT_ CEL-- LOS- APP-- o--- L u . BDO 0 - - _-- 42 a LuC a a , � i TR 1 . :93 0 .392 130 .0 4C 34 .3 2G9n 10^ •Z n .E� al^ = B C . _ 9 C •569 130 . 0 12 . 1 86_ W= 68 . 5 P _ ' n= . 169 13r- . 0 42.6 286 C •6 1 . CC 16-' . 3 i - -K C?Z 0 .438 13C . 0 29 .4 2334 36 .4 0 • E= `= 9 E t tiEL 165 01 - 2-77 130 . ❑ 42.2 -8C 95. ? _^- •= = -C .2 F T C . 159 0 . 177 130 . 0 34 .4 315 C • _: - : 2 ` R 0 .309 0 .346 130 . 0 23.7 52L. -- ' SE1.. .? = 99 .7 L 1 . 164 0 . 169 :3C • 0 42.5 ZB6 1=9 •= 7 0 .324 0 . 169 130 . 0 36 . 1 403 0.1 C .e� 23 .9 C R 0 .314 C .292 130 .0 27.2 intersecticn De ' ay = 86.5 (sec/vee) intersection LOS 1 i I t r r P PAGE " ti4 i 1 _ �• y ` yr. •�T as j � • xr - r' i+ f. i — 9 and SURVEY POR _BLK DATE/;/SD F,reVaFr �- ^, DR/1FTED BY G.PAPPE SEC.3l. T.1 s. LAMETTE Y.ERIDIAR R3:o3wrrnrD onxcoN 3.AND summirDR6 YULT Son pap ' ; .H. CO..-OREGON.. .10977 S.W.CANYON DnIVL CLACK. .•L 030.3343 7uwrkw 1st&cp 40 3• s..KZo.•.•soo.oKcaow .,... WASH.TL./?M 01/RD( NOTi"01 •0" 304 IRO` ROD SET; '36 INDICATES MON. FND. AS NOTED. BASIS FOR BEARINGS:S&RU rJ�mi:f evw uuEor R FIERENCES: Fr%.IDsas : v.S. zsz3 fps 5183: t S.W.Q9ALlPIL HNL'f f CS.ID3D5) P.5.71D0: �5.3°t57 i °'-FD. yy s.P. Sao �\ 1 y. uryez ear•�1�u �S h5\�1 s� \ . D•,T 1> '51rOe-Z ro..7.r 6 P.S.ro305) • dal � \ ,,V r A •� �, DUETDTHF015G0vfCVDFA \ 300 wLUF Mlar£us or-Arrjwr ERror Ouauit t tW41rr AYIrLS t CULKDOr SURVEY MAP FDZ \ uuf srAxzls , GDCOCW rMCrIU, OATED DEZ V AIM , Z AHL LON Summirrimd; k' 't! THIb MAP rx FIU1.k.J.uD MAX Tr or rjjDVJ.I TWIN rA15 MAP \ S y? t9 m surrescor THE >Ata 1 \` Ici i� /� Oct_ Sty WWW orGLOMY. IODP rD.3s-rr ---0.03 AG �/- \t[ElDtD 4PIA1� . s7K 133'1 fD 3^,-Z.R 1 `19.95 'LSEi•a r FXTExrDED BfirtnJ� t , _ 4. !• ,s w, L ` ■ v< MOM WE d r_ �' a � �� C7■ � ' is ` IS I" Nis MIS �� _ ■■■■■t ■iii■ >>,�. 4J I■. ®41 ry al t �s•�i �.� •�, tet. Q•{�.. �� f S+ti _ u 1..r_. ,....�r..._r.�. .. Y.....L .. .t ...... ..v r...... w ....) ... .:f.. ..1..•.. so.J� .. �,t....a. l4 ._.. _ .. .._... ... .rel ..'-7 i .- .\- � t x . s mom NINE HIM * ^., '� . 111 • W l� 3 4 man i 1 i w M'fi may.. rZIV K ■ _ .:.: �u� 1�� '� (�'�� /M mac• t�. I �Bi11� • t e' 1db ` AI f2 MIS Y .r e: {d' �. t tI ,`i '� r 1-.: -'r: -r. < ,�, �,� bf' ,�i• : s 'r�.!nf l.. 3� r.: � .'�1 ., •.. ..�7 1 .... ...,. .. ... .. .S ..n .,i._�:` ......�.�....... ...,... _ r.,. .t. ..� t • •...':FYI...*Y..,: ' .,J. r_ { ..-. � ..... .-..•.. -....., i _.• r f l i I t Zoos rArz I o v-r 2�PwA y .20 rS/�" )A I L y 1 I�1 D v T- 1)JQ I L / 7, Lc.- ,�9 ��Sro J'r4s /g4 66 0 J 6 �SS 0J 9� nc�4 /��0S 865.`" A9 3a /0 (J 20 59 l /% 3� 3 3 rk 2 96s /90 ,2t�� .3.3 8�Q 202-0 2�8� 28220 /boo 2670 /09 8 So 6170 // o f /3 y c PZ m "rbT.,I -trzi ps OvT c s= Tl A"C.&IC f'/�'� �.C•��c psp� E x?,I .20"C's uph 802.0 vel,,k ov 4 ♦ '�( r�� S / 1 r. r. 77a-,o4 ',D ZOOS L3��-® o LT pAI L Y pro/c Y TRIPS I N vIr 7WItfr I gjo 14s-' So ^I -0 5�5/3o 2 77S 4s0 ivro /� 9 szo 62o _6-1.280 _5200 sloo 2 ADO sv j R Z/o /600- 2C,70 110S40 / 70 1 i ��o ®spar// •��r � /�j �91�!/ I � ' /ic,/�• �°/�/z/�� /moi%�.0%I'��.�u�� 7'DP>b 3 � -9/4t�v�� coos- , Od 6/,ph I - _ moi. .� .. �... � .. �• � - i E� IN THE COURT OF APPEALS t OF THE STATE OF OREGON GORDON R. MARTIN and GORDON S. ) MARTIN, JR. , ) Petitioners-Appellants, ) Court of Appeals V. ) No. A33250 CITY OF TIGARD, MAYOR PROTEM ) Washington County KEN SCHECKLA, COUNCILOR JOHN ) Circuit Court COOK, COUNCILOR TOM BRIAN, and ) No. 84-0517C s COUNCILOR IMA SCOTT, ) Respondents. ) i OPENING BRIEF s f An Appeal from the Final Judgment of the ' Circuit Court for the County of Washington on a Writ of Review from an Action of the I City Council of the City of Tigard, Oregon The Honorable Holger M. Pihl, Jr. , Circuit Court Judge DUNK, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE Charles D. Ruttan, OSB No. 72211 G. Kenneth Shiroishi, OSB No. 74300 Gary L. Tyler, OSB No. 83098 851 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1500 Portland, Oregon 97204 Telephone: (503 ) 224-6440 Attorneys for Petitioners-Appellants O'DONNELL, SULLIVAN & RA.MIS Timothy V. Ramis, OSB No. 75311 Steven L. Pfeiffer, OSB No. 81453 1727 N.W. Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 Telephone: (503) 222-4402 f Attorneys for Respondents PAGE -21— SECOND ASSIGN14ENT OF ERROR i { f 1 To the extent that the Circuit Court' s judgment on review sustained the City' s actions in regard to its adoption of j assessment Ordinance No. 84-18, the court erred when it held: "ORDERED AND 'ADJUDGED that the relief sought by petitioners by the Writ of Review is DENIED based on the Court' s finding that petitioners' procedural, substantive and jurisdictional allegations are without legal merit and that there is sufficient substan- tive evidence in the record as a whole to s support respondent' s findings and ultimate decisions as set forth in the applicable ordinances under review * * *. " Ab.-6. ARGUMENTS A. THE CITY ARBITRARILY DEPARTED FROM ITS ESTABLISHED RULES OF PROCEDURE TO SUCH AN EXTENT THAT ITS ACTIONS VOIDED THE � ` ASSESSMENT PROCESS AND RENDERED THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 84-18 WITHOUT LEGAL EFFECT. -` By its express terms, TMC 13.04.080 mandates that, before ' } the City' s engineer can be directed to prepare estimated assessments, the City must first determine whether it will act as its own general contractor or contract with a third party for ;. such supervisory services. If the City should decide to engage 4 j the services of an independent general contractor, the contract must be let to establish the cost of construction. If, on the other hand, the City decides that it will undertake the job of supervising the construction of the improvement, the total estimated cost of the project, as previously determined in EXHIB111 42 . PAGE z- -22- conformity with TMC 13.04.030, will be deemed the contract price. _ 1 (" Specifically, TMC 13.04.080 provides: [ "Assessment. Upon signing a contract or upon ' a determination by the city council to make the improvement under its own supervision by purchasing the material and hiring labor, * * * the city council * * * shall direct the city engineer to apportion and assess the cost of making such improvement upon t he lots, parts of lots and parcels of land within the assessment district in accordance with the special and peculiar benefits derived by each lot, part of lot and parcel i of land. "If there is no contract let for the accom- plishment of the work, the total estimate of � the city enginee� shall for be conthesidered to improvemene ' the contract p1 district." When considered in its full context, the plain meaning and I intent of this language is evident.L6/ Wisely, the City has k 16/ In the court below, the City argued that the language of TMC 13 .04.080 was ambiguous in that, although this section y expressly required the City to decide whether it would contract with a general contractor, TMC 13.04.080 also permitted the adoption of an assessment scheme based not on an established contract price but on a preliminary gross estimate of costs. ("Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment" 8portionFor of TMC 13.04-080: the City relied on the emphasized "Assessment. Upon signing a contract the city council * * * shall direct the city engineer to apportion and assess the cost Of making such improvement upon the lots "The city clerk shall cause to have mailed, or cause to have personally delivered, to the owner of each lot prod to bemen assessed, a ( notice of such proposed I notice shall state the amount of the assessment proposed on that property and f shall state a date by which time objections shall be filed with the city clerk. Such such notice shall further require that any objection shall state the grounds thereof. (continued) EXHIBIT -9 PAGE 3 -23- determined that, before commencing the assessment process, the f ' cost of the planned improvement should be determined with reasonable certainty, thus, avoiding the uncertain path of reassessment. If, as in the present case, the City chooses to rely upon a r general contractor (Rec. at 124) , the total cost of the project i remains indefinite until a bid is accepted. Once costs have been i established by bid, the city engineer can apportion such costs among the benefited properties with some assuredness. i Absent a contract, although the City may be able to estimate • � its costs of construction, the cost of engaging a contractor would be the subject of conjecture. Here the City chose to hire a contractor; however, prior to letting the contract, the City proceeded to compute and levy the i challenged assessments solely on the basis of R.A. Wright' s preliminary, gross cost estimates.1-7/ In these particulars, the 16/ (cont. ) The city council shall consider the cit i engineer' s estimates of assessments and all objections thereto filed with the SLty clerk, and without any further notice may adopt, correct, modif or revise the proposed assessments, and shall determine the amount i to be charged ainst each lot within the district according to the special and ( peculiar benefits accruing thereto from the I! improvement. " (Emphasis added) . When read in context, however, it is immediately apparent that the phrase, "city engineer' s estimates of assessments", only refers to the proposed assessments which were to be prepared by the city engineer after the contract price had been established } � by bid. The City' s contention to the contrary is without merit. 17/ Even if this court was to conclude that, before firmly establishing a contract price, the City could assess on the (continued) EXHIBIT_, -9 ------- PAGE RPM i -24- City failed to conform its actions to the unambiguous procedural path established by TMC 13.04.080. The provisions of TMC Ch. 13.04 provide an orderly process , by which the governing body can act for the betterment of the i community. The City' s power to levy a tax is limited; and, the City must strictly adhere to those m:zimum procedures mandated by { law. Harder et ux. v_. City of Springfield et al. , 192 Or. 676, I 683-684, 236 P.2d 432 (1951) . The City' s premature and arbitrary iactions voided the assessment process and rendered the adoption of Ordinance No. 84-18 without legal effect. f " y B. THE CITY FAILED TO MAKE FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO PETITION- ER' S OBJECTIONS TO THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT PLAN. „ In compliance with the City' s notice (Rec. at 70) , - petitioner timely filed written objections to the proposed as- sessment plan. (Rec. at 45-49, SO-Sp) . In addition, at the pre-assessment hearing, oral objections were entered. (Rec. at - 33-35) . These objections involved both issues of fact and issues , of law. Included among petitioner' s concerns were the following: (1) Petitioner had understood that it was collectively agreed among the City and the Dartmouth L. I .D. property owners that the L. I .D. would not proceed to assessment unless and until a consensus was reached on the alignment of S.W. Dartmouth Street s 17 m• --� (cont. ) basis of its engineer' s "estimates of assessments", as noted earlier, R.A. Wright, the City' s contract engineer, only E prepared preliminary gross cost estimates (See Rec. at { 122-130) . The City did not ever direct R.A. Wright to - 1 prepare the detailed plans, specifications, cost estimates, , and proposed assessments required by TMC 13 .04.030 and TMC 13.04.080. In this respect, the City acted prematurely in _ adopting Ordinance No. 84-18EXHISIT PAGE � i t 1 -25- and the assessment plan. Petitioner was objecting on both issues. (Rec. at 55, 9 3; Rec. at 121A) . (2) No consideration was given to the special benefits to be derived by the City. (Rec. at 33; Rec. at 47-48, 7 3; Rec. at 144, item 12c) . (3) No consideration was given to the differences in ` special benefits to be derived by the different property owners. � P P Y I (Rec. at 48, 11 5; Rec. at 50-51; Rec. at 52, 11 1) . (4) In error, four properties were removed from the I - proposed assessment rill on a challenged finding of "no benefit" . I !1 (Rec. at 33; Rec. at 47, 1 2) . (5) Petitioner would not consent to the City' s plan to purchase petitioner' s property and then immediately resell the • same lands to H. Williams. (Rec. at 48, 11 4) . (6) The proposed assessment scheme was based upon the city engineer' s preliminary-feasibility study and engineering report. These plans, specifications, and gross cost estimates were wholly inadequate for assessment purposes. (Rec. at 45-46, 50) . In Hughes V. City of Portland, 53 Or. 370, 100 P. 942 (1909) , petitioners filed objections to a planned re-assessment. These objections were referred to a city committee, and, without otherwise disposing of the objections, the council passed an ordinance making a re-assessment for street improvements. (53 Or. at 379) . Commenting on the City' s obligation to hear the objections to the planned re-assessment, the court concluded that such objections must be both heard and determined. (53 Or. at 384) . However, with the exception of noting the adoption of the I assessment ordinance, when the record is otherwise silent, no EXHIBIT RAGE presumption attaches to the effect that the objections of ( property owners were considered by the council and found without I merit. The record must affirmatively show that the objections were considered and passed upon by the counsel. (53 Or. at 384-385) . If the objections involve an issue of law, then the minutes i must, at least, show that the objections have been overruled. If jan issue of fact, the City should make an express finding, and, enter such finding, either in the record or in the ordinance. If the objections involve questions of fact, they cannot be sum- 3 marily overruled by a general order. (53 Or. at 389-390) . Irelan v. Portland 91 Or. 471, 481-482, 179 P. 286 (1919) ; 1 } Hiransomboom v. City of Tigard, 35 Or. App. 595, 601, 582 P.2d 34 (1978) . { In the present matter, the record clearly indicates that no _ k t findings were made with respect to petitioner' s objections of fact and of law. The City has a duty not only to hear � petitioner' s objections, but it must investigate and resolve all '� s such issues: i f "The right of the property owner to make .' objections to a proposed assessment against his property and have such objections heard and determined by the council is a substan- tial right. Indeed, it may be all the protection he has against a wrongful or unjust assessment, and therefore he is entitled to have his objections, if in proper form, heard and disposed of in an orderly way. The extraordinary power conferred by the character upon the council in assessing or reassessing property for a public improve- ment, and the great liability to abuse and j consequent injury, demands that the ! requirement of the law in all its parts, s affecting the rights of the interested ` property owners, shall be complied with, and ( EXHIBIT s'9 t PAGE 7 i -27- t that the proceedings shall show upon their ram ON face that the council has considered and passed upon all questions made necessary by the charter, and the result at which they have arrived. That which the law regards as the substance of the proceeding cannot be regarded as immaterial; nor can presumption supply its place. " Hughes v_. City of Portland, 53 Or. at 390. The absence of findings renders the assessment premature and s the passage of the assessment ordinance without legal effect. { I C. THE RECORD ON REVIEW SHOWS THJkT THE CITY ACTED ARBITRARILY WHEN IT ADOPTED ITS PROPOSED ASSESSMENT SCHEME. In Western Amusement v. Springfield, 274 Or. 37, 41, 545 P.2d 592 (1976) , the court discussed the scope of review in cases involving challenges to local special assessments: "We have reviewed special assessments in all sorts of proceedings * * *. Regardless of the nature of the review proceeding, we have consistently used the same approach: We held that the city council' s deter- mination that property has been benefited by an improvement and the amount of the benefit is conclusive unless the court can say that the city council' s action was palpably arbitrary and abusive. We said that the burden of persuading the court is a heavy one. * * *' Gilbert v. City o£ Eugene, 255 Or. 289, 292, 465 P.2d 880 (1970) , sum- marizing Stanley v. Cit of Salem, 247 Or. 60, 427 P.2d 406 ( 1967) . ' The court went on to state, however, that " [r]egardless of our j reluctance to intervene, the state legislature has provided that f the [City' s] determination cannot be sustained unless supported I by "substantial evidence"". (274 Or. at 43) . In the present case, petitioner contends that neither the irecord nor the law will support the City' s determination of ( 1) "no benefit" for certain properties located within the Dartmouth EXHIBIT- I PAGE _ a -28- L. I .D. , 28-L. I .D. , (2) the inclusion of the cost of constructing S.W. F Dartmouth Street between S.W. 68th and S.W. 69th Avenues in the F total cost of the project, and (3) assessed acquisition costs. 1 (1) Determination of No Benefit. Although somewhat limited in detail, the City' s record shows that, at the conclusion of the j March 26, 1984, meeting of the city council, the City determined that, with the exception of four properties, R.A. Wright' s > preliminary engineering report would be accepted, and, that an ordinance forming the Dartmouth L. I .D. be drawn and adopted. (Rec. at 88) . The exclusion of these properties was made as a _ i result of the City' s determination that each was fully developed • and the properties would not benefit from the construction of S.W. Dartmouth Street. (Rec. at 78, 85) . - Two of the excluded properties, those owned by J. Alexander I1and J. Probstfield, had commercial buildings on them. These t properties were located on either side of the planned i intersection of Pacific Highway and S.W. Dartmouth Street. (Rec. ` at 128, 130, Tr. 49-50) . The other two parcels of land, those � t owned by L. Hedgepeth-Stewart and L. Vasey, were developed as single family residences. (Rec. at 86, 115) . The remaining L lands were, for the most part, undeveloped. All of the properties bordered on the planned right-of-way. L. It is well established that in determining whether a -' particular property will benefit from a proposed improvement, the L _ p city must not limit its analysis to the present use of the d b property. As stated by the Oregon Supreme Court in Stanley v. - i — s . EXHIBIT p - PAGE y e Tim -29- ( City of Salem, 247 Or. 60, 66, 427 P.2d 406 (1967) : "Most of the testimony in these cases that f the value of the adjoining properties had not been enhanced by the improvement - was based upon the present use of the properties. In determining whether an enhancement of value has occurred the inquiry cannot be restricted to the present use. The test must be, would the value be enhanced if the property were Iput to its highest and best use. " (Emphasis added) . j Accord, Kerr v. Hallett, 67 Or. App. 324, 329, P.2d (1984) . The rationale for not limiting a determination of benefit to present use is set forth in Western Amusement v. Springfield, 274 I i Or. 37, 44-45, 545 P.2d 592 (1976) . Present use is not controlling because the assessment must be made when the i improvement is constructed, and, if benefit had to be determined by the present use, an owner could change the use after the assessment was made and receive full benefit of the improvement without any payment. Special benefits add to the particular convenience, accessi- bility and use of identified properties, and they are to be 9 distinguished from those general, public benefits which I incidentally arise out of the improvement. Chrysler Corporation v. City of Beaverton, 25 Or. App. 361, 367, 549 P.2d 678 (1976) , citing, State Highway Commission v_. Bailey, 212 Or. 261, 319 P.2d 906 (1957) . The fact that a street improvement abuts property, increases the possibility that, in the future, the street will benefit the property. There is a presumption of benefit to all property r EXHIBIT s8 PAGE ° -30- A abutting on a street to be improved. Western Amusement v. ( Springfield, 274 Or. at 46. 11V j The rule regarding assessments was established early: "( I ]f there be property within the assessment district which has been benefitted by the local improvement, and willfully, arbitrarily and intentionally omitted therefrom, such assessment would be void. " Masters v. Cit of Portland, 24 Or. 161, 165, 33 P. 540 (1893) . i In the present matter, in part, Ordinance No. 84-17, Section 5, provides: 1 1 "Benefit for the purposes of LID #40 is _ hereby determined to be derived according a (sic] property' s ability to develop as set y forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Tigard. Four properties in part or whole i as provided below are excepted from the District and they are the Alexander property (Tax Map #lS1 36 CD Lot #1800 & 1990) , the Hedgepeth-Stewart property (Tax Map #1S1 36 DC Lot #4402) and the Vasey property (Tax Map = #2S1 lAA Lot #2800) which are substantially developed and therefore receive no benefit, also the Probstfield property (Tax ?dap #1S1 36CD Lot #1700) EXCEPT the southerly 11 10,000 square feet which is substantially developed and therefore receives no benefit. " A review of the City's comprehensive plan, and plan map, indicates that the entire area included within the Dartmouth L. I .D. is zoned for commercial use. The properties owned by i Alexander, Probstfield, and Hedgepeth-Stewart are located within an area zoned: general commercial district ("C-G") . This • r _ j classification requires no minimum lot size and makes no w fr 1 • 18/ Compare argument made by petitioner in Western Amusement v_. Springfield, 274 Or. at 44-45, with demands made by J. 4 Alexander (Rec. at 86) . -' EL i EXHOT 9.9 0 PACE �i j -Jl- t allowance for residential construction. lg/ Lucille Vasey' s F ( property is zoned: professional/administrative office commercial district ("C-P") . This zoning makes allowance for mixed use, including multiple family residential units.20/ I Given strikingly similar factual circumstances, this court and the Oregon Supreme Court have consistently upheld the test set forth in Stanley. E.g. , Western Amusement v_. Springfield, 274 Or. 37, 545 P.2d 592 (1976) (abutting commercial property) ; Kerr v. Hallett, 67 Or. App. 324, P.2d (1984) (abutting i single family residence zoned for multi-family residential units) . i The City' s removal of the Alexander, Probstfield, j Hedgepeth-Stewart, and Vasey properties from the list of 1 benefited properties was arbitrary and not in compliance with the i City' s stated criteria for determining benefit. Ordinance Nos. 84-17 and 84-18 should be set aside and the assessments declared void. (2 ) Cost of Constructing S.W. Dartmouth between S.W. 68th f E and S.W. 69th Avenues. Unquestionably, assessments must not only be based on special bei.efit, but they must also be based on the full cost of the improvement assessed by benefit ratio to the 1 properties affected. E.g. , City of Stanfield v. Burnett et al . , F 222 Or. 427, 434, 353 P.2d 242 (1960) ; Heritage Scuare Dev. v. Cit of Sandy, 58 Or. App. 485, 493, ( ) ; _y _ _� P.2d 1982 TMC 1� Volume 3, Tigard Comprehensive Plan Development Code, Section 18.62 (November 1983 ) . a I 20/ Id. , Section 18.64. EXHIBIT s� s PAGE /J— L -32- 13 .04.080. Stated otherwise, an assessment cannot, on one hand, r�- t exceed a property' s special and particular benefit, nor, on the other hand, exceed that property' s ratable share of the cost of the improvement. Reif v. Portland, 71 Or. 421, 432, 141 P. 167, 142 P. 827 (1914) ; Heritage Square Dev. v. City of Sand , supra. - Here, the City had actual notice that the state was going to j construct the section of S.W. Dartmouth Street between S.W. 68th i and S.W. 69th Avenues at no cost to the City. (Rec . at 85, item 19b) , see Rec. at 158-167, 176) . Despite this knowledge, the City did not reduce its C projected total cost of construction -- a cost estimate which was based on R.A. Wright' s prelimlinary proposal for the construction + l of a road between S.W. 68th Avenue and Pacific Highway (Rec. at 123, 144) . The City' s stated cost remained at $1, 995,700. V (Compare Rec. at 128, column 11 and Rec. at 144, item 12a with _ Rec. at 61, column 11 and Rec. at 78, section 4, 5) . Contrary to law, the City adopted and thereafter levied assessments which exceeded known costs. (Rec. at 59-61) . In j these particulars, the City acted arbitrarily and without just cause. (3) Acquisition Costs. At the time R.A. Wright prepared the preliminary plan and engineering report, it was recommended ( that the City either condemn or purchase petitioner' s land located on the north side of the proposed road, and then sell this same land to H. Williams. (Rec. at 126) .21 Either option ( 21/ Also see "Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment" at 24. l EXHIBIT PAGE F would have required the expenditure of L. I.D. funds for nonessential purposes because the properties in question were not needed for the proposed right-of-way nor otherwise needed to support the planned improvement. The inclusion of such costs in the total estimated cost to be assessed was plainly contrary to the provisions of TMC 13.04.080: "[W)hether there be a contract price arising from a bona fide contract or whether the estimate of the city engineer be used as hereinabove provided, there shall be added to said contract price the cost of right-of-way and expenses of condemning the land, all 1� costs of engineering, superintendence, adver- tising and legal expenses and also any and all other necessary and 2roper expenses incurred which additional amounts shall be and do become a part of the amounts to be assessed against each lot, part of lot and parcel of land benefited by the improvement. " (Emphasis added) . In addition, condemnation actions of this kind are subject t to challenge because the acquisition of qu' private property is being ; ! made for private rather than public purposes. Foeller v. Housing Authority of Portland, 198 Or. 205, 256 P.2d 752 (1953) . Prior to the adoption of the assessment ordinance, peti- tioner' s attorney informed the City that a voluntary sale would not be possible. (Rec. at 48) . However, the City continued to carry forward thero osed p p purchase-sale of petitioner' s property 2 as part of the City's assessment plan; and, this scheme was eventually enacted into law as part of Ordinance No. 84-18. s r (Rec. at 61) . Ordinance No. 84-18, thus, reflects an assessment plan which is contrary to existing facts and law. t i e -34- CONCLUSION judgment should be reversed; and, the The Circuit Court' s judgm as void, and _ court should be directed to enter an order declaring and 84-18, and setting aside, City of Tigard Ordinance Nos. 84 Y of Tigard to an order directing the finance director for the City from the City's Lien docket all assessments entered in � strike conformance with Ordinance No. 84-18. 1 In the alternative, the Circuit Court should be directed to as void, and setting aside, City of enter an order declaring C the finance Tigard Ordinance No. 84-18, and an order directing ' s lien director for the City of Tigard to strike from the City .• with Ordinance o• do cket all assessments entered in conformance I f DUNN, CARNEy, ALLEN, :. HIGGINS & TONGUE By: G. Kenneth Shiroishi OSB No. 74300 I ! Attorneys for Petitioner EXHIBIT S'8 I PAGE �s t' r l' t - August 6, 1987 Mr. Charles D. Ruttan 851 S.W. 6th, Suite 1500 Portland, OR 97204 Re: Land in the Tigard Triangle - Applicable planning procedures for Commercial Dear Mr. Ruttan: Development. In accord with your request we have made an overview study of the larger tracts of land available in the Tigard Triangle, cularly Of the Pacific Highway and west of SW 72nd Avenue,'atoldeterminehose whatssteps should be taken if some or most of this property is to be efficiently developed for commercial uses, including retail sales. As you are aware, we have been observing this and the surrounding areas for some 20 years since we first started the planning and design'of 4 Washington Square. Our immediate conclusions are that an arterial road serving this area j should not be designed or constructed until: ,l 1. A detailed study of connecting an arterial south of the j Haines overcrossir.g area on I-5 (Dartmouth Street) with r Highway 217 is completed. 2. Suitable elevations for the lower parts of the properties can be determined so that land use can be maximized. y 3. A storm drainage plan for the area west of I-5 has been t' designed that can be implemented on an area wide bas' I pis. 4• A comprehensive planning study has been made along the genereal lines we described in the following outline. { As a supplement to these conclusions ' here is our brief description of the land involved and the primary ng street and drainage systems forlthelareatcan beareahould bedetermiundertakdn before ft_ E 1 Mr. Charles D. Ruttan Page Two 8/6/87 4 A. Description of the land available: i 1. The land can be generally described as agricultural pasture sloping west from SW 72nd Avenue, and sloping south from Pacific Highway, terminating in a low area on the Northwest side of Highway 217. 2. The ground elevation varies from a low of 152 ft. to ' about elevation 220 to 223 ft. on Pacific Highway where access could be located, and to about elevation 210 to 212 ft. on SW 72nd, near the westerly projection i of Dartmouth Street. 3. SW 72nd rises, going north, to about elevation 254 ft at SW Baylor Street, and going south to about elevation 240 ft. near SW Elmhurst Street. This dip in SW 72nd is the location of the drainage course serving about i 46 to 50 acres east of, and 39 acres west of SW,72nd. The northerly part of the properties is served. by, a drainage course running in a southwesterly direction from the northeasterly corner of the triangle, with some 85 or so acres east of SW 72nd, and 60 or so acres west of 72nd. Both drainage courses run to the low area along Highway 217. B. Planning; steps to be undertaken. 1. Drainage. i a. Determine run off based upon masterplan for ultimate use rather than current zoning; areas which could have more intense use over I a 50 year time span should be allowed for. b. Design main features of system; check against I City's Master Drainage Plan. i C. Ammend drainage plan if necessary. 2. Areas and grades required for retail useage. a. Determine typical useage modules and parcel size for following: i -Small buildings such as banks, restaurants and theaters. S f r _ j� 1 EXHIBIT 5 c _ PAGE _ _ ��__ �� I I 1 I Mr. Charles D. Ruttan (Con'd) Page Three 8/6/87 3 i I 2. Areas and grades (Con'd) a. Determine typical useage (Con'd) -"Strip" shopping center of 100,000 SF. i -"Community" shopping center of 300,000 SF. i 1 -"Small Regional" center of 700,000 SF. , i b. Use 37. for maximum grade within parking area, 6% maximum grade for entrance roads and roads which s transition from one parking area to another; use parking bay widths of SO to 60 ft. building modules of ' 60 - 80 ft. and perimeter planting strips of 10 ft. , with sidewalks and planting around buildings of from r 10 to 20 ft. c. Determine to what extent 2 levels can have access from parking at grade and fit the slopes available, or more to the point, determine how cut and fill will enable these uses to be realized; determine how much the ground elevation will have to be raised in the a lower parts of the site. i d. Determine how sizes of proposed uses will vary if ? public transit service is made available, reducing parking requirements for 1000 SF of leasable area from S to about 4. e. Determine traffic generation for typical uses per s M present applicable planning criteria and from actual F t requirements of the development, assuming a successful leasing program and Food performance of the merchants. 3. Access and growth. s. a. Determine access points on perimeter based on ' characteristics and capacities of surrounding street and highway systems. Take into account previous (and required) studies by area traffic engineers, and planned or needed changes in the systems. b. Evaluate studies of the projected growth in the immediate and tributary area (within 10 to 15 minutes driving time). r c. Investigate the interest of potential tenants in the I area, asuming adequate. access and relatively level land for building pads and parking areas. 7AGr:. t t. ! Mr. Charkes D. Ruttan (Con'd) Page Four 8/6/87 i 4. Development Plan. a. With all of the above studies in hand prepare a tentative development plan for the area, with two or three alternate mixes. b. Determine the approximate finished grades (broad brush) required for the building site and road system, utilizing imported fill as j required. f c. Determine the approximate location and elevation of an arterial street (or streets), together { with any tributary streets that may be required; I preserve flexibility in final locations until firm interest develops for larger uses (don't ruin a good site by pushing ahead with a free standing bank, or even a market, until a site master plan has been worked out). d. Prepare estimates of cost with all factors shown and taken into account so that all beneficiaries can participate (in cost as well as benefits). Include all utilities required: storm and sanitary drainage, water, electrical power, gas and communications. e. Organize a corporation or partnership for poolinr, the land of the various parcel owners and th.n prepare a Plannr_d Development "Concept Plan" for acceptance by the City as the first step in development. Ic should be understood that the above task list is simplified in that several of the tasks must be carried on simultaneously and not necessarily in the exact order listed. For example, Items 3b and 3c might be done first to enable a judgement to be made on when planning should be completed and when any city sponsored construction should be implemented. Further, since many of the factors are mutually dependent and effect each other substantivally there are several stages of preliminary studies before the tasks can all be "finalized':. even tnen, the solutions proposed should be as flexible as possible, because market forces are notorious for thwarting detailed planning efforts which don't include experienced judgement in their creation . f I IEX34ISOT :,�� 4 Mr. Charles D. Ruttan Page Five 8/6/87 t It is also conceivable that the preliminary studies will show that this land is not suited for commercial uses until significant access to Highway 217 can be achieved, and that the City should be actively en- gaged in this endeavor. i If we can be of further assistance in this matter please do not hesitate to call. 1 - Yours truly, HARRIER CONSULTANTS 7jAlvin B. Harrison, AIA Iabh:bg l i i i I EXHIBIT-69 . PAGE: 5 r rnL Lit h reg Lsis MA ? (+1[I+rFj[1[I�It��1�jtP1) ti� oi[(aiD tl[i[tt [i[�!jiTl[�11 �►11 Ita lirli 11 fN [Fll� [IJ�� 1l 1 1 1 1 ( I I - t {I l I " 1 0 Jill 1 1 I i�jR fill (r r r t l i r t 1 71[ ila ita tt t NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN - THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO - Aor TFE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL i oe—ea ez Lz az sz -eZ__ez zz Iz oz sr ei�i 9i s�T b f E� -Zi I -01 6 8 1 -g--S— 0 e z [,M+, ; �ni�u[diu[hudNNlwd►Ma�[ndu[ 11[rrli[[Ii1B -— . 4 MARCH _�� _ 1990 Z`IV�.4Y'ffi4':Sid�+gl � .cra•�5a i I _y; ` yyll .. -•Te*';-�'.a y■`r` j��+ci�'^�r �,Tq'`��,.��4. - :' 4 •I$. 1 ii �C,. .w� 1�/. ISI• � ±✓� ��'', s'r"�fv�-�;,:-� '`� '� �-.� � f•. ,/~ '•.�` i of��{� •�, tl� � � ?u. f�. �Vfl;' h{+ _ , 1�'1�-� I -'J /�"F nor r � r'?tiro t� •a f,! IGF`-� � � .J• "`.'°`��' .�,I �f-� - F.•: -1' � ._ '. �"_�r"�';7�f� • ,._ �•.p�' � t'li I'��[' �- � •,. .. -_ u •' .pct- l"- i r. � 'xyr "f - �; ..{"jIY -te'F�+�'I� 7`J� ;��,`�.• .�� nit{. -,sr�.:�- -,p �s x-� 3-�`"c r. 'i��'".S ��,i l.''7'• F t p �i. �rp��3 �o-i �s C�"j�I' �� _ �1 i3,�`e•C fit' ,,4't r �I 3 ,,r R - h� Y V�tiISlN-t � F _ d •:�,is k ��. ,r�: p � s-0. f .'� �� ..♦�-- - - � `e1,. -;� h r =i►.. �'z9' 's;"� �� e �I� - ?a _ - ''`rn�_ sem' '•.�. ,�. 's a ai ' �� +• r �Y TIG GFIA�. tli> lam. a �, .;r" t n '. i z t` -- '+�•. .;,� t� St:. r � •,�.�".po. -� ,. ab,. ,. -_ ,..�y-�� 1 �1 , n:7}S x 1�J�Y.�.. F 'a6ihWitlrl�Ji rt�l', _ 6 l,`''"'CC' „'. -�• '� - y _,. �"` _ L..2 �[a.�� r� �� -- � t Y �� 'I �T :ems. -r !F:a •1-;<7 c'ir! �c�:.'c iy�r � -�{� .�.. ':�_.,1�:� y� �L'��l�y.�f-^�,, E t -0:�� i ! � "- + '4P r � '��",•`a}`g�y'Fay'Y' �� 1. �' r ASL. �yy ,tom.. 'E,�+ �.�. �e.��l �I„'-�� .i�..�> - .>}: � ..�6a 460 �t* �ti.:,�` Y/ ��"� ;�� , ••�°Q. '% •�.�,� T.� -. ��y-.t� ..a� - F'��*��- � �QG� .s�.L� A� r �I',Y'_ S� .� i�• SWI i I •rt � � �'!� f I I 11 o. i :l=r� $T1'S.' r ~{af .. � d I �..�f' �r `9 'i'x51111 '^�lr` '�, r +` I1�'• .-IIx _ a .�" `: -" - It 6 .31-- �-'��-. . d fruf µ�"• ;, i ' � ty� ,, !r.�-� - t � _ '" :3inZ", ai t y.k• T 70 �3.. �i a `r, G{Fr. yf' GORDON S.MARvi ' '' S 'it- - ' Iry w. �K✓i .taae '�' 2/7/86 J .. .r. rl:nlgq:u�ngq'Iq'I'V,I'pu ail'n�ngiP+:upu�:PpP'uPnt'nl:p�,isPp�ggn�:yPp a'pi:q'pli,:I'I�uI�I'Pu��i:pnl.nl,r+q..... _ 2 32X ,��I�::i:nd�::I�mL,:�i��h::I�mlm:m�h:d:mlmAn�6ndu�Im:6v:h:nln�+pnlnuLmLn�In::bnJ.ruin:Jeu6ndnnlin�LudwiLnihn,IwiLnJnulnu6uJuu6nilnldlminiJwihndwdwi6minidnidnu6in6nJnnbmhmlin, MARCH 8 11990