City Council Packet - 04/24/1989
-71
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item needs to sign on the appropriate
w BUSINESS AGENDA CATV sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available,
APRIL 24, 1989, 6:30 P.M. ask to be recognized by the Chair at the start
H TIGARD CIVIC CENTER of that agenda item. Visitor's agenda items are
13125 SW HALL BLVD. asked to be to 2 minutes or less. Longer matters
E-1" TIGARD, OREGON 97223 can be set for a future Agenda by contacting
either the Mayor or City Administrator.
6:30 o STUDY SESSION
7:30 1. BUSINESS MEETING:
1.1 Call To Order and Roll Call
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance
1.3 Call To Staff and Council For Non-Agenda Items
7:35 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (2 Minutes or Less Per Issue, Please)
7:40 3. KEYS TO THE CITY - CITY CENTER PLAN TASK FORCE (Mayor Edwards)
7:45 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be
enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request
that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action.
Motion to:
4.1 Approve City Council Minutes for March 13 and 16, 1989
4.2 Authorize Preparation of Preliminary Engineer's Report for the
Ar Proposed PacTrust Local Improvement District - Resolution No.
89-29 (Con*_inued from the April 10, 1989 Council meeting.)
4.3 Recess Council Meeting; Convene Local Contract Review Board (LCRB)
Meeting: a) Approve Consultant Contract for McDonald Project; b)
Authorize. Bidding on Various Projects; Adjourn LCRB: Reconvene
Council Meeting.
4.4 Accept S.W. Naeve Street Public Improvements-Resolution No. 89-30
4.5 Endorse Recommendations on Scholls Ferry Rd. Project-Res. No.89-.3/
7:50 5. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 89-02, ZONE CHANGE ZC
89-02 SANDERS (PLANNING RESOURCES, INC.) NPO #6
Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium Density
Residential to Medium-High Density Residential and a Zone Change from
R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) to R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre)
for approximately 4.27 acres of an 8.27 acre parcel. The remainder of
the parcel is designated Medium-High Density Residential and is zoned
R-25. LOCATION: 11165 SW Naeve Street (WCTM 2S1 10 DB, eastern half
of Tax Lot 200).
o Public Hearing Opened
o Declarations Or Challenges
o Summation By Community Development Staff
o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination
o Recommendation By Community Development Staff
o Council Questions Or Comments
o Public Hearing Closed
o Consideration By Council
COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 1989 - PAGE 1
i
8:20 6. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 89-03; ZONE CHANGE ZC
89-03 DUVALL STREET NPO #4 f
C. A request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Low-Density
Residential to General Commercial and a Zone Change from R-3.5
r (Residential, 3.5 units/acre) to C-G (General Commercial) for f
approximately 6.4 acres including properties on either side of Duvall i
Street west of SW 72nd Avenue. LOCATION: WCTM 1S1 36DC, Tax Lots 600,
700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 1700, 1800, `
1900, 2000, 2100, and intervening public right-of-way.
o Public Hearing Opened
o Declarations Or Challenges j
o Summation By Community Development Staff
o Public Testimony: Proponents, Opponents, Cross Examination
o Recommendation By Community Development Staff
o Council Questions Or Comments
o Public Hearing Closed
o Consideration By Council {
i
8:35 7. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff
8:40 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive
Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (a), (d), (e), & (h) to $
discuss Police Chief selection, labor relations, real property
transactions, and current and pending litigation issues.
e
9:15 9. ADJOURNMENT
cw/9584D
1
c
E
a
s
COUNCIL AGENDA - APRIL 24, 1989 - PAGE 2
i t
l l
TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal
7-6912
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 RECEIVED
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 RECEIVED
Legal Notice Advertising APR 24 1989
CITY Or TIGARD • ❑ Tearsheet Notice GAY OF TIGARD
• PO BOX 23397 •
TIGARD, OR 97223 ❑ Duplicate Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF OREGON, )
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )S'-
1, FT ATNF PFTROGFORGE
being first duly sworn, depose and say jFfi a~ l Advertising
Director, or his principal clerk, of the
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010
and 193.020; published at Tlreun in the
aforesaid county and state; that the
CTTY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for -!~~~Successive and
co.-.svcut:V.°, in the followin; issues.
APRIL 20, 1989
o
D
Subscribe -and sworn to ore. this APRIL 21, 1989
Not ry blic for Oregon
My Commission Expires: 9/20/92
AFFIDAVIT
'*1tP fo~io~iririg seieiitsd ~1 TtAr Y: "tio~
l
1
e u~ ~r i UCE TTE T rn r x; .
MEN
Mom
TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice7-6908
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
• CITY OF TIGARD • ❑ Tearsheet Notice
• PO BOX 23397 •
TIGARD, OR 97223 ❑ Duplicate Affidavit PUBLIC HEARING
The following will be considered by the Tigard City Council on April- 24,
• • 1989, at 7:30 P.M.,at Tigard Civic Center, Town Hall Room, 13125 SW.-Hall
i, ;Boulevard, Tigard; Oregon. Further information-may be obtained from the
Community Development Director or City Recorder:at.the satne [ocation.or
bycailing:839~4i71. You are Invited to submit written testimony In advance
of tho public hearing, written' and oral testimony will, be considered xtttie
1i. 1. ,ig., The public heating will be conducted in accordance wittilhe
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION appiicable.Chapter 19M2 6f the'Tigard Municipal`;Code and. apy rutes,.of
STATE OF OREGON, ) procedure adopted by tlfe Council and available of City Hail '
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss. ` COMPREHENSIVE`PLAN'AMENDMENT-CPA 89-02;"7gNE CHAICGE ZG
89-02 SA yDERS,(PLANNING RESOURCES, INC) NPO #6 Requestora
ELAINE PETROGEORGE Com rehenslve'-Plan Anneadment
i, p irom`14ledium` Density Residential;to
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising Medium High Density Residential e} or;app
and aZone Change from R p (ResIden-
Director, or his principal clerk, of the TIGARD TIMES tial, l2 unitS/acre)`to R-25 (ReaiTdential,.25 utiitsJacr froxirri
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 4;27 acres;of an 8.2Tacre parcel hexemainderof the,pareel'_is desigdated
and 193.020; published at TIGARD in the Medium High Density Residential and is zoned R 25'LOCATION 11165 SW.
aforesaid county and state; that the Naeve Street (WCTM 291 lODB, eastern half'of tax ioti200) F ' '
gguT ~S n- A-RING
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and t L~
r._
consecutive in the following issues: w o
d f'1 °
APRIL 13, 1989 i
r ti y- i a~ ;iT s hv~ a ..w5 y 1'
a j
Z ~ l- -r ~ Mt : ~ ,.s Sin ~ ~ ~ k':.;.
f t -Yr • y d
Subscribe and sworn to ore me this
4 1989
.17 'I
j -N
Notary P i f r Oregon
9/20/92;s
My Commission Expires: TT6908 Publish Apri113 198$ .
AFFIDAVIT
_-~:'l.. .-....-ter..-v.-..nom...-. .~s.n~..-er .........~~.-..--.~,._[.~'.^._...w-r-r'T~T...~n...-..~.-.....-~n_:-.....-.~.~..
TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal
P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 Notice 7_6907
BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075
Legal Notice Advertising
• CITY OF TIGARD • ❑ Tearsheet Notice
PO BOX 23397
• TIGARD, OR 97223 • ❑ Duplicate Affidavit . .
PUBLIC HEARING
• • The folio:wing w111'be considered by the TigRrc} City Councfi on Aprii24,
190t Z; F.jy4 AT1iad CiYIC Center, Town liail;Roorq;13125 V11411.
Boulevard;:Tigard, Oreg i.,1kirtheradfoimation may be obtained from;t>ie
Community Development Director''or. City Recorder at the same loc3t(pn or
j hy;calling 639.4171 You;are,invited~to submit written tesflmoiiy in•advance
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION of th[ public hearing, written and oral testimony will be considered at the
ia
pplie'Ch pt rj .18.32, of ii1e 1Tigard Municipal Code a dnany rul of
STATE OF OREGON,
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' procedure adopted by the COancil and available it City Hall
CPA 89-03/,ZC 8903,DWALL' STREET~NPO #4A raquest fbr `atCompfe-
l, FT ATNF PFTR(l('F(lRf F hBASIVe{PiBn t ft LOW-660ity! Re41d8~1tia1~t0 ("s6Rer8l[,om.
being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising
fr inertial and a Zone Change'irom R=35 (Residentia13.5 units/acre) io.`CwG
Director, or his principal clerk, of the TIGARD TIMES ro erties.on
a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 (General Commercial) for approximately 1i:4 acres including p,, p
either side' of Duvall Street; west of SW 72na'=Ave LOCATION: VCTral ; ISi
and 193.020; published at TIGARD in the 36K Tax.Ldts100, 700, 800, 900,1000, 1100, 1200, 1300,1400, 1500, 160.0,
aforesaid county and state; that the -17031'1800;1000,•;2000, 2100,_and interveNng•publicr[giit-uivv~3y ;
P11M IC HEARING NOTICE
a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the
newspaper for ONE successive and ! U+~ >x}
entire issue of said
consecutive in the following issues:
APRIL 13, 1989 ~E
Ys., / S x c
~t r .
AP IL 14, 1989
Subscribe and sworn to fore me this 1
%
wf }
~l 4
~r 1 r.
s,
Nota lit for Oregon y,
My Commission Expires: 9/20/92`
e
AFFIDAVIT TT6907 Publish April 13,1A819 u ~
-.2 , 4/24/89
-N. AGENDA'UEM/ VISITOR'S: AGENDA. DATE
(Limited to 2 minutes or less, please)
Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council
wishes to hear from you on other issues not on the agenda, but asks that you
first try to resolve your concerns through staff. Please contact the City
Administrator prior to the start of the meeting. Thank you.
NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED
oG )-AP-SE4-- izolfo s.o,vozrrraAkc~Tr4 /Z/ w/OE/rnvc,
w i IJ1 Ef-tlDA, "t('-M A-4 REt~'.Y
DATE 4/24/89
s
I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on
the following item: (Please print the information) r:
Item Description: %AGENI) ITEM -NO. 5 - PUBLIG`
."HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE-PLAN AMENDMENT Wk 89-02ZONE' f:
,CHANGE 89-02.'SANDERS".(PLANNING RESOURCES,-INC.) NPO>#6
Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue)
Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliati n
t
'C7 S it O t! D CC'n~~l~ p~
4iu s, Q Qt^ C oY ?lrS n 'd'O✓-~~fn Gpt N$ vK/
k'ct
NCO
s.xr4, coM.mr ,J t.
- q
rZL= IS' ®o Scv~~D,F2BRKCa
71
DATE 4/24/89
T wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on
the following item: (Please print the information)
Item Description: _~'AGENDA ITEM NO. 6 - PUBLIC
Z'HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE,PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 89-03;
tZONE"CHANGE ZC_89=03, DUVALL STREET.NPO #4,
Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue)
Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation
`D 4-vej
✓c4ri bt~k~cP
- ~ ~ .~~v h n5oln
65th OREGON LEGISLATIVE. ASSE346LY•-1989 Regular Session ` A_NXQ ~q` do-
,-At S~ SS ~ (M
Rouse Bill 3398
Sponsored by Representatives BRIAN, CALOURI, D. JONES, KEISLING, ROBERTS
SUMMARY
The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof suolect
to consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's brief statement of the essential features of the
measure as introduced.
Authorizes urban renewal agency, with approval of municipality, to release part of its tax in-
crement to taxing units within which it is located for purposes of reducing tax rates of those taxing
units.
i A BILL FOR AN ACT
2 Relating to urban renewal; amending ORS 457.220, 457.440 and 457.460.
3 Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
4 SECTION 1. ORS 457.220 is amended to read:
5 457.220. (1) Except for-the provisions of [subsection] subsections (2) and (4) of this section, an
6 urban renewal agency shall carry out the urban renewal plan approved under ORS 457.095.
7 (2) Any substantial change made in the urban renewal plan shall, before being carried out, be
8 approved and recorded in the same manner as the original plan.
9 (3) No land equal to more than 20 percent of the total land area of the original plan shall be
10 added to the urban renewal areas of a plan by amendments.
11 (4) When the principal and interest on indebtedness to which the portion of taxes is
12 irrevocably pledged for payment under ^viU 457.440 (S) is f_»y paid, or it is found that ex-
13 isting deposits or amounts that will be deposited in the special fund referred to under ORS
14 457.440 (4) 'are sufficient to fully pay principal and interest on that indebtedness either
15 through direct payment or by payment of principal and interest on bonds or notes issued to
16 finance the indebtedness:
17 (a) A portion of the land included within an urban renewal area may be withdrawn from
18 the urban renewal area by plan amendment; or
19 (b) The urban renewal agency, with the approval of the governing body of the munici-
20 pality, may direct, for the tax year or years indicated in the direction, the assessor to release
21 a portion of the assessed value subject to ORS 457.440 (4) and to add the portion so released
22 to the assessed value included in the certificate, or amended certificate, on file with the
23 county assessor under ORS 457.430 and used to compute the rate percent of levy for those
24 taxing units in which all or a portion of the urban renewal area is located; or
25 (c) The urban renewal agency, with the approval of the governing body of the munici-
26 pality, may direct, before August 1 of tax year indicated in the direction, the county treas-
27 urer to transfer a portion of the taxes that would otherwise be transferred to the special
28 fund referred to in ORS 457.440 (4) to the unsegregated tax collections account established
29 under ORS 311.385 to be distributed to taxing units in the same proportion as under the
30 percentage distribution formula in effect on the date of the transfer. Upon receipt of a di-
31 rection pursuant to this paragraph, the county treasurer shall immediately notify the county
32 assessor of the amount distributed to each taxing unit and the county assessor shall cause
NOTE: Matter in bold face in an amended section is new; matter [italic and bracketed] is existing law to be omitted.
IT
t
f
f
H B 3398
1 that amount to be offset against the levy of the taxing unit for the tax year indicated in the
2 direction in order that there be a reduction in the taxing unit rate of levy; or 1
t
3 (d) The urban renewal agency may give notice to the assessor as provided under ORS
4 457.450 (2). t
SECTION 2. ORS 457.440 is amended to read:
6 457.440. (1)(a) Subject to paragraph (b) of this subsection, during the period specified in ORS
7 457.450, the county assessor shall compute the rate percent. of levy for each taxing body in which F
8 all or part of the urban renewal area is located in the manner provided by ORS 310.090, except that
9 the assessed valuation to be divided into the total amount of money proposed to be raised by the
10 taxing body shall not include that part of the assessed value attributable to any increase in the true s
11 cash value of the property located in the urban renewal area, or portion thereof, over the true cash
i
12 values specified in the certificate or amendment to the certificate prepared by the assessor under }
13 ORS 457.430.
14 (b) If the assessor has received direction under ORS 457.220 (4)(b), the assessed value
15 specified in the certificate or amendment to the certificate shall be increased by the amount
r
16 of assessed value indicated by the directive so given for purposes of computing the taxing
17 unit rate of levy under paragraph (a) of this subsection.
18 (2) The rate percent determined under subsection (1) of this section for the taxing body shall
19
be extended by the assessor on the county assessment roll for that year against the entire assessed
20 valuation of all the taxable property in the taxing body including the increase, if any, in true cash
21 value of property located in the urban renewal area or portion thereof exceeding the value specified
22 in the certificate or amendment thereto filed under ORS 457.430, plus any addition under para-
23 graph (b) of subsection (1) of this section, although such increased value or valuation attributable
24 E
thereto was not included in computing the rate percent of levy. r
25 (3) That portion of the taxes produced by the rate upon which the tax is levied each year by
26 or for each of the taxing bodies upon the true cash value of the taxable property in the urban re-
27 newal area, or part thereof, specified in the certificate or amendment to certificate filed under ORS.'
28 457.430, plus any addition under paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section, shall be allo- j
29 cated to and when collected shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing bodies in the same
30 manner as taxes by or for said taxing bodies on all other property are paid.
31 (4) That portion of the taxes representing the levy against the increase, if any, in true cash
32 value of property located in the urban renewal area, or part thereof, over the true cash value
33 specified in the certificate or amendment to the certificate filed under ORS 457.430, plus any
34 amount added under paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section, shall, after collection by.
35 the tax collector, be paid into a special fund of the agency and shall be used to pay the principal
f•.
36 and interest on indebtedness incurred b the agency to finance or refinance the car f
by vying out of the
37 urban renewal plan or may be transferred in part to the unsegregated tax collections account 4
38 for distribution as provided under ORS 457.220 (4)(c).
39 (5) Unless and until the total true cash value of the taxable property in an urban renewal area
40 exceeds the total true cash value specified in the certificate or amendment to certificate filed under
41 ORS 457.430, all of the taxes levied and collected upon the taxable property in such urban renewal
42 area shall be paid into the funds of the respective taxing bodies.
43 (6) The agency may incur indebtedness, including obtaining loans and advances in carrying out
44 the urban renewal plan, and the portion of taxes received under subsection (4) of this section may
[2)
H B 3398
}
1 be irrevocably pledged for the payment of principal of and interest on such indebtedness.
2 SECTION 3. ORS 457.460 is amended to read:
3 457.460. (1) An agency shall, by august 1 of each year, prepare a statement containing: E
4 (a) The amount of money actually received during the preceding fiscal year under ORS 457.440
r
5 (4) and from indebtedness incurred under ORS 457.440 (6); t ~sit~
c
6 (b) The purposes and amounts for which any money received under ORS 457.440 (4) and from
7 indebtedness incurred under ORS 457.440 (6) were expended during the preceding fiscal year;
8 (c) An estimate of moneys to be received during the current fiscal year under ORS 457.440 (4)
9 and from indebtedness incurred under ORS 457.440 (6);
t.;
10 (d) A budget setting forth the purposes and estimated amounts for which the moneys which have t:
11 been or will be received under ORS 457.440 (4), including the purposes and estimated amounts
12 to be transferred under OILS 457.220 (4)(b) or (c), and from indebtedness incurred under ORS k'
13 457.440 (6) are to be expended during the current fiscal year; and
r.
14 (e) An analysis of the impact, if any, of carrying out the urban renewal plan as affected, if j;
15 applicable, by any transfers under ORS 457.220 (4)(b) or (c) on the tax rate for the preceding:
16 year for all taxing bodies included under ORS 457.430.
17 (2) The statement required by subsection (1) of this section shall be filed with the governing
18 body of the municipality and notice shall be published that the statement has been prepared and is
19 on file with the municipality and the agency and the information contained in the statement is
20 available to all interested persons. The notice shall be published once a week for not less than two
21 successive weeks before September 1 of the year for which the statement is required in accordance
22 with ORS 457.115. The notice shall summarize the information required under paragraphs (a) to (d)
23 of subsection (1) of this section and shall set forth in full the information required under paragraph
24 (e) of subsection (1) of this section.
25
o~
i
r
u
[3)
TIGARD PARK LEVY OPTIONS
Five Year Levy
PLAN A ® PLM B ® PLAN. C
Plan A Plan B Plan C
Summerlake Park Plan "B" includes all items covered Plan "C" includes all items covered
Benches in Plan "A", plus the following: in Plan "A" and "B", plus the
Planting shubbery at playground following:
Bridge at dam Summarlake Park
East side asphalt trail (1/3 mile) Lawn seeding at Lakeside Summerlake Park
Foot bridges (2) East restrooms at playground West end parking lot
Irrigation (3 acres) Tennis courts (2)
1.9 acre land acquisition Fanno Creek Park Basketball court
East Labe playground Second downtown project Picnic shelter and tables
Soft trail (1/3 mile) (amphitheatre and/or tea garden) Pathway lighting
East entry plantings West restrooms
Fanno Creek Park Foot bridge relocation Winterlake playground
East entry improvements/Plaza Meadow plantings West side asphalt trails
West entry land acquisition
(.86 acre) Cook Park Fanno Creek Park
Bicycle paths (2/3 mile) Soft paths (1/3 mile) City Hall water garden j
Main Street Plaza Project Riverfront landscaping, irrigation
and plantings for picnic area Cook Park
Cook Park Riverfront picnic tables Asphalt trails
Playground concrete walks and plaza
Picnic tables and benches Greenway parkas paths Parking area
Riverfront landscaping Durham Road-Cook Park Access drive reorientation
Riverfront parking connection Ballfield relocation
and paving improvements Shelter/concession stand/reet:room
Irrigation of soccer fields Total for Plan "B" - $1,645,000 Half basketball court
and play area Amphitheater/bandstand
Restroom renovation Spray pool
Additional landscaping
Greenway Parks paths Caretaker/Gatehouse
Pathfinder/Genesis (1.9 miles)
Englewood (1.5 miles) Total for Plan "C" - $4,052,000
Total for Plan "A" - $1,000,000
) i l ll ooo 10 D Sold l~Do
The assessment on an 880000 house would be
Plan---)A 811.20/YR Plan B -"'-.A8.40/YR Plan C e 84._ 4BO YR
t
v
i
Dear Neighbor, i
r
Tigard is a growing city. Our schools, roads, civic--center and library, and
parks are providing services to a greater number of citizens as each year
passes. To help keep the quality of our lifestyle, Tigard's civic leaders have
successfully planned for new schools and better roads. In our parks system,
much needed improvements have yet to be performed.
The Tigard City Council asked the Parks Advisory Board in August of 1986 to
develop a "Tigard Park Plan" to help guide the city forward in meeting park
needs for the future. In June of 1988, after countless hours of city staff and
citizen input, the Parks Advisory Board presented to the city council the
Tigard Park Plan. The Park Plan is your plan to guide us forward into the
future.
The Tigard Park Plan calls for improvements to be made at many of our parks,
especially the larger community and regional parks such as Summerlake Park in
northwest Tigard and Cook Park in south Tigard. The Parks Plan has a "vision"
of what Tigard's parks should be like through the year 2000. The citizen board
members who worked on developing this vision are now asking for your help.
On the reverse of this page you will find three "Park Levy options", referred {
to as Plan A, B, and C. The Park Levy would be in effect for a period of five
years. Please take a moment to see,what we are offering in these options, look r
at t cost, ^d check the one which you feel is best for mi..s.•.i f
Remember, these are =..ar parks, and their future ±s in your hands.. The Park
Board, City Council and Staff look forward to receiving your selection and hope
you enjoy our beautiful parks during the coming year. t
Sincerely,
Tigard Park Board
r
i
I{{
1
I
e
CGf~vt ck
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council April 25, 1989
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, Deputy RecdYde
SUBJECT: Text of Testimony from Mr. Bob Larsell
(Visitor's Agenda on 4/24/89)
Attached is the text of Mr. Larsell's testimony which he submitted concerning
the 121st Avenue project. This project was pulled from the Consent Agenda to
allow Council time for review and discussion.
cw
Attachment
c: Pat Reilly, City Administrator
Randy Wooley, City Engineer
402/01/89 Memo to Randy Wooley from Gary Alfson
re: 121st Avenue Consultant Contract
Item 1.7; Meet With Property Owners
Scheduled for 03/13/89 Occurred 04/20/89
Question: Is this entire project actually 5 weeks behind the
proposed schedule?
07/21/78 Tigard Community Plan - Neighborhood Planning
Organization - NPO #7 page 3
Quote "The Tigard Community Plan allows limited mixing of
housing types in the urban low density residential areas. The
committee con--luded that some mixing which would permit limited
amounts of efficiency housing was appropriate when sensitively
designed into the larger residential developments for the area
west of 121st ("sensitively designed into" means mixing a variety
of housing types rather than clustering one type, ie., duplexes
or apartments into an area). The area east of 121st and ajacent
Dakota and Tigard Streets was viewed as having a large lot
character which would not be compatible with the more efficient
land development techniques, "but should be developed as existing
minor land partitions; small acreage subdivision; building codes;
and required access provisions will allow".
Page 8 STREETS
When the N.P.O. had completed a preliminary land use plan it was
turned over to a consulting traffic: engineer, Carl Buttke to test
the street system to determine if it could handle the proposed
land use and to propose appropriate improvement standards. In
this report, Mr. Buttke makes the following conclusions about
future street improvements.
(paraphrased) Generally, all streets will function
adequately as two lane roadways with left turn, lanes at major
intersections or major driveways at the commercial area. The
only exception would be on 121st Avenue immediately south of
Scholls Ferry Road. It is recommended that 121st Avenue be
provided with two northbound lanes (one right turn and one left
turn lane) and two southbound lanes to the major east-west
collector street on the south side of the commercial area. The
right southbound lane should be marked as a right turn lane for
the commercial area access and east-west collector street.
As the area develops, it will be necessary to install
traffic signals at the following locations:
Scholls Ferry Road and mist Avenue
Scholls Ferry Road and 135th Avenue
121st Avenue and Walnut Street
Page 10 Existing Streets
Improvements to existing local streets in the residential
portion of the neighborhood will be made upon existing right-of-
way whenever possible. This will avoid the taking of landscaped
front yards of homes built near these rights-of-way.
QUESTIONS
#1 How could the intersection of 121st and North Dakota be
made safer by installing a turn lane and sidewalks?
The problem is that vehicle traffic already exceeds the
posted speed on 121st. With these improvements, the problem will
only get worse. 90% of the accidents are caused by ignorance of
the stop signs on either side of North Dakota at 121st. These
improvements will not solve this problem.
With the street widened, residents of adjacent properties
will be placed in jeopardy by faster traffic at the "improved„
corners when entering or leaving their driveways.
#2 How is it possible that the NPO #7 was able to make this
recommendation to the City Council with out even consulting the
affected landowners?
#3 Why weren't the landowners informed of these meetings directly?
#4 Why is it that our first notification by mail was a request
for cooperation with the surveyors?
#5 Why, when we attended the "informative" meeting at Mary
Woodward School last Thursday evening, were we informed that this
is "how it is" and that we "better not try to fight it!" Is this
the way that the City allows its' contractors' employees to
operate?
Cite: R. E. Meyer contract #88106 page 1 Item 1.5
Prepare draft design of widening improvements.
...impact on existing fences, trees, landscaping, and
utilities}... The purpose of the preliminary plan is iu
define project elements and impacts on existing improvements
so that design effort can be coordinated with input from
property owners and City staff.
#6 Why is it necessary for the City to acquire property to
within five feet of our foundation when the sidewalk will be
twelve feet away? Is it needed?
All of our twenty year old shade trees will be eliminated,
as well as some others more recently placed as a sound barrier to
the noise of traffic on 121st. We will be forced to endure the
heat of the western sun on the bedroom end of our home without
benefit of these trees.
#7 Isn't the value of our property going to decrease, not only
due to the reduction of our lot size, but because the easement is
so close?
One reason for remaining in this location for fourteen years
is because the resale value was rising and appeared to be
continuing upward, we now feel that our home will be worth
considerably less after these alleged improvements.
#8 Our property taxes will or should decrease due to the
reduction of lot size, however won't the tares rise with the
addition of the sidewalk?
.
#9 Are we not also responsible for taxes on the amount of
. property sold to the City for this "improvement?"
#10 If we had been so well informed about this in the past, as
we were told that we were at Thursday's meeting, we would have
come forward much sooner. If we didn't care about the changes to
our property and lifestyle because of the proposed work or. 121st
then we wouldn't be here tonight. I wouldn't have spent hours at
the library researching or would I have bothered to attend this
meeting. We care about our property as much as wanting the
intersection of 121st and North Dakota changed. Living here as
we do, we honestly feel that the proposed changes are a waste of
tax dollars. However, a Four-way stop or a traffic signal here
would surely eliminate these problems!
f
t~
4
c
i
CITY OF TIGARD OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: April 24, 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: _April 17, 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: City Center PREVIOUS ACTION:
Plan Task Force Keys to the
_ REPARED BY: Donna Corbet _
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OKI REQUESTED BY: Mayor and Council
POLICY ISSUE
Keys to the City are presented to citizens who have served on a board or
committee in recognition of their service to the City of Tigard.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
r
The following citizens are being recognized for their service on the City
Center Plan Task Force:
Stuart Cohen March, 1987 - April, 1989
Joy Henkle July, 1988 - April, 1989 E
r
Pam Juarez March, 1989 - April, 1989
R. Michael Marr March, 1987 - April, 1989
i
Richard Morley February, 1988 - April, 1989 }
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
N/A
i
FISCAL IMPACT
E
i
N/A
i
i
t
SUGGESTED ACTION i
Presentation of "Keys" by Mayor.
do/9617D
f
Y
l
T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 13, 1989 - 6:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon,
Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Pat
Reilly, City Administrator; Wayne Lowry; Finance Director (Present
for Agenda Item Nos. 2 and 3 only); Ed Murphy, Community Development
Director; Liz Newton, Senior Planner; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel;
Catherine Wheatley, Deputy Recorder; Randy Wooley, City Engineer.
2. TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOND DISCUSSION
a. Finance Director reviewed the preparation of the sale for the
Transportation Safety Bond. He introduced Mr. Pat Clancy of
Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA), advisor for this
debt sale.
An $8.5 million bond sale attracts national attention and requires
several weeks' lead time for sale preparation. Two important dates
coming up for Council include:
- March 27 Council meeting to consider a resolution
authorizing the bond sale.
- April 25 Council to meeting convene within four hours
after bid opening to award the bid. (Note: Date was
subsequently changed to Wednesday, April 26, at 12:00
Noon.)
The City would actually receive the funds on May 18. (A deposit
will be received at bid award.)
Tigard has a good credit rating, but the size of this bond sale
warrants the effort and expense of a credit review. Thanks to
efforts by GFOA, representatives from Moody's would be visiting
Tigard to evaluate a rate change. Normally, City staff and
officials would be required to travel to Moody's headquarters in New
York which would cost several thousand dollars.
b. Mr. Clancy reviewed how the bond sale would be structured. He
advised the pros and cons of a split sale had been analyzed. It was
determined that one sale would be the best financial decision
because the sales expense would be incurred only once.
Transportation projects were scheduled to be completed over a three-
year period and unused amounts from the bond sale would collect
interest. This interest could possibly fund additional projects.
Discussion followed concerning the bid process.
C 3. FRANCHISE AGREEMENT DISCUSSION
a. Finance Director reported that the Utility & Franchise Committee had
been assigned franchise agreement analysis about a year ago. He
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 1
r
I
updated the Council on the results of this review to date.
In examining several other cities franchise agreements, there
appeared to be a trend to utilize franchise agreements as a way to
increase general funds or other types of revenue. This has been
done by raising the franchise rate.
The standard franchise rate was 3% on telephone and energy-related
public utilities (with exception of electricity which was 3-1/2%).
The rate was capped, for the most part, at 5%. When the standard
rate ("standard" = 3%) was charged, it does not appear on users's
bill but was part of the operating cost for the utility company.
When the rate was higher than the standard, then the overage amount
must be shown on the bill.
Finance Director advised the Utility & Franchise Committee was also
reviewing other portions of the franchise agreements including
better audit clause language and late payment charges. In addition,
they would attempt to negotiate language on the bill which lists the
franchise fee (over the standard amount) as a "tax."
City Attorney advised that Pacific Northwest Bell (PNB) has proposed
legislation to alter the method of computing the base amount to
which the percentage was applied. Currently, in Tigard's franchise
agreement, the percentage was computed on gross revenues. In other
jurisdictions, PNB has successfully proposed a reduced base by using
a formula eliminating "competitive service" (i.e., "call waiting"
and "mobile telephones"). DNB's rationale was that their
competitors were not required to pay a franchise fee for these
services so neither should they.
Now, PNB was asking for further reduction saying the base used for
computing 9-1-1 service taxes should also be used for computing
franchise fees. City Attorney advised that if this new formula was
implemented as requested by PNB, this would affect franchise fees
from GTE as well.
Finance Director advised that Tigard has the ability to negotiate
rate changes for their franchise agreements. He reported the
Committee and staff anticipate completion of agreement review within
the next several months. He'noted the major issue for Council to
consider was that if rates were increased over the standard amount,
they would appear on users' bills as a "tax." Finance Director
explained the franchise fee was a charge for the use of public
right-of-way. The intent of the City would be that the utility pay
the fee as a cost of doing business.
City Administrator advised that budget preparation was underway.
Projected revenues were being estimated using increased rates as was
the direction of the prior Council. If, for some reason, Council
would want to review this direction, this should be done soon.
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 2
Discussion followed. If citizen: viewed this as an increased tax,
this could affect other issues such as the part; levy and city center
development.
The utility companies generally maintain the fee (over 3%) must be
shown as a "tax" on customers' statements. Whether or not this
terminology was required by law has not been satisfactorily
concluded. Councilor Eadon suggested that since other cities have
recently increased their franchise rates, they may be interested in
addressing this issue concerning how the fee was denoted on the
billings. She added that the League of Oregon Cities might be
persuaded to become involved if several cities expressed a concern. )
Finance Director reported if the franchise rate increases were
implemented, additional revenue in the amount of $429,000 per year
would be realized (based on this year's projections). ;
Mayor Edwards noted he felt these funds should be utilized in areas G
such as streetlighting where citizens can see a direct benefit in
relationship to the fee charged.
Finance Director advised the fees could be designated for E
"infrastructure," i.e., maintenance, streetlighting, etc. He added
C it was important to diversify the revenue base in the general fund,
especially when viewed by credit rating companies such as Moody's. k
City Administrator advised if Council consensus was to continue to
estimate these increased franchise rates for budgeting purposes,
.then he would ask Council to continue to give thought on structure
for revenue allocation.
Council consensus was for continued work on the renegotiation of
franchise agreements as presented by staff. i.
f
4. UNIFIED SEWERAGE AGENCY AS REGIONAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY '
DISCUSSION
{
a. City Engineer summarized the formation of the Steering Committee for
Surface Water Management (SMM). Last year, Tigard and most of the
other cities in the County, decided to study implementation of a
regional storm drainage authority in order to meet water quality 4
standard deadlines. Councilor Schwartz was Tigard's representative
on the Steering Committee which has been meeting about twice a month
for the last four months.
The Steering Committee has proposed that Unified Sewerage Agency's
(USA) authority be expanded to include SWM. This would be '
administered much the same as was being done with sanitary sewer in
that cities would assume certain maintenance responsibilities. This
recommendation shall be forwarded to the Boundary Commission for
their review.
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 3
Currently, all cities in Washington County must agree to USA's
expansion of authority. On March 27, Council would receive two
resolutions for consideration. The first would represent the City's
support of the expansion of USA's authority. The second resolution
was an alternative action to be forwarded to the Boundary Commission
if 1009 of the cities in the County do not agree to the expansion
of USA's authority. This alternative resolution would support
formation of a SWM authority (also USA). This was comparable to the
first resolution, but administration would be more complicated.
Legislation has been introduced at the state level which would
change the law slightly so that only 709 of the cities in the County
would have to agree to the expansion of USA's authority. Councilor
Schwartz reported that two cities, Gaston and Banks, have not agreed
to support USA as the regional SWM authority. All other cities,
through their representatives, have shown support.
City Engineer distributed "Addenda for the Boundary Review
Commission Feasibility Analysis." Councilor Schwartz reviewed some
of the changes in the Addenda.
Councilor Schwartz advised there has been concern with the proposed
fee structure. Presently, a $3/household fee was being considered.
Tigard now has a monthly fee for SWM and may not be charged the
entire $3. Forest Grove objected to this because they, too, do some
SWM functions which were funded from their general fund.
The proposed fee of $3 per month would provide for maintenance only
(no capital improvements). Councilor Schwartz asked Chris Bowles,
representative from USA to describe how improvements would be
accomplished.
Mr. Bowles advised that the fee structure, at this point, was only
the financing package prepared for presentation to the Boundary
Commission. The Boundary Commission package was a very general work
program and rate analysis. Mr. Bowles advised that the work program
included what the City had already been doing in their maintenance
program and then carries it further to develop a water quality
program and watershed management needs as imposed by DEQ and EPA.
The $3/household was intended to replace the $1.50/household
currently charged in Tigard.
Mr. Bowles said it was essential, in a region-wide program, to begin
with the basics. Basics would include a sound maintenance program,
water-quality monitoring, and development of uniform regulations.
Capital improvement projects (CIPs) would be dealt with as the local
basin determined a need for specific CIPs. These would be funded
by the local basin probably as an LID. If the CIP would be of
region-wide benefit (i.e., regional water quality basin retention
facilities), then those would probably be funded out of the basic
program administered by USA.
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 4
If the Boundary Corm-. scion approves the proposal in August or
September, then the work program would be developed into a more
refined and detailed document for execution. Also, the final warn
program could include some region-wide CI?s not currently listed.
Implementation would probably occur in July 1990.
(Councilor Johnson arrived: 6:20 p.m.)
t
Bob Bledsoe, Tigard citizen, noted two concerns:
r
1) SWM fee was being proposed as a utility charge rather
than-as a tax. He felt citizens would ultimately be
paying a "tax on a tax."
2) Standards for the clean-up of the Tualatin River were
too high. Historically, the river (because it was slow
and meandering) has been high in phosphate/nitrate k
levels. He said he felt the high standards were set F
because of pressure from Lake Oswego to control algae
in their lake. He said surrounding communities should 4
attempt to overturn EQC's strict requirements. #
e
Mayor responded to Mr. Bledsoe's second issue. He advised that
there had been testimony from several long-time residents at l
hearings echoing Mr. Bledsoe's comments about the Tualatin River;
however, the requirements remain in place.
Mr. Bowles addressed Mr. Bledsoe's first issue. He explained there
was a nationwide trend to charge for SMM through a user fee rather
than a tax. The No. 1 reason for a user fee was equity:
o The amount of runoff which needs to be controlled was
connected to impervious area and not to assessed
valuation.
o A tax method for SWM fees generally include numerous
non-taxed properties. From a utility standpoint, there
was no logic as to why these- properties should be
excluded from paying.
4. CITY CENTER PLAN WORKSHOP
a. Community Development Director noted the purpose of the workshop was
for Council to become more familiar with the Development Plan and
Report. He noted upcoming public hearings scheduled for March 16
and 27, 1989.
b. Sr. Planner Newton reviewed some statistics and the history of the
city center study area. She noted that Council, as the City Center
Development Agency, would be the policy-making body charged with
overseeing the development of the city center. The Advisory
Commission (7-12 members to be appointed by Council) would assist
the Agency in the ongoing annual budget process. She urged Council
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 5
to begin thinking about selection of the members of the Advisory
Commission.
Mayor noted he has been contacted by city center business people who
were concerned about the Advisory Commission role; that is, the
Advisory Commission should be truly "advisory" only. Also, first
consideration for appointment to the Commission should be given to
downtown business owners. Mayor recommended that City Center Plan
Task Force members not be considered as appointees to the
Commission.
C. Sr. Planner reviewed the specific projects outlined in the Plan and
Report. Discussion followed.
Mayor noted concerns with several projects listed. He added he
would like the opportunity to discuss projects in detail because he
had objections to public improvements such as restrooms, courtyards,
etc. These types of facilities could expose Tigard taxpayers to
tremendous liability and noted Supreme Court case law which
supported this concern.
Discussion followed. The issue was raised that if a project was not
listed in the Plan, then tax increment financing funds could not be
spent if it was later determined that the project should be
implemented. Not all projects listed in the Plan had to be
completed.
Council meeting recessed at 7:40 P.M.
Council meeting reconvened at 7:55 p.m.
Councilor Schwartz commented that transportation projects should be
described to provide as much flexibility as possible to assure the
City would not be locked out of options. Councilor Kasten added
that flexibility would be important for future Councils as well.
d. Workshop discussion continued with the following issues reviewed:
o Tax increment financing how it works.
o Development Report must be adopted each year with budget
for projects.
o Policy issues to be resolved
formation of urban renewal district
timing of plan adoption
non-conforming uses - how to deal with
action area overlays
citizen involvement
o Important tasks to be done
land use review
Development Code standards review
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 6
land assembly review (eminent domain issues)
role of Advisory Commission
composition of Advisory Commission (who?)
o May or November election (what would be the difference?) May election: Tax increment financing mechanism filed
with County Assessor prior to October 1989; therefore,
base would become the assessed valuations of city center
area as of January 1988.
November election: Base would become the assessed
valuations of city center area as of January 1989.
5. ADJOURNMENT: 9:30 p.m.
Approved by the Tigard City Council on April 24, 1989.
Catherine Wheatley, Deputy Rk?corder
ATTEST:
Mayor - City of Tigard
Council Minutes - March 13, 1989 7
T I G A R D D C E I V T E Y L O C P O M U E N N C T I L A / G C E I N T C Y Y C E N T E R
A N D P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N
MEETING MINUTES - MARCH 16, 1989 - 6:30 P.M.
1. Mayor Edwards advised the meeting would be conducted, for the most
part, by the Planning Commission who would be considering testimony on
the City Center Development Plan and Report. He advised the City
Council (who were also present in their capacity as the City Center
Development Agency) would listen to testimony and assist staff with
answering questions.
2. Planning Commission Vice President Fyre called the meeting to order.
Roil Call:
Planning Commissioners Present: Milton Fyre, Vice President;
Commissioners: Vlasta Barber, James Castile, Gregory Newton, Daniel
Rosborough, Harry Saporta.
(Also:
City Council/City Center Development Agency Present: Mayor Jerry
Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and
John Schwartz.
City Staff Present: Pat Reilly, City Administrator; Ed Murphy,
Community Development Director; Liz Newton, Sr. Planner; Tim Ramis,
Legal Counsel; and Catherine Wheatley, Deputy City Recorder.)
3. Vice President Fyre read a statement concerning conduction of the
meeting pursuant to provisions contained in the Tigard Municipal Code
and the Oregon Revised Statutes.
4. PRESENTATION OF CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
a. Senior Planner advised the purpose of the meeting was for the
Planning Commission (after the public hearing) to recommend to
the City Council whether or not they believed the City Center
Development Plan conformed to the City's Comprehensive Plan (Comp
Plan).
Sr. Planner reviewed elements of the Development Plan and noted
whether or not the element pertained to prov"_sions of the Comp
Plan. Her comments included the following:
o The boundaries of the area affected were contained in the
Development Plan and the area was known as the City Center
Plan Task Force Study Area. This element of the Development
Plan pertains to Comp Plan Policy 11.1.1.
Page 1 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
o An important element of the Development Plan was the timeframe
which was set primarily for the use of tax increment financing
(TIF). TIF was not an issue relating to the Comp Plan.
Funding and financing issues would be considered by the City
Council/City Center Development Agency..
o Council would be acting (in conjunction with an appointed
Advisory Commission) as the City Center Development Agency for
implementation of the City Center Development Plan. The
Agency and the establishment of an Advisory Commission were
important elements, but were not Comprehensive Plan policy
issues.
o The projects and programs listed within the Plan and Report
were Comprehensive Plan issues. If the urban renewal district
was formed and moved forward, the programs and projects listed
would be those wZiich could be selected for implementation.
Any programs or projects not listed could not be undertaken
without going out to a vote; for this reason, descriptions of
programs and projects were somewhat generic.
The projects and programs included in the Report were the same
as those contained in the Development Plan. However, the
Report indicated an estimate on phasing and project
financing. By law, in order to put the district into place,
the City must predict when the projects would be done and how
the projects would be financed. Realistic expectations
concerning completion of projects to occur over the life of
the district must be demonstrated. Phasing and financing of
the projects were not Comprehensive Plan goal issues.
o Tax rate impacts on other taxing jurisdictions were also
included in the Report but were not Comprehensive Plan issues.
(Councilor Johnson arrived at 7:25 p.m.)
Sr. Planner reviewed how some of the projects and programs
conform to the Comprehensive Plan:
o Transportation--Comprehensive Plan Policy 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.
The Ash Avenue project was defined in Comp Plan Policy
11.2.1 and was reviewed by Sr. Planner.
Sr. Planner reviewed several street projects and
improvements recommended in the Development Plan. Parking
structures were included as transportation improvements;
location of parking structures were shown in the Plan, but
these locations could change as studied further. 01
Page 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIUDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
o Economy--Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.1.3 states, "The City
shall improve and enhance the portions of the Central
Business District as the focal point for commercial,
high-density residential, business, civic, and
professional activity creating a diversified and
economically viable core area." The projects listed in
the Development Plan were designed to conform with this
Policy. Senior Planner reviewed some of the projects
listed.
o Projects and Programs: Parks and Open Space:
Comprehensive Plan Polices 3.5.3; 3.5.4; 3.6.1. Sr.
Planner reviewed the projects which would affect the
preceding Comprehensive Plan Polices.
b. Senior Planner read into the record a letter dated March 12,
1989, from Jerry D. Scott commenting on the downtown
redevelopment effort. (This letter has been filed with the
meeting packet materials.) She responded to some of the issues
raised by Mr. Scott:
1-
Displaced business owners would be compensated and receive
assistance for relocation. Consideration for lost business
was a negotiable issue.
1
The City may be asking, on the May ballot, for the opportunity
to use tax increment financing. Tax increment financing would`
represent 43 percent of total project funding. Once the,
improvements were made, the business and property owners in
the downtown would benefit by having newer public improvements
and more compatible businesses in the area. It would be
beneficial to the Tigard community to have a more vibrant E:
downtown which would also be more of a community gathering j`
place.
The $37 million cost for improvements would not be the issue
on the May ballot. (This was the estimated cost of all of the
improvements.) Tax increment financing (TIF) does not
represent a bond authorization or tax increase.
C. Presentation by City Center Plan Task Force Chair Stuart Cohen:`
He noted the issue before the Planning Commission was to
determine whether the Plan was consistent with the Comprehensive it
Plan. He reported it was the opinion of the Task Force, after
examining the Study Area for the past two years and reviewing the
Comprehensive Plan, that the Development Plan presented to the
Council on March 6, 1989, was consistent with policies set forth
in Tigard's Comprehensive Plan.
d. Public Testimony:
o Dave Atkinson, 10460 S.W. Century Oak Drive, Tigard, Oregon
advised his testimony concerned financing issues. It was
noted this issue would be open for discussion on March 27,
1989.
n
Page 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
o Dick Miller, 8970 S.W. Burnham Street, Tigard, Oregon, noted
he owned a business and property in the area. He advised his
concerns were with the process and asked when there would be
an opportunity for the public to ask about the specific
downtown projects.
Vice President Fyre reviewed the process:
The purpose of this meeting was for the Planning
Commission to determine if the City Center Plan complied
with the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission
would forward their recommendation to the City Council.
Sr. Planner advised that the recommendation from the Planning
Commission would be used as an element for Council
deliberation during the Development Plan approval process.
Sr. Planner explained the process as follows:
Public Hearing on March 16 before Planning Commission
Comprehensive Plan review; that is, how does the
Development Plan and Report comply with Comp Plan
Policies? This would be the best time to voice concerns
on specific projects if those projects would affect
policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan.
Public Hearing on March 27 before City Council
Council would receive testimony on everything contained in
the two documents (Development Plan & Report). After this
final public hearing, Council would consider an ordinance
to adopt the Plan and a resolution accepting the Report.
Mayor Edwards further clarified that the Planning Commission
was to determine whether all of the items contained in the two
documents were within the master Comprehensive Plan of the
City. He advised that projects and programs could be removed
from the list through Council action after receiving public
input. A full hearing would be held on March 27, 1989.
Councilor Johnson reviewed the history behind the downtown
development plan:
Two years ago, Council questioned, what, if anything,
should be done to help the development/ redevelopment of
downtown Tigard. It was apparent that there was a lot of
building and growth activity in areas all around the
downtown. At the same time, the City was receiving an
increasing number of requests for nonconforming uses.
Council made the determination that the City should review
the potential of downtown and make a clear, educated
recommendation to answer the question:
Page 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/ DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
Should the downtown area be revitalized as some kind of
retail/commercial/professional/light-industrial, mixed-use
zone or should the City relent to the nonconforming
appeals and rezone the entire area to light industrial?
The City Center Plan Task Force was formed to study this
question. Their assignment was to look at the downtown
area; determine logical boundaries for the study area; use
data already compiled in the 1983-84 study; and work
through the demographics and the potential of downtown to
determine what should happen.
The City Center Plan Task Force found they had the need
for professional consultants. A marketing consultant was
hired to help with the reality of the market; that is, was
the "Vision Statement" economically viable? As the study
progressed, a traffic consultant and a park plan
consultant were also tapped for their expertise. Finally,
a design consultant was chosen as the professional to
bring the loose ends of all the other professional
recommendations together for the Task Force.
Transportation access and improvements were identified as
very important to the downtown area; however, these
improvements would be quite expensive.
Tax increment financing (TIF) was reviewed as a financing
option. The Task Force concluded that if there was no
mechanism to utilize TIF in the downtown area, many of the
transportation and public improvements necessary for
revitalization would not be affordable.
The Oregon Revised Statutes outlines the rules for TIF
utilization. Every conceivable project which would
receive funding from TIF must be identified. It becomes
necessary to forecast development which may occur as a
result of basic improvements. Other funding sources must
also be identified. The entire scope including estimating
project costs, revenues and development must be done for a
1-,:-year period (the Development Plan and Report do this).
Land use issues for the downtown area were not required by
state law to be placed in the Development Plan and
Report. This would be a separate action and should take
place whether or not the TIP issue was placed on a ballet.
Land use issues would concern the review of the
Development Code for the downtown area; i.e., permitted
uses, building construction, parking, and landscaping
requirements.
The Task Force did not review land use issues because
these were not within the scope of their assigned area of
study.
Page 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
The Council must now determine the process for the review
of the land use issues. Once it has been determined
whether or not the City has the tool of TIF, it will be
the Council's (aka Downtown Development Agency)
responsibility to determine how to spend the money; by
determining specific road alignments and projects for
completion.
o Wil Spohn, 9053 S.W. Burnham, Tigard, Oregon, advised he would
comment at the March 27 public hearing.
o Dan Dolan, 4524 N.E. Davis, Portland, Oregon, noted objections
to the Plan. He advised there has been no
environmental-impact study for the proposed lake in the park
and was concerned about wildlife and birds in the wetlands.
Mr. Dolan also noted concerns with crime risk in the proposed
park. He said the park would be long and narrow. making it
difficult to patrol. He also objected to the Plaza noting
that young people would probably loiter.
Mr. Dolan advised he owns the building where the A-Boy store
was located (this was also his place of employment). He said
A-Boy plans to build a $1 million development aL this
location. Plans have been submitted to the City.
Mr. Dolan said he did not like the proposed Tigard "T"~
emphasis on Burnham Street and he believed this would be a
mistake for downtown Tigard.
o Gordon S. Martin, 12265 S.W. 72nd Avenue, Tigard, noted
concerns with previous traffic studies. He referred to a
"micro" and a "macro" traffic study. The micro study dealt
with internal circulation in the downtown area, while the
macro study represented a design to move traffic to the
downtown area.
Mr. Martin referred to recommendations made by the traffic
engineer- for the macro plan which has been excluded from the
meeting and hearing process and asked why this had been done.
He described traffic patterns outside the downtown area he
felt would be beneficial. He said he understood that the
macro traffic study was outside the boundaries of the city
center, but was still an important element for the downtown
area.
Mr. Martin advised the downtown business owners should be
given priority consideration for expansion since they have
been "keeping the boat afloat" for the last 15-20 years.
Mr. Martin suggested a special edition of the "All About Town"
newsletter be published to inform the general public on this
issue. He said the City should cite examples to help citizens relate to what was being proposed.
Page 6 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
Community Development Director responded to Mr. Martin's
question with regard to the deletion of the macro traffic
study during this public hearing process. He advised the
macro traffic study was still in place; however, this was
outside the scope of the study for projects under
consideration in the downtown area.
o Chuck Woodard, 12490 S.W. Main, Tigard, Oregon, asked the City
to review the proposed off-ramp which would create a new
Burnham Street interchange. He suggested an alternate route
which would come off of Pacific Highway onto Commercial Street
and described the merits of this proposal.
Community Development Director noted City Council would be
reviewing the traffic ramp project. The wording could be more
flexible to allow relocation of the ramp if a better
alternative was identified.
Mr. Woodard encouraged the preservation of the older
buildings, such as the Tigard Feed Store (originally the train
station and the oldest building in Tigard).
Mr. Woodard received clarification on wording contained in the
Report document concerning relocation of businesses and
residences. Discussion followed.
o Tim Miller, 9075 S.W. Burnham, Tigard, Oregon noted concern
over whether the police and fire departments have commented
about the park plan. He said.he has observed problems with
vandalism and loitering near the railroad.
He reported the bridge on Main Street was falling down and
should be replaced. However, if a newer, larger bridge was
built, water would move through more rapidly and cause
flooding. He said he believed some of the. proposed buildings
would be in the floodplain.
Discussion followed. Commission Vice President Fyre noted-the
Building Code prohibited building in the floodplain;
therefore, this was not an issue.
City Center Plan Task Force Chair Cohen advised engineers had
studied the plans for Fanno Creek Park and did not note any
flooding issues. He further advised that no structures within
the Plan would be built in the floodplain.
e. Recommendation by Community Development Director: He
acknowledged the concerns expressed by the members of the
audience noting that staff attempted to address many of those
during the study process. He reviewed some of these issues:
o A wildlife biologist had reviewed the proposal with
respect to retention of the eco system in the park. The
conclusion was that the proposal would enhance the
conditions for wildlife.
Page 7 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
!
o Crime was always an issue with respect to parks and
plazas. Care must be taken to design the public areas to
be as crime resistant as possible.
o Preservation of historic buildings would be a major
consideration.
o Relocation policies were addressed in the plan. He said
he believed the Plan contained strong wording noting that
property owners would receive relocation assistance as
necessary. He advised that businesses would not be
relocated unless absolutely necessary and then, the City
would attempt to make sure the business was moved to
another suitable location in the downtown area.
In response to a question from the audience concerning a
nonconforming business, Community Development Director advised a
business would have to be relocated in an area zoned for that
business. If the business was located downtown as a
nonconforming use, then the business would be relocated to an
area where it would be conforming.
City Attorney agreed with the Community Development Director on
the relocation of nonconforming businesses. He advised the
business would either be relocated to a zone which would allow
the use or the property selected for relocation would be rezoned
so the business was a conforming use.
Community Development Director reported the staff believed the
Development Plan and Report programs and plans were consistent
with the overall Comprehensive Plan. He recommended that the
Planning Commission adopt the proposed resolution which stated
findings of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
In response to a question, Community Development Director advised
the City Center Development Agency could acquire property through
the eminent domain process (condemnation) as part of any public
project identified in the Development Plan. Furthermore, he
stated, the City Council presently has the right to acquire land
for any public purpose as long as it can be demonstrated that
there was a public purpose; the land owner would be fairly
compensated.
f. Public hearing was closed.
g. Planning Commission deliberations:
o Commissioner Saporta said he found the Development Plan to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He noted that several
good points were raised during testimony which included the
concern that historical buildings be preserved.
Page 8 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
o Commissioner Rosborough commended the City Center Plan Task
Force for their hard work and the good recommendation which
resulted. He noted the Plan was a step in the right
direction. Testimony from the public brought forth several
valid concerne--ioramost erc> the public saf_t.y i ccltPC wh i ch
should be reviewed by Council. He agreed with staff's
findings and advised he found no inconsistencies between the
Development Plan and Comp Plan.
o Commissioner Newton agreed that the Development Plan was a
good one. He advised he had served on the Tigard Economic
Development Commission in 1984 and 1985, and there had been a
lot of discussion about the problems with downtown and what
they would like to see happening. He advised the critical
elements of the Development Plan were the transportation
issues. He emphasized it was important to keep focused on the
"big picture" of what the Development Plan was attempting to
accomplish and to not become too concerned with details which
could be resolved later.
He noted he found the plan in conformance with the policies
establishe- in the Comp Plan.
o Commissioner Castile noted he basically agreed with everything
said and he was enthusiastic about doing something for the
downtown. Hopefully, with implementation of the Development
Plan, business properties would become more valuable. He said
he endorsed the Plan for the future.
o Commissioner Barber commended the City Center Plan Task Force
for long and hard job well done. She said she remembered
downtown Tigard from the early 40's and it does not look much
different today. She said the Plan was very general with no'
specific businesses identified for relocation. She reported
the Development Plan appeared to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
o Commission Vice President Pyre said he found the Development
Plan to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He
reviewed some issues raised during testimony:
- Wetlands (floodplain): Would be protected by state law.
- Consideration to Existing Businesses: To be addressed by
Council when they deliberate the downtown development
issue.
- Preservation of Historic Building: Development Plan
appeared to be flexible enough to accommodate this
concern. Historic building preservation was also an
element of the Comp Plan.
- Relocation of Businesses: Development Plan addresses this
issue adequately.
Page 9 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
Off-Ramp Location: To be addressed by Council if and when
the Development Plan is implemented.
Crime in Parks: Always a concern for park areas, but
1acau
asked, "Do we stop building packs '~`a.,ac of crime?"
Vice President Fyre noted consensus of the Planning Commission
favoring the implementation of the City Center Development
Plan.
h. TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION - RESOLUTION NO. 89-01PC - A
RESOLUTION FORWARDING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND
THE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ON THE CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT
PLAN.
i. Motion by Commissioner Saporta, seconded by Commissioner Barber,
to adopt Resolution No. 89-01PC.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Commission present.
5. The Planning Commission Meeting adjourned at 8:43 p.m.
6. The City Center Development Agency Meeting was convened. Mayor Edwards
advised the public hearing for the Council review of the City Center
Development Plan and Report was scheduled for March 27, 1989 at 7:30
p.m. at which time in-depth testimony on all aspects of the Plan and
Report would be received.
Mayor commented on the concerns expressed by individuals from the
downtown area. The Plan, in his view, should be realistic and promote
the livability and the best interests for everyone in Tigard.
7. ADJOURNMENT: 8:44 p.m.
c- w
Deputy Recorder.- City of Tiga
ATTEST:
P an inr C is ion Vice Pres ent Fyre
Mayor - City of Tigard
cw/9510D
Page 10 - PLANNING COMMISSION & COUNCIL/DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES- 3/16/89
14, a
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: April 24, 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: April 17, 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Proposed PREVIOUS ACTION: Continued from the
FacTrust LID Council Meeting of April 10, 1989
PREPARED BY:
DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY:
CY ISSUE
Consideration of a petition stating interest in forming a local improvement
district for street and utility improvements in the area of proposed PacTrust
development. f
t
INFORMATION SUMMARY
i
Attached is Resolution No. 89-29 for Council consideration. This Resolution
was continued, by Council motion on 4/10/89, to the 4/24/89 Council Consent
Agenda.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
TMC 13.04.020(b)(2) provides that:'
(2) Based on the preliminary evaluation report, the Council shall:;
r•
r.~
b'
(A) Direct staff to terminate the work on the proposed district and
improvement; or F'
(B) Adopt a resolution directing staff to prepare a preliminary`
engineer's report.
x
t
FISCAL IMPACT
All costs of preparing the
preliminary engineer's report will be paid by
PacTrust and may be included in the LID if it is formed.
SUGGESTED ACTION
t
Adoption of the attached resolution directing that a Preliminary Engineer's
Report be prepared.
cw/9615D
t
i
I
April 24, 1989 John Sri _
Visl~~ cv~~a
1. I
HONORABLE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY STAFF:
MY NA14E IS JOHN SMETS AND MY ADDRESS IS
6830 S.W. BONITA ROAD, TIGARD
I DON'T WANT TO DELAY THE PROCEEDINGS MORE THAN JUST TO REPORT THAT
THE TWO WEEKS' DELAY SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN FRUITLESS.
OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE ADVICE FRCM THE COUNCIL AND AS A COURTESY
TO PACTRUST, I CUT AN EXPENSIVE BUSINESS TRIP TO AUSTRALIA SHORT BY
THREE DAYS WHEN MY OFFICE RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE PACTRUST REPRESgNT-
ATIVE. HOWEVER, THE OFFER WAS MUCH THE SAME "TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT"
ATTITUDE AS BEFORE. COMMUNICATION BY FAX MACHINE WAS NON-RESPONSIVE
FRCM PACTRUST AND MY CALL THE MORNING OF MY RETURN WAS NOT RETURNED
UNTIL 5:00 P.M. IN THE EVENING. RAYtrdivig, Ae -14--c a-n(f2 fqvPtlld .
AS PREVIOUSLY STATED, WE HAVE NO PLACE TO MOVE AND SINCE PACTRUST
IS NOT WILLING TO EXCHANGE THEIR PROPERTY ON OUR SOUTH LINE WE NEED
ALL OF OUR PROPERTY FOR OUR FUTURE EXPANSION. IF THE STUDY IS BEGUN
AND INCLUDES OUR PROPERTY A CLOUD WILL BE PLACED OVER BOTH THAT PROPERTY
AND OUR PLANS FOR EXPANSION. REMEMBER, PACTRUST HAS OTHER ACCESS
ALTERNATIVES, BUT I HAVE NO EXPANSION ALTERNATIVES AND WILL BE FORCED
TO MOVE EVENTUALLY. THEREFORE, THE SOLUTION IS NOT TO INCLUDE OUR
PROPERTY IN THE LID ENGINEERING STUDY BECAUSE IF THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZES
THE FUNDS FOR THE STUDY THE MOMENTUM WILL BE THE ACQUISITION OF OUR
PROPERTY AND THE LOSS OF OUR BUSINESS FROM THE CITY. PACTRUST MIGHT
WELL BE HAPPY TO PICK UP THE REMAINDER OF OUR PROPERTY LATER FOR A
SONG AND THE LID IS A PRELUDE TO THAT END. AS A SMALL BUSINESSMAN I
HAVE ONLY TWO ALTERNATIVES IN MY FIELD - EXPAND OR DIE. IT IS THE
VERY FUTURE OF OUR BUSINESS THAT CAUSES ME THIS GREAT CONCERN IN
THESE PROCEEDINGS.
April 24, 1989
Page 2 - Smets to Tigard Mayor & Council
MAY I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COUNCIL TO SUGGEST THAT THE STUDY CONSIDER
ACCESS ALTERNATIVES FOP. PACTRUST OTHER THAN ACROSS THE SMETS PROPERTY.
BY DOING SO YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH A STUDY AND LEAVE THE WAY OPEN TO
HEARING MY CONCERNS AGAIN.
THERE IS NO LOSS TO THE CITY BECAUSE PACTRUST IS GOING TO BUILD THEIR
PROJECT - OR SOMEONE ELSE WILL. IT CAN BE JUST AS SUCCESSFUL WITHOUT
THE SMETS PROPERTY - MAYBE MORE SO!
IN 1973 WE GAVE STREET FRONTAGE TO THE STATE FOR AN ACCESS ROAD TO
GEVURTZ, AT WHICH TIME WE WERE TOLD NO MORE PROPERTY WOULD BE TAKEN
FROM US. OUR PRESENT ROAD IS CONSTRUCTED TO STATE HIGHWAY SPECS AND
ALL OF OUR INGROUND UTILITIES ARE IN AND EXTENDED TO OUR PROPERTY.
i
THANKYOU AGAIN FOR YOUR COURTESY IN MAKING THIS EXTENSION. PACTRUST j
HAS EVERYTHING TO WIN AND NOTHING TO LOSE. WE HAVE EVERYTHING TO LOSE
AND NOTHING TO WIN..........
_r
~ 's
f
n E. Smets
i.
6
A
fr
f
C' c:`Zvv7 C; L 'mac t C
F=AdThusT 111 S.W. Fifth Ave., Suite 2950
Portland, Oregon 97204
503/224.6540
Pacific Realty Aaaociatea, L.P. Facsimile: 503/224.6709
April 20, 1989
a~
Mayor Jerry Edwards
Tigard City Council
City of Tigard
13125 S.W. Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
Dear Mayor Edwards:
We have received and reviewed both the written material provided by
John Smets at the City Council meetings of March 27, 1989 and April 10,
1989 and the comments by Mr. Smets recorded by the City at the April 10,
1989 meeting. We would like to take this opportunity to rebut in writing
some of the statements made by Mr. Smets and to provide information
bearing on Mr. Smets contentions.
Mr. Smets has stated in writing and in his oral testimony that PacTrust
has never made an offer to purchase the property needed to continue the
planned road through to Bonita Road. This comment is untrue. PacTrust
has offered to purchase all of the Smets property outright or to arrange a
tax free exchange of all of the Smets property (in which case Mr. Smets
would have the option of buying or building his own building, have
PacTrust build him a building, or move his existing building). We have
also expressed a willingness to discuss purchase of only the required
right-of-way. We have made it clear to Mr. Smets that our preference
would be to acquire in some fashion all of his land. To date, Mr. Smets
and PacTrust have not been able to agree on what is a reasonable purchase
price. We wish to state most emphatically that Mr. Smets was willing to
convey the required right-of-way to the Koll Company or to PacTrust until
it became apparent to him that his requested price was not viewed to be
realistic by the prospective purchaser. It has only been since
negotiations stalled and Mr. Smets became aware of the possibility of
condemnation that his plans for development of 54,000 square feet of
buildings on his approximately 2.29 acre property surfaced.
Mr. Smets has implied that he was unaware of who PacTrust was when the
subject of the development of what will become Pacific Corporate enter
was brought up and that he was not notified that PacTrust was to be
involved in the development of the land. He indicates that information
was hard to find with respect to PacTrust. As a matter of fact, PacTrust
was introduced to Mr. Smets by the Koll Company on September 27, 1988. At
that meeting Mr. Smets met Leon Hartvickson and Richard Buono of PacTrust
and learned who PacTrust is and what holdings PacTrust has in Tigard, as
well as throughout the Pacific Northwest. Mr. Smets received business
cards at that time and could have contacted PacTrust directly for
Mayor Jerry Edwards
Page 2
April 20, 1989
additional information and references had he had further questions. It
was at that meeting that Mr. Smets was informed that PacTrust was to be
involved in the development of the adjacent property which will become
Pacific Corporate Center.
Since that meeting, Mr. Hartvickson has met with Mr. Smets several times
and has spent considerable time on the phone with him discussing the
property, our plans, and the economics of adding a building of the type he
was considering (a single 16,000 square foot concrete tilt up high bay
crane way manufacturing building) on land with a value equivalent to that
offered by PacTrust, as well as with his expected value, which we perceive
to be inflated.
We find it curious that Mr. Smets, as owner of an international business
and a resident in this area of Tigard since 1973, was unaware of the
existence of PacTrust who has been his neighbor since 1973 and who has
developed in excess of 1.3 million square feet of buildings housing
hundreds of jobs in his immediate area.
Mr. Smets would like you to believe that he will place as much as
54,000 total square feet of buildings on his land. To accomplish this
development density (in excess of 54% of the land area covered by
buildings) he will need to provide truck loading and maneuvering areas
necessary to serve such a manufacturing complex, parking for the 70 people
he claims will be employed in this development, the required landscaping
to meet City of Tigard code, and such additional paved area as is
necessary to meet the maneuvering requirements of the project customers
and visitors, as well as emergency vehicles. We are professionals in the
area of planning and constructing industrial parks, and we must confess
that we have been unable to achieve densities in excess of 33% land
coverage for light manufacturing buildings such as those Mr. Smets states
that he plans for his site. We do not believe that financing for a
project with a site design such as that suggested by Mr. Smets will be
available institutionally or privately. We further feel that even if
financing could be found for such a project, the appearance of an
industrial development of the projected density would be detrimental to
the City and the neighborhood. No responsible developer known to us would
design a business park in the manner proposed by Mr. Smets.
Mr. Smets has stated that the street shown in the January 31, 1989,
Oregonian article was a misrepresentation of the facts by PacTrust.
PacTrust never represented that it controlled the portion of the proposed
right-of-way that is on the Smets land. To the contrary, PacTrust has,
from the beginning, been discussing with the staff at the City of Tigard,
the Tigard City Council, and Mr. Smets the fact that the Smets property is
key to the proper engineering of the proposed road. These discussions
began well before the publication of the January 31, 1989, Oregonian
article. Any comment to the contrary is at least misleading. The
F
Mayor Jerry Edwards
Page 3
April 20, 1989
v~
picture in the Oregonian article was simply a graphic representation of a
road alignment PacTrust proposes as a proper method of handling the
traffic that will be generated by all businesses in the area when the area
is developed fully and does not represent an engineering document. t
e
Mr. Smets' comment that the Smets property and the Gevurtz properties f:
appear to be landlocked by the proposed road is absurd. It was never
suggested or implied that the Smets property or the Gevurtz properties
would be landlocked. In fact the engineering work that has been submitted
to the City shows clearly that access for the Smets and Gevurtz properties
is enhanced by the proposed road. The drawing submitted with our
application for an LID to construct the proposed road showed that no
properties would be landlocked or denied access to the Bonita Road ,
improvements. That material is a matter of public record and has been
available to Mr. Smets.
We have been continuously willing to negotiate in good faith with
Mr. Smets. We have made numerous offers. We have researched and looked
for available land or buildings in specific areas that Mr. and Mrs. Smets
indicated an interest in investigating as potential relocation sites for
C their business. We have also discussed the possibility of PacTrust
structuring and providing interim financing for portions of an acquisition
price which might exceed the $550,000 offer we have made for his entire
property if he should wish to purchase a larger or more expensive;
property. These discussions have been conducted in conjunction with our
attempts and those of several people in the real estate brokerage business
who have contacted Mr. Smets to find a suitable alternative site for his
business.
Mr. Smets currently has a single building of approximately 8,000 square feet on his land. Until recently, Mr. Smets had only stated a requirement
for another 16,000 square foot building which he initially wanted the Koll.
Company, and subsequently PacTrust, to build for him along his south
property line. The 16,000 square foot building would have allowed the
80 foot right-of-way necessary for the proposed street. At no time during`
our conversations with Mr. Smets have his space needs been anywhere near.
the 54,000 square foot range he now professes to require.
Mr. Smets has indicated that it will damage him for the engineering study
to take place. As a matter of fact, such a study will stabilize the
situation and provide him with information he needs to have in order to
plan for his long term future. The study will provide the information
necessary to determine if a public purpose is served by connecting Bonita
Road and Upper Boones Ferry Road at this location now or in the future.
Mr. Smets needs to have this information. The City of Tigard needs this
information. PacTrust needs this information.
Mr. Smets is provided ample opportunity to address the issues that concern
him at the hearing for a Resolution Of Intent To Form An LID and later at
Mayor Jerry Edwards
Page 4
April 20, 1989
the hearing for an Order Forming the LID. His interests are protected by
the LID process as a matter of law. There is no need to provide further
delays at the expense of PacTrust in order to provide Mr. Smets further
insulation from a normal public process.
It might interest you to know that, subsequent to the April 10, 1989,
postponement, PacTrust has attempted to contact Mr. Smets to continue
negotiations with regard to his property. We were told that he will be
out of the country until April 23, 1989. We provided Mrs. Smets with our
phone number and our facsimile number in order that we might discuss this
issue with Mr. Smets before he returns. We have now heard that Mr. Smets
will return to Tigard on Friday, April 21, 1989. We will certainly be
prepared to continue discussions with him on his return. We see no
purpose for further delay of the LID process, however, as ample time for
discussions between us will be available during the LID process.
Representatives of PacTrust will be happy to meet with the City Council to
provide any additional information requested at the convenience of the
City Council.
Sincerely,
PACIFIC REALTY ASSOCIATES, L.P.
. Hartvickson
t resi`
d P. Bu o
ce resident
cc: Steve Pfeiffer
Peter Bechen
-J;
3Q.
4
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY - Local Contract Review Board
AGENDA OF: April 24, 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: April 3, 1989
ISSUE /AGENDA TITLE: Authorize 1 PREVIOUS ACTION:
Contract for Englaiaari nc Serv;n
on McDonald Ski% et Pro ect PREPARED BY: Randall R. Woolev
DEPT HEAD O ITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY:
POLICY ISSUE
Shall the Local Contract Review Board authorize signing of a contract for
engineering services on the McDonald Street project.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
A contract for engineering services has been negotiated for the McDonald Street
project. The contract covers design, construction inspection, and surveying
services. The consultant was selected from a pool of over 30 consultants who
responded to our request for statements of qualifications for engineering
services for street projects.
Attached is a contract with Westech Engineering, Inc. which uses the standard
City consultant contract form.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Authorize execution of the attached contract.
2. Require modification of the contract.
3. Have the work done by in-house staff as time permits.
FISCAL IMPACT
Payment is on an hourly basis for actual services needed with a specified upper
limit. The upper limit is within the amount budgeted for engineering services
on the project. All project costs will be paid by the Road Bond approved by
the voters in November.
The upper limit on the contract is $124,355.
SUGGESTED ACTION
That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, authorize the City
Administrator to sign the attached contract with Westech Engineering, Inc.
dj/MCDONALD.GA
BIB9F
MEMORANDUM'
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TO: Randy wo-ey; C-t
FROM: Gary Alfson
DATE: March 31, 1989
SUBJECT: McDonald Street Consultant Contract
I have reviewed the proposed submittal by Westech Engineering for the McDonald
Street improvements and have prepared the attached contract to retain their
engineering services.. Westech was selected from the Statement of
Qualifications received from various consultants for the Major Streets Bond
based on the qualification of the firm and their past experience in working
with the public on difficult road improvement: projects.
The proposal describes the scope of work required for roadway improvements
including vertical realignment to improve the safety of the roadway, storm
drainage, sanitary sewer, sidewalks, streetlights, and associated underground
utility improvements. The consultant will provide alternative designs, from
ultimate full width improvements to minimal widening to provide
pedestrian/bike lanes in order to evaluate the impact of cut and fill slopes
and to establish the ultimate centerline of McDonald Street. Also included is
the necessary surveying tasks for topographic details and construction staking.
The consultant will also be responsible for contract administration and
construction management. Since this project will require right-of-way
acquisitions from several properties, we need to begin the design of the
improvements this year in order to be able to construct the improvements in
1991.
The contract amount is based on a "Not to Exceed" amount of $124,355, which is
applicable for the scope of work required. Billing will be on an hourly basis;
therefore a lesser total amount could be realized, if the work to complete the
project is less than that estimated in the proposal.
dj/MCDONALD.GA
C
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
T0: Honorable Mayor & City Council April 17, 1989
FROM: Cathy Wheatley, Deputy Recorderc-6"2 r
r
SUBJECT: Contract for Engineering Services - !
McDonald Street Project
i
r
In lieu of sending copies of the entire contract, attached is a copy of the
Design and ConstrucLion Schedule as well as the table of hourly billing rates.
A copy of the contract will be available at the meeting on the 24th, but if
you desire to review the terms of the contract, please contact me and I'll
see that you get a copy.
i
i
t'cw
Attachments f
t
t
t
3
9
t
d
7
f
v
t{
f
DESIGN
26 27 28 29 30-
23 24 25
PROPOSED SCHEDULE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
WEEKS 51 12 i3 14
6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5
TASKS I'll t, pRELIlIN ENGINEERING PHASE
1, 0RGANI2E PROJECT
REVIEW DATA
2, COLLECT
3. FIELD SURVEY
4. GEOTECHHICAL SURVEY
PRELIMINARY PLANS
6, REVIEW
Q.RIGHT OF WAY / EASEMENTS
1. R1W $ EASEMENTS
2. R!W sli tip MP
3, R/W DESCRIPTIONS
La. FINAL DESIGN PHASE
FINAL CONCOxiRA CND RAE TS
FINALIZE
4, t El 2E SUBMITTALS `
CotysmuvrtoN
27 26 29 30
22 23 24 25 26
SCNEDUIE 1 1B 19 20 21
PROPOSED 6 17 WEEKS 14 15
3 4 5 6 7 $ q 10 11 12 13
1 2
TASKS
.DOCUMENT PREPARATION PHASE
ASSIST DURING BIDDING
y, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENt SERVICES
~ pR@C011STRUC110% MEETING
}
STRUCTSOBS SERVICES
COM
2.
WESTECH ENGINEERING, INC.
HOURLY BILLING RATES
1989 1991
Engineer VII $62.00/hr. $65.00/hr.
Engineer VI $58.00/hr. $61.00/hr.
Engineer V $50.00/hr. $52.50/hr.
Engineer IV $44.00/hr. $46.00/hr.
Engineer III $40.00/hr. $42.00/hr.
Engineer II $37.00/hr. $39.50/hr.
Designer II $39.00/hr. $41.00/hr.
Designer I $37.50/hr. $39.50/hr.
Technician IV $34.00/hr. $36.00/hr.
Technician III $31.00/hr. $32.50/hr.
Technician II $28.00/hr. $29.50/hr.
Technician I $26.00/hr. $27.50/hr.
Secretary $30.00/hr. $31.50/hr.
Word Processor $28.00/hr. $29.50/hr.
Clerk $22.00/hr. $23.00/hr.
Registered Surveyor $50.00/hr. $52.50/hr.
Two-Man Surveying Crew $66.00/hr. $69.50/hr.
Mileage $0.25/mile $0.26/mile
Direct Expense Cost i 10 Percent
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of April, 1989, by and
between the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to
as the "City," and Westech Engineering, Inc., 13500 SW 72nd Ave., Portland,
Oregon 97223, whose authorized representative is Steve Ward, P.E., and having
a principal being a registered engineer of the State of Oregon, hereinafter
referred to as the "Engineer."
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, the Mr_Dnnald Street improvements, as part of the Tigarl Major Streets
Traffic Safety Improvement Bond, have been proposed to improve McDonald Street
between Hall Boulevard and 98th Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the accomplishment of the work and services described in this
Agreement is necessary and essential to the public works improvement program
of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the Engineer to render professional
engineering services for the project described in this Agreement, and the
Engineer is willing to perform such services.
IN CONSIDERATION of the promises and covenants hereinafter contained, the
parties hereto hereby agree as follows:
1. Engineer's Scope of Services
The Engineer shall perform professional engineering services relevant
to the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth
herein, and as provided in Exhibit I, which is attached hereto and by
this reference made a part of this Agreement.
2. Changes in Scope
If changes occur either in the Engineer's Scope of Services or the
Description of the Project, a supplemental agreement shall be
negotiated at the request of either party. Absent such supplemental
agreement, each party shall only be bound to the terms of this
original agreement.
3. Engineer's Fee
A. Basic Fee.
1. As compensation for Basic Services as described in
Sections I through V of Exhibit I of this Agreement, and
for services required in the fulfillment of Paragraph 1,
the Engineer shall be paid on an hourly rate
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 1
based upon the "Schedule of Rates" in Exhibit 1 of this
agreement, which shall constitute full and complete payment
for said services and all expenditures which may be made
and expenses incurred, except as otherwise expressly
provided in this Agreement. The Basic Fee shall not exceed
the amount of one hundred twenty-four thousand, three
hundred fifty-five dollars ($124,355) without prior written
authorization.
2. The parties hereto do expressly agree that the Basic Fee is
based upon the Scope of Services to be provided by the
Engineer and is not necessarily related to the estimated
construction cost of the Project. In the event that the
actual construction cost differs from the estimated
construction cost, the Engineer's compensation will not be
adjusted unless the Scope of Services to be provided by the
ngineer Che-ages.
B. Payment Schedule for Basic Fee.
Payments shall be made upon receipt of billings based on the
work completed. Billings shall be submitted by the consultant
periodically, but not more frequently than monthly. Payment by
the City shall release the City from any further obligation for
payment to the engineer for service or services performed or
expenses incurred as of the date of the statement of services.
Payment shall not be considered acceptance or approval of any
work or waiver of any defects therein.
C. Payment for Special Services.
Only when directed in writing by the City, the Engineer shall
furnish or acquire for the City the professional and technical
services based on the hourly rate schedule as described in
Exhibit I of this contract for minor project additions and/or
alterations.
D. Certified Cost Records.
The Engineer shall furnish certified cost records for all
billings pertaining to other than lump sum fees to substantiate
all charges. For such purposes, the books of account of the
Engineer shall be subject to audit by the City. The Engineer
shall complete work and cost records for all billings on such
forms and in such manner as will be satisfactory to the City.
E. Contract Identification
The Engineer shall furnish to the City its employer i'
identification number, as designated by the Internal Revenue
Service, or Social Security Number, as the City deems applicable. x.
a
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 2
F. Gross Receipts Tax.
To the fees and other payments payable hereunder, the Engineer
may add any applicable gross receipts tax.
4. Ownership of Phis and Documcnts: Reenrds
A. The field notes, design notes, and original drawings of the
construction plans, as instruments of service, are and shall
remain, the property of the Engineer; however, the City shall be
furnished, at no additional cost, one set of reproducible mylars
of the original drawings of the work.
B. The City shall make copies, for the use of and without cost to
the Engineer, of all of its maps, records, laboratory tests, or
other data pertinent to the work to be performed by the Engineer
pursuant to this Agreement, and also make available any other
maps, records, or other materials available to the City from any
other public agency or body.
C. The Engineer shall furnish to the City, copies of all maps,
records, field notes, and soil tests which were developed in the
course of work for the City and for which compensation has been
received by the Engineer at no additional expense to the City
except as provided elsewhere in this Agreement.
5. Engineer Is Independent Contractor
A. Engineer's services shall be provided under the general
supervision of City's project director or his or her designee, but
Engineer shall be an independent contractor for all purposes and
shall be entitled to no compensation other than the compensation
provided for under paragraph 4 of this Agreement.
B. In the event Engineer is to perform the services described in
this Agreement without the assistance of others, Engineer hereby
agrees to file a joint declaration with City to the effect that
Engineer's services are those of an independent contractor, as
provided under Chapter 864 Oregon Laws 1979.
C. Engineer acknowledges that for all purposes related to this
agreement, Engineer is and shall be deemed to be an independent
contractor and not an employee of City, shall not be entitled to
benefits of any kind to which an employee of the City is
entitled and shall be solely responsible for all payments and
taxes required by law; and furthermore in the event that
Engineer is found by a court of law or an administrative agency
to be an employee of the City for any purpose, City shall be
entitled to offset compensation due to demand repayment of any
amounts paid to Engineer under the terms of the agreement, to
the full extent of any benefits or other renumeration Engineer
receives (from City or third party) as as result of said finding
and to the full extent of any payments that City is required to
make (to Engineer or to a third party) as a result of said
finding.
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 3
D. The undersigned Engineer hereby represents that no employee of
the City of Tigard, or any partnership or corporation in which a
City employee has an interest, has or will receive any
remuneration of any description from the Engineer, either
directly or indirectly, in connection with the letting or
performance of th..s contract, except as specifically declared in
writing.
6. Engineer's Employees Medical Payments
Engineer agrees to pay promptly as due, to any person, copartnership,
association or corporation furnishing medical, surgical, and hospital
care or other needed care and attention incident to sickness or
injury to the Engineer's employees, all sums which the Engineer
agreed to pay for such services and all monies and sums which the
t
Engineer collected or deducted from employee wages pursuant to any
law, contract or agreement for providing or paying for such service.
i
7. Early Termination
t
A. This Agreement may be terminated without cause prior to the
expiration of the agreed upon term by mutual written consent of
the parties and for the following reasons authorized by ORS
279.326:
1. If work under the Contract is suspended by an order of a
public agency for any reason considered to be in the public
interest other than by a labor dispute or by reason of any
third party judicial proceeding relating to the work other
than suit or action filed in regard to a labor dispute; and
2. If the circumstances or conditions are such that it is
impracticable within a reasonable time to proceed with a
substantial portion of the Contract.
B. Payment of Engineer shall be as provided by ORS 279.330 and
shall be prorated to and include the day of termination and
shall be in full satisfaction of all claims by Engineer against
City under this Agreement.
C. Termination under any provision of this paragraph shall not
affect any right, obligation or liability of Engineer or City
which accrued prior to such termination. `
f.G
r;
8. Cancellation for Cause."
City may cancel all or any part of this Contract if Engineer breaches'
any of the terms hereof or in the event of any of the following:
Insolvency of Engineer; voluntary or involuntary petition in
bankruptcy by or against Engineer; appointment of a receiver or
trustee for Engineer, or an assignment for benefit of creditors of
Engineer. Damages for breach shall be those allowed by Oregon law, Y
reasonable and necessary attorney's fees, and other costs of
litigation at trial and upon appeal.
i
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 4
r,
E;
t
i
t
9. Assignment
This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent
of the parties hereto, and if so assigned, shall extend to and be
binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
10. Nonwaiver.
The failure of the City to insist upon or enforce strict performance s.
by Engineer of any of the terms of this contract or to exercise any
rights hereunder shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment
to any extent of its right to assert or rely upon such terms or
rights on any future occasion.
11. Attorney's Fees k
r
s
In case suit or action is instituted to enforce the provisions of
F
this contract, the parties agree that the losing party shall pay to
the winning party such sum as the Court may adjudge reasonable
attorney's fees and court costs including attorney's fees and court
costs on appeal to appellate courts. }
i
12. Applicable Law
This contract will be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon. }
13. Conflict Between Terms
Should there be any conflict between the terms of this instrument and
the proposal of the Engineer, this instrument shall control and
nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance of the said terms
of said proposal conflicting herewith.
14. Indemnity
The Engineer agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
and its officers, agents, and employees from and against all suits,
actions, or claims of any character brought because of any injury or
damage received or sustained by any person, persons, or property
arising out of or resulting from any asserted negligent act, error,
or omission of the Engineer or its agents or employees.
15. Insurance
The Engineer agrees to procure and maintain at its expense until
final payment by the City for services covered by this Agreement,
insurance in the kinds and amounts hereinafter provided with
insurance companies authorized to do business in the State of Oregon,
covering all operations under this Agreement, whether performed by it
or its agents. Before commencing the work, the Engineer shall
furnish to the City a certificate or certificates in a form
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 5
satisfactory to the City, showing that it has complied with this
paragraph. All certificates shall provide that the policy shall not
be changed or cancelled until at least ten (10) days' prior written
notice shall have been given to the City. Kinds and amounts of
insurance required are as follows:
Workers' Compensation Insurance. Workers' compensation from the
State Accident Insurance Fund or from a responsible private carrier.
Private insurance shall provide the schedule of employee benefits
required by law.
Liability Insurance.. Professional liability insurance in an amount
not less than $500,000 per claim and aggregate and automobile
liability insurance in an amount not less than $250,000 for injuries
to any one person and $500,000 on account of any one accident and in
an amount of not less than $100,000 for property damage to protect
the Engineer and its agents from claims which may arise from services
rendered under this Agreement, whether such services are rendered by
the Engineer or by any of its agents or by anyone employed by either.
16. Multi-Phase Construction Contracts
Where multi-phase construction contracts are deemed to be in the best
interest of the City and are so ordered in writing by the City, then
a supplement to this Agreement shall be negotiated between the
Engineer and the City.
17. Complete Agreement
This contract and any referenced attachments constitute the complete
agreement between the City and Engineer and supercedes all prior
written or oral discussions or agreements.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this agreement to be executed by its
duly authorized undersigned officers, acting pursuant to action of the Local
Contract Review Board, duly passed at the regular meeting held on the 24
day of April , 19 89 , and the engineer has executed this agreement
on the date hereinabove first writs, n.
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
By
Date
ENGINEER
By
Date By
br/9507D
F
ONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 6
EXHIBIT I
Duty of Engineer
A. Basic Services:
The basic services shall be as outlined in the attached Exhibit I of the
proposal submitted April 11, 1989, entitled "McDonald Street Proposal."
br/9507D
IL
CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES - Page 7
EXHIBIT I
1. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE
1. Organize Project
a. Meet with staff to review critical aspects of the pro-
ject, design parameters, scope of work, project files,
existing technical data, project specifics, etc.
b. Review proposed design and construction schedule with
staff and obtain consensus by all parties.
C. Review project with Division of State Lands and Corps
of Engineers. Additional work for permits, if required,
will be special services.
d. Conduct day-to-day project management that includes the
supervision of work, communication with the City, and
the preparation of project invoices with monthly progress
reports.
2. Collect and Review Data
a. Research and obtain tax maps, right-of-way maps, property
survey maps, easements, and deeds.
b. Collect both public and private utility maps and as-built
maps.
C. Review existing traffic data.
d. Make a field reconnaissance and identify potential field
difficulties.
Page 1
YF
n
6
is
c
3. Field Survey
t
a. Review existing survey data, as-built drawings, etc.
b. Have public and private utility companies field locate
underground facilities.
C. Research existing right-of-way and establish existing'
roadway centerline. Set PK nails at 50-foot intervals
on existing right-of-way centerline.
6
4!.
d. Complete vertical and horizontal control survey locating
existing property corners. c`
e. Make topographic survey locating surface and subsurface
features, including, but not limited to, driveways, land-
scaping, utilities, ditches, fences, buildings, etc.
rt
Topographic survey to include cross sections at 50-foot
intervals and additional details at intersections. Con-
sultant intends to use the City's 1" = 20' ortho photo
maps to provide supplemental topographic information.
f. Pothole with utility forces any utilities critical to the
;r
design and establish elevations and alignments.
g. Plot topographic survey and prepare base maps of proposed
improvements. Set coordinates for reference points.
h. Compile 1" = 100' base map showing property corners,
reference points, property lines, and ownerships of af-
fected properties.
JPage 2
r
r:
i. All surveying to be completed using electronic total
s;
station with data collector (TOPCON PROPAC). All plot-
Ling of topography by computerized plotter. MAPTECH
software used for all computations and plotting.
f`
4. Geotechnical Survey
a. Review existing soils information, including but not
is
limited to:
o Published geologic maps and reports in the project i`
area.
o Previous soils reports in the vicinity.
o Records of existing construction.
o other data as available from City, County, or.State
files.
b. Make a field reconnaissance of the site and surrounding
areas, including but not limited to:
o Surface soil conditions.
o Areas of slop instability.
o Evidence of high groundwater.
o Condition of nearby structures/pavements.
o Other surface manifestations of soils or geologic
conditions.
C. Collect soil samples at a maximum three boring locations
assuming a total of 80 linear feet of drilling for labor-
atory testing.
Page 3
I
i.
d. Perform laboratory testing on collected samples to deter-
mine the following:
o Soil classification.
o Moisture compression testing to measure undrained
shear strength.
o Atterburg limits.
o Subgrade soil modules (R value).
e. Make recommendations for design, including but not lim-
ited to pavement. Section, cut and fill slopes, compac-
tion requirements, etc.
5. Preliminary Plans
a. Prepare preliminary street plans, profiles, and cross
section base maps. Drawings to be prepared at 1" = 20'
scale.
b. Establish horizontal and vertical roadway alignments for
major collector roadway. Design speed established at a
minimum 35 mph.
C. Prepare preliminary striping, signing, lighting, and
traffic control base maps. City forces to provide infor-
mation for design of signing and striping. No traffic
signal work is included in this scope of services.
d. Prepare plan and profile base maps for sanitary sewer
design.
Page 4
e. Determine cut and fill limits and complete earthwork
impact analysis for various design alternatives. No
retaining walls are included in this scope of work.
Retaining wall design if required is an extra service
to be negotiated separately.
f. Determine drainage requirements for various design alter-
natives. Analyze existing drainage basin and size cul-
vert crossing accordingly.
g. Prepare preliminary engineering construction plans show-
ing alternative designs. Drawings to be plan and profile
showing proposed alignment, grades, curvature, drainage,
slope catch points, etc. Plans will show how the alter-
native improvements will interface with adjacent private
property and improvements.
h. Prepare preliminary sanitary sewer design.
i. Prepare preliminary quantity takeoffs and costs estimates
for alternative designs.
j. Submit plans and all other applicable preliminary design
information to staff and any others for review.
k. Review preliminary designs with utility companies and .
coordinate any utility work required.
1. Conduct a meeting to review in detail alternative prelim- .
inary plans and discuss each feature, differing ideas,
cost, etc. Make decisions regarding design features,
street location, grades, etc.
Page 5
Fm"m
i
M. Attend no less than four public meetings for presentation
and discussion of the alternative designs. Meet indivi-
dually with seriously affected property owners. Meetings
to be held at various times in the design process to }
obtain critical input and concerns of all parties.
n. Prepare video tape and photographic record of project's j
preconstruction features.
o. An EIS is not included in this scope of work. Environ-
mental work if required to be special services. l
II. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENT ACQUISITIONS
1. Establish Right-of-Way
a. Determine right-of-way, slope easement, utility easement
requirements, and setbacks to existing structures.
b. Prepare detail street map showing limits of right-of-
way acquisition including slope and utility easements.
Present to the City four copies and a mylar reproducible
of right-of-way street map with legal descriptions.
C. Prepare final right-of-way acquisition maps and legal
descriptions suitable for right-of-way acquisition.
III. FINAL DESIGN PHASE
1. Final Construction Drawings
a. Finalize street design incorporating those items identi-
fied in the review of the preliminary plans.
b. Prepare a final traffic signing and striping plan under
the City's directions.
Page 6
i
i
C. Prepare final street lighting plan.
d. Prepare final sanitary sewer plan and profile.
e. Prepare final power trenching plan for power, telephone, i
and. TV.
f. Complete traffic control plan and detail traffic control
measures. t
g. Complete construction detail sheets.
h. All documents to be prepared in accordance with City of
Tigard specifications and requirements.
t
2. Finalize Contract Documents
a. Prepare special provisions based on City of Tigard Stan-
dard Construction specifications as required to provide
the description and method of payment for all items of
work and to clarify construction details.
b. Prepare final quantity takeoff and bid tabulations and
cost estimate.
C. Prepare final specifications and Contract Documents for
review and approval.
3. Final Submittals
a. Submit final plans, specifications, and cost estimates
for review and approval. Permits and fees are not in-
cluded in this scope of work.
b. Review final plans with affected utility companies and
coordinate utility work.
Page 7
C. Make final revisions as appropriate through City and
approving agency reviews.
d. Present the City with four copies of construction draw-
ings, special provisions, Contract documents, itemized
cost estimates, survey notes, quantity takeoffs, and
design computations.
IV. DOCUMENT PREPARATION PHASE
1. Assist During Bidding
a. Print 30 sets of plans and Contract Documents for distri-
bution by City. City to maintain planholder list.
b. Assist City in advertising for bids.
C. Answer bidder's questions and assist in preparation of
any addendums as required.
d. Attend bid opening and assist in analyzing bid results
with City staff.
e. Assist City in making recommendation on contract award
and in award of contract.
V. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
1. Preconstruction Meeting
a. Notify all interested parties of preconstruction meeting.
b. Attend preconstruction meeting to answer contractor ques-
tions regarding plans and specifications. Review con-
tractor's schedule.
Page 8
2. Construction Services
a. Provide construction staking which would include clearing
limits, slope staking, curb stakes,.. centerline blue tops,
ton of rock, storm sewer power trenching; sanitarj cgpier
facilities, and signing striping. Replace a maximum of
30 property pins which are demolished by construction
activities.
b. Provide up to a full-=time inspector for an estimated
three-month construction period (i.e., 600 hours) to
inspect for defects and deficiencies in the work of the
contractor and keep the City informed of the project's
progress. The inspector will prepare daily construction
progress and inspection reports which will be recorded
on a standard summary sheet.
C. Perform material sampling and testing in accordance with
City of Tigard, AASHTO, and ASTM standard specifications
to ensure adequate quality control of the subgrade, engi-
neered fills, base rock, asphalt concrete, Portland ce-
ment concrete, etc. Testing would be limited to the
following:
o Trench backfill compaction - 10
o Roadway and embankment subgrade compaction - 15
o Base aggregate compaction - 15
o Base aggregate sieve analysis - 2
o Asphalt compaction - 4
o Asphalt content and gradation - 2
o Concrete cylinder tests - 4 sets
Page 9
d. Provide construction management services which would
include but not be limited to:
o Review and preparation of contract change orders.
o Rev'LeW and approval of rout OL ro^Y°°C Payment s for
r
work completed.
o Preparation of monthly progress reports.
o Review and approval of shop drawings, catalog cut j
sheets and material certifications.
o Interpretation of plans and specifications to ensure t
the successful completion of the project.
e. Finalize project, including but not limited to:
o Conduct a final inspection of the construction site
I
and prepare a list of items to be corrected. f
o Prepare final quantities and pay estimates, and
appropriate project close-out documentation.
o Complete final as-built survey and set centerline
monuments at Hall Boulevard and 98th Avenue.
o Prepare and turn over to the City final reproducible
as-built drawings.
Page 10
f
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
WESTECH ENGINEERING FUJITANI HILTS EXPENSES
TASKS E VII E III DESIGNER I SEC P.L.S. SURVEY CREW ENG. TECH. SEC.
I. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
1. ORGANIZE PROJECT
a. MEET WITH STAFF 2 2
b. REVIEW SCHEDULE 2
c. D.S.L. & C.O.E. PERMITS 2 2
d. PROJECT MANAGEMENT 24 12
2. COLLECT d REVIEW DATA
a. OBTAIN ACCESSOR MAPS ETC. 2 4 8
b. OBTAIN AS-BUILTS 2. 4
c. REVIEW! EXISTING TRAFFIC DATA 2
d. FIELD RECONNAISSANCE 2 4 4 4
3. FIELD SURVEY
a. REVIEW EXISTING SURVEY DATA 2 4
b. UTILITIES TO LOCATE FACILITIES 2 4
c. RESEARCH R/W &.ESTABLISH 16 32
CENTERLINE
d. VERTICAL & HORIZONTAL CONTROL 2 4 16 32
a. COMPLETE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 2 4 16 80
f. POTHOLE UTILITIES 4 4
PLOT TOPOGRAPHY & PREPARE 4 40 8
BASE HAPS
It. PREPARE R/W MAP 2 12 8
4. GEOTECHHICAL SURVEY.
a. REVIEW EXISTING SOILS DATA 2
b. FIELD RECONNAISSANCE 2 4
e. COLLECT SAMPLES 2 12 S2,000
d. LABRA'IORY TESTING 4 16
e. FINAL REPORT 2 16 8 4
5. PRELIMINARY PLANS
a. PRELIMINARY PLANS PROFILES 2 4 24
AND CROSS SECTIONS
b. HORIZONTAL & VERTICAL ALIGNMENT 8 32 40
c. STRIPING & TRAFFIC CONTROL 2 12
d. SEWER BASE MAPS 4 12
e. CUT/FILL SLOPE LIMITS 4 12 24
f. DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS 4 12 4
. PRELIMINARY STREET DESIGN 8 24 40
h. PRELIMINARY SEWER DESIGN 4 12 24
1. QUANTITY TAKE OFF & COST ESTIMATE 2 4 8 4
. SUBMIT PLANS FOR REVIEW 2 $200
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
i '
WESTECH ENGINEERING FUJITANI HILTS EXPENSES
TASKS E VII E III DESIGNER I SEC P.L.S. SURVEY CREW ENG. TECH. SEC.
k. UTILITY COMPANY REVIEW 4
I. CITY REVIEW 4
m. ATTEND 4 PUBLIC MEETINGS 12 12
n. PREPARE VIDEO b PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD 4 $100
TOTAL PHASE 1. 98 160 252 16 76 148 26 40 4
62 40 37.50 30 50 66 60 36 28
$41,386 $60076 $6,400 $9,450 5480 $3,800 $99768 S1 560 &1#440 $112 $2,300
11. RIGHT OF WAY / EASEMENT AQUISITION
1. ESTABLISH RIGHT OF WAY
a. R/W SLOPE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS 2 8
b. R/W STRIP MAP 2 2 8
c. R/W DESCRIPTIONS 2 30 16 60 5100
TOTAL PHASE 11. 6 10 38 16 60 0 0 0. 0
62 '40 37.50 30 50
$5,777 $372 $400 S-114-35 $480 $3,000 S10Q
111. FINAL DESIGN PHASE
1. FINAL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS
a. COMPLETE FINAL STREET PLANS 16 40 80
b. COMPLETE SIGNING 6 STRIPING 4 16
c. FINAL STREET LIGHTING 4 8 .8
d. FINAL-SEWER PLANS 4 16 24
e. POWER TRENCHING PLANS 4 8 8
f. COMPLETE TRAFFIC CONTROL 4 8 12
g. DETAILS 2 8 16
2. FINAL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
a. PREPARE SPECIAL PROVISIONS 4 24 12
b..QUANTITY TAKE OFF & BID TABS 4 8 24 4
c. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 2 4 4 4
3. FINAL SUBMITTALS
a. SUBMIT FINAL PLANS 2 5200
b. UTILITY COMPANY REVIEW 4
c. PLAN REVISIONS # 4 8 16 4
d. SUBMIT 4 SETS 2
TOTAL PHASE Ili. . 56 136 208 24 0 0 0 0 0
62 40 37.50 30
_ S17,632 S3 472 $5#440 $7,800 $T20 $200
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
WESTECH ENGINEERING FUJITANI HILTS EXPENSES
TASKS E VII E III DESIGNER I SEC P.L.S. SURVEY CREW ENG. TECH. SEC.
IV. DOCUMENT PREPARATION PHASE
1. ASSIT DURING BIDDING
a. PRINT 30 SETS 4 $1,500
b. ASSIST IN ADVERTISING 2
c. ISSUE ADDENDUMS 4 24 4
d. ATTEND BID OPENING 2 2
e. RECOMMEND AWARD 2
TOTAL PHASE IV. 10 24 8 2 0 0 0 0 0
65 42 39 31
$3,532 $650 $1,008 $312 $62 S1,500
V. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
1. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING
a. NOTIFY ALL PARTIES 4
b. ATTEND MEETING 4 4
2. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
a. SURVEYING 4 40 240
b. INSPECTION 4 600 24 $200
c. MATERIALS TESTING 4 4 60 4 S1,000
d. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 16 80 16 24 $200
e. PROJECT FINAL OUT 4 8 8 16
TOTAL PHASE V. 36 96 624 48 40 256 4 60 4
65 42 39 31 53 69 63 38 29
S56,028 S-2-,3-4-0- 54,032 $24-1-33-6- $1,488 $2,120 S17,664 $252 $2,280 S'116 S1 400
$124,355
DESIGN
PROPOSED SCHEDULE
WEEKS
TASKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
1. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING PHASE
1. ORGANIZE PROJECT
2. COLLECT & REVIEW DATA
3. FIELD SURVEY
4. GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY
5. PRELIMINARY PLANS
6. REVIEW
II.RIGHT OF WAY / EASEMENTS
1. R/W & EASEMENTS NW4
2. R/W STRIP MAP
3. R/W DESCRIPTIONS
I=. FINAL DESIGN PHASE
1. FINAL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS 18
2. FINALIZE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS ■
3. REVIEW ■
4. FINALIZE SUBMITTALS
CONSTRUCTION
PROPOSED SCHEDULE
WEEKS
TASKS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2:4 25 26 27 28 29 30
17.D000MENT PREPARATION PHASE
1. ASSIST DURING BIDDING
Y . CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES
1. PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING
2. CONSTRUCTIONS SERVICES
WESTECH ENGINEERING, INC.
HOURLY BILLING RATES
1989 1991
® Enginecr VII $62.00/hr. $65.00/hr.
Engineer VI $58.00/hr. $61.00/hr.
Engineer V $50.00/hr. $52.50/hr.
Engineer IV $44.00/hr. $46.00/hr.
Engineer III $40.00/hr. $42.00/hr.
Engineer II $37.00/hr. $39.50/hr.
Designer II $39.00/hr. $41.00/hr.
Designer I $37.50/hr. $39.50/hr.
Technician IV $34.00/hr. $36.00/hr.
Technician III $31.00/hr. $32.50/hr.
Technician II $28.00/hr. $29.50/hr.
Technician I $26.00/hr. $27.50/hr.
Secretary $30.00/hr. $31.50/hr.
Word Processor $28.00/hr. $29.50/hr.
Clerk $22.00/hr. $23.00/hr. E
Registered Surveyor $50.00/hr. $52.50/hr.
Two-Man Surveying Crew $66.00/hr. $69_.50/hr.
Mileage $0.25/mile $0.26/mile
Direct Expense Cost + 10 Percent
I
l
i
i
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY (LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD)
AGENDA OF: 4-24-89 DATE SUBMITTED: April 10, 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorizatioft il PREVIOUS ACTION:
to request bids for current 77,1,1 tlzj~,
CIP and Street Bond ro'ects PREPARED BY: RANDALL R. WOOLEY 71f16'w
DEPT HEAD OK-4h,-"CITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY:
Y
POLICY ISSUE
Shall the City Engineer be authorized to advertise for bids for various capital
improvement projects?
INFORMATION SUMMARY
City purchasing rules require that the Local Contract Review Board (LCRB)
authorize advertisement for bids for projects in excess of $15,000. Design is
nearly complete on several currently-funded projects. During the next month,
staff will be working with adjoining property owners to resolve any remaining
design problems and to obtain necessary right-of-way and easements. In order
to meet this year's construction schedule, it is important to advertise for
bids as soon as design and right-of-way acquisition is completed. Therefore,
the City Engineer requests authority to bid on the following projects:
Street Bond proiects
o 121st Avenue (Springwood to Burlheights)
o Locust Street (Hall to 93rd)
o Walnut Street (Pacific Hwy. to 106th)
Street CIP proiects
o North Dakota Street shoulder improvements
(Fanno Creek to 114th)
o Pfaffle Street (78th to Hall)
Sanitary Sewer Improvements
o Industrial Area Railroad Crossing
After bids are received, each project will again be brought before the LCRB for
review prior to construction contract award, as required by the purchasing
rules.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Authorize the City Engineer to advertise for bids as soon as all right-of-
way and easements are acquired.
2. Withhold approval to advertise.
FISCAL IMPACT
Projects are funded through the 1988-89 Capital Improvements budget and the
Stroct Bond.
SUGGESTED ACTION
That the LCRB, by motion, authorize the City Engineer to advertise for bids on
the projects listed above.
dj/SS-CIP.RW
C•
I~
I
f.~
Ll. q
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: April 24, 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: April 4, 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Resolution PREVIOUS ACTION: Compliance Agreement
accepting SW N.*ve Street public i accepted on September 8, 1986
improvements 1 ! PREPARED BY: Engineering Division
DEPT HEAD OK ITY ADMIN OK/ REQUESTED BY: Community Development
OLICY~ ISSUE
INFORMATION SUMMARY
1. The SW Naeve Street improvement is located east of SW Pacific Highway,
fronting "The Fountains" development at Summerfield subdivision. See the
attached location map.
2. All public improvements have now been satisfactorily completed and have
withstood the required one year maintenance guarantee period.
3. The Engineering Division certifies that the improvement is now acceptable
and that all requirements have been met.
4. Therefore, it is recommended that (in accordance with the terms of the
project agreement) the City Council accept the public improvements,
namely - street and streetlighting facilities for City operation and
maintenance responsibility, and further, that the Council authorize
release of the assurance bond.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None; the (City-Developer) project agreement specified City Council acceptance
upon satisfactory completion of all City requirements.
FISCAL IMPACT
1. City assumption of responsibility for operation and maintenance of the
public street and streetlight improvements specified above.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Pass the Resolution titled: "A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS KNOWN
AS SW NAEVE STREET PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS."
ke/9516D
L1,5
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
Y COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: April 24. 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: April. 7. 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Concurrence (PREVIOUS ACTION:
With ODOT Recommendation Reaardi
Scholls mighwaA& Hurra -F at-lao v" ricr~rlaecc,D nY: X"111Ltdll R. Wooiey
DEPT HEAD O CITY-ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY:
P LICY ISSUE
City concurrence with the recommendation of the Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) regarding the Scholls Highway (Murray Blvd. to Fanno
Creek) Project.
INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has completed the public hearing
process for the proposed improvements to Scholls Ferry Road between Murray
Blvd. and Fanno Creek. The ODOT recommendation is summarized on Page i of the
attached Draft Hearing Study Report. The report contains additional details of
the proposed improvements and of the hearing process.
In general, the project consists of widening Scholls Ferry Road to provide two
through lanes in each direction plus a center turn lane. The project also
includes construction of bike lanes, sidewalks, and other associated
improvements needed to provide adequate traffic capacity and to improve traffic
+ safety. The project also includes improvements to the traffic signal system,
including installation of new signals at 135th, 130th, and Conestoga.
Construction is tentatively scheduled to begin in 1990.
ODOT has requested that the cities concur in the project recommendation.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Adopt the attached resolution concurring in the ODOT recommendation.
2. Suggest amendments to the project.
3. Withhold approval.
FISCAL IMPACT
The project is currently funded through the State Modernization Program, the
Washington County MSTIP Program, and a small amount of TriMet funding for bus
pullouts. The current funding appears to be adequate to construct the project
from Fanno Creek to approximately 130th Avenue. Additional state funds are
being sought for completion of the project. If additional funding can be
found, the total project will be bid next year. If not, the project will be
constructed in phases.
SUGGESTED ACTION
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution concurring in the
ODOT recommendation.
br/ODOT
SCROLLS AWAY
Murray Boulevaord - F®nuo Creel
~~rr
HEAR, ING ,
iu~ ~,prr
y • M.. I• III
STUDY
W.M.: Mr.•
1
REPORT
~t e
t
t~h
`a%" y~EFr 1
ZZ;.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HIGHWAY DIVISION
HEARING STUDY REPORT
MURRAY BOULEVARD - FANNO CREEK
SCROLLS HIGHWAY
CITY OF BEAVERTON
CITY OF TIGARD
WASHINGTON COUNTY
rf
f
MARCH 1989
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNIT
f MARK BEESON
f
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RECOMMENDATION i
VICINITY MAP. ii
INTRODUCTION 1
PURPOSE OF PROJECT 1
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3
PROJECT COST AND FUNDING 4
PRE-HEARING ACTIVITY 4
PUBLIC HEARING...........
PUBLIC TESTIMONY 6
SENSITIVE ISSUES 6
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 7
FACTS LEADING TO RECOMMENDATION 7
HEARING HANDOUT AND HEARING MAP
COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
_ Appendices
Hearing Transcript and Written Testimony A
HEARING STUDY REPORT
MURRAY BLVD. - FANNO CREEK
SCHOLLS Highway
Recommendation
The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) recommends the build
alternative be advanced to construction.
This alternative would provide much needed improvements to Scholls
Highway by continuing four travel lanes (two in each direction) from
Nimbus west to Murray Boulevard. While increasing capacity and
enhancing safety, the facility is also designed to promote smooth,
progressive flow of traffic with a continuous left-turn median,
intertied traffic signal system, and right-turn lanes at signalized
intersections.
The facts leading to this recommendation are discussed in more detail
on page 7.
i
, S was .~'•-!~r„t.
_ ' $:PaV rtO~r ~ • ~t~,.+a+R ~ , ~ra.~s r• F~= 1
:.r= s•} iz "~`'ro » 9ma•.. J -F ~ wa..,• ,~.r+~ •AP r ' M o ~u ~ s
Y' ~ 1...~n-+~`• T * r y DE NN~v a• S ~'p{~ . r~ 1 .rt •
ri': ~ 'Kii~, ~ 5 Y i1 ; cK . ~p••eae at 7 a ' ~ 3 ~•'Sj7~,a~18 " ` t s 'i'3:
~ aLr~ ~ ~i=•~s, Y wr a.s~~ oa we
_.~Yaaa+.E +1
.✓t err. F ia+.s.
„rr;.w+•• .-'~"'a "a 4 L `s w a ; -xv",.s` s'.
~ ~ ~ ~ ti aaa+ Tina FE
..L v H L ' r. rj'1--~~~1 off' y c ail.'4 '°nAt+ O TAY hors
....ate-t a -at~'_'_. r y,a, ? ~~.u:w• ~f; r i': r ~.}•w,w s• N •rcw' p3
~~~'t,] •Il..~ ~•n T=' ~ ~ e Y •~.yayr+ Yyt sat W C
-,?+c' ' - s el a• i,J ~•~L~LEss....,~~~• 3-l i e. u } .,wa
t ••bjrr. 4o:. C. r~ J ~Ra`..Rc~,'t+✓'a' „ .,W a '
u . r $ t 'b ~1 ♦ra. -
•`y.., oyD MAN .•aey. °+.S ~ mow' s~ s ~ ~a ~ , o `i1i ar.
c •~,a~a.. .r. ~ , `a r• rW` ~ L'"• ST, .1 Z p ` ccs'
~ R r a „'r" & yu~ Y+a+'to ~f..- e.•s~ . ?~~s, m A ~ n , ~ ~ a ..,,r'• „
Y 9
F+ Z~a f e d . { t. s+a~ _ FLE S T ~ I v ad°
I_ Donn,.. r ~ ~ 1s'~ y • ~ PfA iq w•'•r~~,r tl.:jo.. ~ S
ova 7
r,
1 QQ NtJ ~ ae .4 S.:,ft~ OaL ! yy,.
T, gar '
k. aaa `fTP 'sa s ` m S ~ ~.a^'a-`'
6
ALD
is a 9 ,p,n
.eta rn..
BUI► Mtn a4
t.~jiea ~ 1
wa
HEARING STUDY REPORT.
MURRAY BLVD. - FANNO CREEK
SCHOLLS HIGHWAY
u,
Introduction
The Hearing Study Report summarizes events leading up to and input
at the public hearing held on the proposed design for this project.
The report summarizes the public involvement in the development of
designs, describes the designs, discusses major issues involved in
the project, discusses the facts that lead MOT to recommend the project
be advanced to construction, and responds to hearing testimony, ques-
tions, and comments that are not consistent with the proposed design.
Purpose of Project
The purpose of this project is to improve capacity and safety of the
highway to accommodate projected increases in traffic to the year
2010. This will provide about a 20-year planning horizon when construc-
tion is completed. The 20-year buildout of this area in accordance
with Washington County's adopted comprehensive plan will necessitate
Scholls Highway be improved to five lanes from the current two and
three lanes.
Currently, traffic on this highway averages 17,000 vehicles per day.
Traffic projections for the year 2010 are estimated to average 25,000
per day. Traffic volumes are expected to be substantially greater
approaching Highway 217 (20,000 VPD at project limits west, 35,000
to 40,000 VPD at project limits east).
Project Development and Community Involvement
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) made up of representatives from
F the various jurisdictions was forned in February 1987, and initial
development of the design was begun. ODOT, assisted by local jurisdic-
F tions, met with elected officials, iocai nciyiiuvr^".^.i'rn.5
nesses to present the design concept and to receive input on the proj-
ect.
Public comment and input was also sought at a general public meeting
F held in September 1987. About 90 people attended the meeting at which
ODOT, Washington County, City of Beaverton and City of Tigard staffs
were available to respond to questions and concerns. Points of concern
raised at this and previous public meetings included:
- Safety concerns at the intersection of Scholls Highway and
Springwood Drive for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
A traffic signal at this location was suggested and supported
by a number of users and residents.
- Noise concerns due to existing and additional traffic following
the improvements. Concern was expressed and suggestions made
regarding location, effectiveness, and style of noise mitigation.
- Lack of bicycle/pedestrian continuity at Fanno Creek, both-
east-west, and north-south along the park due to the existing
Fanno Creek Bridge.
- Safety concerns about the intersection of Scholls Highway and
121st due to steep grades and lane configuration approaching
from the north.
- Access concerns and inconvenience during construction.
- 2-
Design features were incorporated into preliminary plans in response
to most of the concerns expressed. Additional traffic analysis was
conducted at Springwood Drive and as a result, a traffic signal was
not incorporated into the design. Interested parties were informed
of these additional design features prior to preparing the Environmental
Assessment.
ODOT prepared preliminary design plans for a single build alternative
and an Environmental Assessment which evaluated the build and no-build
alternatives.
Project Description
No-Build Alternative - If a no-build alternative were selected, no
changes would be made to the existing highway. Normal maintenance
and/or preservation activities would continue.
Build Alternative - The build alternative would provide for four 12-foot
travel lanes (two in each direction), a continuous 14-foot left-turn
median, and 14-foot right-turn lanes at major signalized intersections.
New or modified traffic signals would be provided at the intersections
of 135th, 130th, 125th (North Dakota), 121st, and Conestoga Drive.
These signals, along with the recently-installed signal at Murray
Boulevard, would be intertied to operate as a system. Six-foot shoul-
der/bike lanes, curbs and six-foot sidewalks throughout the 1.7-mile
project length would improve safety for both pedestrian and bicyclists.
A five-foot landscape/utility strip is proposed behind the sidewalk.
Extensive noise mitigation is also proposed.
The Fanno Creek Bridge would be raised and widened to provide north-
south combination bicycle and pedestrian path under the bridge. Provi-
sions for pedestrian sidewalks and bike lanes would be included on
the widened structure. This design feature provides mitigation for
the public land acquisition.
1
Approximately 35 parcels would be affected. One business and one
residence would be displaced.
-3-
Project Cost and Funding
A combined construction right-of-way and preliminary engineering cost
for this project is estimated at $7.5 million.
Currently, this project is cooperatively funded through the State
Modernization Program (State. Mod.) and the Washington County Major }
Streets Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP). Tri-Met has also
contributed $100,000 to the project for bus shelters and pullouts
which have been incorporated into the design. Combined, the State !
Mod., MSTIP, Tri-Met, and other State funds make up a total of $3.79
million available for the project:
State Mod. $1.56 million
MSTIP $1.77 million
Tri-Met $0.10 million
State Funds $0.36 million
$3.79 million
Pre-Nearing Activity
The Environmental Assessment was approved for public review December
2, 1988. In addition to the normal government agency review, it was
distributed to TAC members, local libraries, and elected officials.
Letters were sent to interested parties (approximately 200 people
including those who attended meetings during project development and
adjoining property owners), elected officials, and neighborhood leaders
publicizing the availability of the Environmental Assessment, the
upcoming public information meeting and formal public design hearing.
Two paid legal notices were placed in the Oregonian, the Times, and
the Regal Courier as well as an area-wide postal customer mailing
(6700) also advertising the availability of the environmental document,
the public meeting, and the hearing.
elf
41
-4-
"l0
A general public information meeting was held January- 12, 1989 one
week prior to the formal public hearing for the purpose of presenting
and answering questions about the built alternative and the Environ-
mental Assessment. Design plans were displayed and environmental
documents were made available. The meeting was jointly hosted by
® ® the cities of Beaverton and Tigard, ::ushington County and ODOT. ODOT
and local staff were on hand to respond to questions both prior to,
during, and following the meeting. About 45 people attended.
Public Hearing
A public hearing was held on January 19, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. in the
auditorium of the PGE building (14655 S.W. Old Scholls Ferry Road,
Beaverton, Oregon). The hearing was chaired by Don Adams, Region 1
Engineer for NOT and Jerry Parmenter, MSTIP Program Manager for Wash-
ington County.
Thirty-three people attended the hearing with 28 names registered
on hearing attendance cards. The formal hearing lasted approximately i
one and one-half hours. Detailed engineering drawings were displayed '
with ODOT, County, and City staff on hand to answer questions one
hour prior to, during, and following the public hearing. The following
is a list of materials on display and/or available prior to and during
the hearing:
f
- Large-scale colored hearing map of build alternative.
- Colored aerial mosaic of the existing project site.
- Engineering drawings including profiles and typical sections.
- Project photography. i
- Copies of the Environmental Assessment.
- Two right-of-way pamphlets: 1) ."Moving Because of the Highway
or Public Projects", and 2) "Acquiring Land for Highway and
Public Projects".
Also, small-scale, colored hearing maps enclosed in a hearing handout
were distributed to all attendees.
-5-
Public Testimony
Eleven people gave oral testimony. Comments were made on five hearing
attendance cards. One piece of written testimony was received following
the hearing.
~ Strong support was registered for the project. No testimony in opposi-
tion to the improvements was received.
Sensitive Issues
Phasing - Mixed testimony was received regarding potential phasing
should a funding shortfall still exist at the time of construction.
While many supported the TAC recommendation of starting on the west
side of Fanno Creek and working westerly, some felt that working east
from the new improvements at Murray would stretch funds further.
All agreed, however, that available funds should be spent in a manner
that would resolve the most severe traffic problems. E
Springwood Drive - Citing safety concerns, mixed testimony was received
regarding the TAC's recommendation to not signalize Springwood Drive
on the basis of promoting smooth, progressive flow of Scholls traffic.
A traffic signal at this location was determined not a responsible
installation by the TAC. Extensive reevaluation of traffic operations
at this location had been conducted prior to the hearing.
Fanno Creek Bridge - Raising the Fanno Creek Bridge providing a safe
f.
pedestrian under crossing in the first phase of construction was strong-
ly supported, differing from the TAC recommendation.
6
I
Visual Screening of Soundwall The visual appearance of soundwalls
from the highway has consistently been a concern of citizens throughout
project development and at the hearing. A uniform architectural facing
treatment and vegetative screening was strongly supported for aesthetics
and to deter graffiti artists.
_ Design Considerations
In the final design of the build alternative, consideration will be
given to special sound wall treatment, vegetative screening, and the
most cost effective wall type.
Facts Leading to Recommendation
The recommendation that the build alternative be advanced to construc-
tion is supported by the following facts:
- This project is consistent with Washington County's adopted
comprehensive plan.
- The facility is already over capacity and experiences extreme
delays during peak periods.
- This improvement would enhance safety for the motorists, pedes-
trians, and bicyclists while increasing capacity of the facility.
- This project received a major funding commitment through the
MSTIP program a three-year serf-Al levy approved by voters in
May 1986.
- Strong public support for this project has been demonstrated
throughout project development and at the public hearing.
IF AC-r SNEER
Transportation
t on Qepartment of
1 -me Greg
data
RTATtON
ini-ice' Su MAJOR RSTS -ttAtMr P~pGHAM
# IMPo
asr~ng4n
County
T
. NC CREEK
FpN
~GHWpIf
SCV OLLS N
r-
INTRODUCTION
A highway improvement is currently being developed along Scholls/Old - 12
Scholls Ferry Road from Murray Boulevard to Fanno Creek. This improve-
ment is a cooperatively-funded project between the State of Oregon r .
and Washington: County which will continue the existing five-lane section
(four travel lanes plus a continuous left-turn median) from Highway
217 to Nimbus with an intertied signal system westerly along Scholls -
Highway to 135th, and continuing on Old Scholls Ferry Road' to Murray
Boulevard. Upon completion of this section, agreement has been made
to switch jurisdiction of Scholls and Old Scholls Highway to Washington
County and the State, respectively.
TRAFFIC
Currently, traffic on this highway averages 17,000 vehicles per day.
Traffic projections for the year 2010 are estimated to average 25,000
vehicles per day. Traffic volumes are expected to be substantially
greater approaching Highway 217 (20,000 VPD at project limits west,
35,000 to 40,000 VPD at project limits east).
PROJECT PURPOSE
The purpose of this project is to improve the capacity and safety
of the highway to accommodate projected increases in traffic to the
year 2010. This will provide about a 20-year planning horizon when
construction is completed. The 20-year buildout of this area in accor-
dance with Washington County's adopted comprehensive plan will necessi-
tate that Scholls be improved to five lanes from the current two-three
lanes.
VICINITY MAP
U
NORTH 3 g
o, E
~ O Z
O O
C g e V
0
Beaverton F
~ LL
O L.
i
1
,1 G
r'
I C t
5`co\\~ Y « Tigard
5-Lane Widening
0\6 f o
- -
s By Others
N
r
Existing signal
y~° Proposed Signal Q
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CORRECTIONS
AND
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
it r
Vicinity and Zoning Maps
A.. r.,n.., ~ .1 on .7 n J....,......-__, -V_.U.,
T 'he v I c I11 i l.y Iilap i n +ke c' v I wcn lu 1 nJCJJUICiI V JII J u 1 fiQlCate Im-
esterly to Murray Boulevard (not Davies). Also,
provements extending weste'rly'
the city limits and zoning boundaries are not accurate. An updated
map will be used in the revised Environmental Assessment.
Cost Estimate and Funding
The cost information in the Environmental Assessment is contradictory
showing both $7 million and $8 million. Estimates have been refined
as developer and LID projects are being constructed.
The combined construction, right-of-way, and preliminary engineering
cost for this project is estimated at $7.5 million. Currently, this
project is cooperatively funded through the State Modernization Program
(State Mod.) and the Washington County Major Street Transportation
Improvement Program (MSTIP). The Scholls Highway project is one of
17 MSTIP road improvement projects that resulted from a three-year,
$27 million serial levy approved by voters in May 1986. The MSTIP
provides matching funds necessary to leverage State and federal dollars
and will make major traffic safety and congestion improvements to
specific, existing roads county-wide over the next five years. Tri-Met
{ has also contributed $100,000 to the project for bus shelters and
pullouts which have been incorporated into the design.
s C-mbined, the State Mod., MSTIP, Tri-Met program and other State funds
have a total of $3.8 million available for the project. The Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC) has developed a plan of action to deal with
the shortfall in the funding of the project which generally calls
for:
1. Pursuing additional funding through State and local improvement
programs,
2. Conditioning new development as appropriate to contribute
towards improvements.
3. Developing a phasing plan with available funds to build the
entire five-lane width in sections beginning at the Fanno
Creek Bridge and working west if a shortfall still exists
following design approval.
r-
{
r-
Related Projects
Murray Blvd. Widening - Allen to Existing 5 Lanes at Murray Hill -
This proposed Washington County project will be broken into two phases.
The project design and construction will be managed by the County,
with joint financial participation from the City of Beaverton, using
System Development Tax generated by adjacent develoments.
Phase 1: A three-lane facility between Allen and the existing
five lanes at Murray Hill is currently being designed
with construction scheduled for the 1989 constrsuction
season. The portion near Murray Hill has been construct-
ed to five lanes by adjacent development.
Phase 2: The five-lane facility, with the same project limits
and three-lane compatibility is also being designed
now by the County. Actual right-of-way acquisition and construction of the five-lane facility will be
subject to the availability of federal funding. `
Murray Blvd. @ Old Scholls Hwy. Local Improvement District - An LID r
was formed to fund the now nearly complete intersection of Murray
Boulevard at Old Scholls. Development, and the City of Beaverton,
has funded this approximately $800,000 improvement and dedicated associ-
ated right-of-way. The interchange, complete with traffic signal,
was designed to match the overall Scholls widening as well as building
a fourth leg that would eventually extend Murray Boulevard to the
south.
Murray Blvd. Extension - The continued extension of Murray Boulevard
south between Scholls and Old Scholls is a City of Beaverton street. F
The alignment of this section and south to Walnut Street has been
determined through preliminary design, reviewed and approved jointly
by the State, Washington County, and the cities of Beaverton and Tigard.
Extension of the roadway system south of Walnut Street has not yet
been determined. Currently, the City of Tigard and Washington County
are working jointly on plans for roadways between Walnut Street, Gaarde
Street, and Bull Mountain Road. The City expects to be holding neigh-
borhood meetings on this planning subject early in 1989.
135th LID - An LID was completed in 1988 (not 1986 as stated in the
Environmental Assessment) widening 135th approaching Scholls from
the south. This improvement make left and right turns possible simul-
taneously. Signalization of this intersection is proposed with the
Scholls Highway project.
121st to 125th Connection - Currently, both 121st and 125th are signal-
ized and are proposed to remain signalized with this improvement.
A north-south, 125th to 121st connection between Beaverton and Tigard Yr
has been endorsed by the project TAC, the County, and Tigard. Beaverton
has designated the area as a "study area" and will be considering f
a Transportation and Land Use Amendment as a result within the next!
few months. The connection has received conceptual approval from
both the City of Beaverton's Planning Commission and City Council.`
~
~ rte.
~
~ ~r
1 ~ Vii,. n
- r
f~
~
€ ~ L
*i
,~~,^.-gym ~e~~~-~.~. - _:«v~~ .~'^-s_
,r„
_ r.~ n,,,.,,.
X12. ~i r~ T1T'r{I L ~ a{a rta r ~ rtF~1~~1~1ttiJ1(~ fijl'ryl~li~ 1~i[>iTll~h _ l~liriT7ljt~~ 11~Z1i~y7~L{I iir~gr~a{rpp.rT~ili,Lllil'1rT{i(a9LiL1~~11L~r1i~Llat~{fjsri
_ V } ~ { - ~ ~ ~ ~ t
i 8 T 8 8 0- I1
N]TE; YE THLS MICAOELIDED ~ ~ 2....,,,,,,... 3.,, 4 5 _ ` 12Y
I,`
DRAMING IS LESS CLEAR THAN ~
THIS NOTICc~ ii i5 Dl~ Ta
I TFE (UACITY OE Tff ORIGINAL _ T I .
_ _ _
I _ _
oRwING. i ! 06 6Z ~BZ lZ 9Z SZ >Z £Z ZZ IZ OZ 61 8i 11 81 St~~i.l 61 ZI Ii~01 8 _9... 1__ 9._. S 4 __e_.__.~ f
butm~Lm~uninu~uakxi6n
I~ ,
Irr
r.:' ~ LL~~
v
4.
_
BEG{H PRi3,~ECT ~
1 ; ; ~ z
i f t ~
f ~~AUi 1F =
S'.fR~1G fr~ietT£ fQGES? h +~LiE60 99MId
s',' r
r ~ ~ ~ ~
Y
S
s ~
r ~i
~
_ - ~ sy~' 2
~w
" nt
3 k~ .
~ ~w
i ~
9. ~ Y4
F
piloiAlZtAI InArflc Toom ~
N
~1_R>z n ~rpar 1
s ' . ~ ~
9ro ~ , urs ~ ca+EStow l ~
pN T~ G{{fF1!
u a`,' ?lNil
~ ~ : ~ , . ~ r Ego pROs~cT
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ BUSZESS ' ~
o ~ , s s , .
I ~
C i
W Qa , 1
~ ~ , , GREEHWOpD SHOPPING CENSER ' ' ~ ' I ~
I ~ ENGLEI'000 - 2 g, ~ EN0.EWOOp
~ I ~ N = i I ~
I I ~ ~ ~
~ I ~ pj ~ ~ I ~ E1lSTIIr fOpIP1TH
TYPICAL SECTIONS LEGEND
NEW CONSTRUCTION
sa~otAu
6• ~ f7 w rr iuA pREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP~lTAT{011 ROADWAY REMOVAL
/ALL TRAVEL LAIES IEmAN ttuvFl LAIES g..
I n, CORRIDOR/CESIGN HEARING MAP ~ STRUCTURE
~►Y'~ irr' ~ - WEDIAN / TURN LANES
~ TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION MURRAY FANI~O CREEK
~ SgAORALL SCROLLS HDGHWAY SIDEWALK
u. a---l--tr r w a BIKEWAY
LIAR tRAr0. I LdlES tNJr veg. WASHINGTON COUNTY SOUNDWALLS
i~,~ttT~ t~ SIGNAL
sT'R"fR
[N AREA OF RIGHT-TURN LANES
3
w
_ If 7j~ rp flr~fp!'f r~~l(i lpI{IT llf~flr flljtjf 1 Jm~!1?j!if7T~ji1~11!Illi ,~.(r(rir~rl~~f( ijtjlll(YIYIIN~Ttflfll[rlrllli~j'}p~llflrl+Iqf rja~fplllllgl~flflflflf{I}►u
0 1 I 1 l 1 i ~'T'l'T' t 1' ~
WTf: if THIS MLCROFItYED ! i~,
CRAMIIG IS LESS CLEAR 7NAN I i ~
'HIS LgTI0.°, IT IS ~ 70 r
~l TFE QUALITY OF TtE ORIGINAL ~ _ _
~ .r._ _ . _ _ _ I
i' 0£M62 B2 t2 8Z SZ >Z £Z ZZ IZ OZ B{ BI~11 9i 'S1 bl £I ZI {I 01 6 0 1 BYS b £ Z i _
tt '
'YHINIiI~I111IsIlI~llItIIUIIdNN~ ~ ~
'7V'
;3~ j ~ i j
~ `
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r a
I
_~y~-,
_
_ _ -
Aee~~ 1~~ke a~ Zq aq
A~Pnda~'~ 5
~5~~ ~5mm~o11 ~~m
i
If, in the future, the status of 125th or 121st is revised, it may
h. It may also eliminate
11
f be possible to remove the signal at '25t
the need for the proposed signal at Conestoga.
( In November, voters in Tigard approved a bond measure for improvements
to a number of streets including 121st Avenue in the Scholls Ferry
area. Part of the 121st Avenue project specifically includes intersec-
i_ tiorn improvement at Scholls Ferry Road to be coordinated with the
t Scholls widening project.
COSTS
Construction
Roadway 4,172,000
Soundwalls 1,000,000
Signalization 488,000
Fanno Crk. Br. 640,000
Subtotal 6,300,000
Right-of-Nay 770,000
Subtotal 770,000
F
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
Subtotal 420,000
Total 7,490,000
AVAILABLE REVENUES
` State Mod. Prog. 1,560,000
MSTIP Prog. 1,770,000
Tri-Met 100,000
Other State Funds 358,000
Total 3,788,000
SHORTFALL
Total Project 3,702,000
Construction Phasing
` Should a shortage of funds still exist at the time of construction,
the following priorities for use of available funds is recommended
by the TAC:
Unit 1 - Construct unit 1 from the west end of the Fanno Creek struc-
ture through the 125th intersection.
Unit 2 - Construct unit 2 continuing west from unit 1 to the completed
LID improvement at Murray Boulevard.
Unit 3 - Raise and widen the Fanno Creek Bridge including provisions
for north-south and east-west pedestrian facilities.
f
Intersection of Scholls @ Old Scholls/135th
The recently-installed interim traffic signal at the intersection
of Scholls and Old Scholls west of 135th was constructed in advance
of the total improvement for two reasons: 1) increasing safety, 2) _
in view of the shortaoe of funds for the total improvements, the interim
signal may have to service this intersection longer than intended.
The long-range plan, as future development occurs, is to realign Scholls
into Old Scholls with a signalized intersection at Davies Road. Scholls
Highway to the east would serve as a local access road only (see vicin-
ity map). The extension to Davies, traffic signal at Davies, and
the cul-de-sac would not be a project cost, but a cost associated
with anticipated future development.
Intersection of Scholls @ Springwood Drive
The Technical Advisory Committee concurs in ODOT's evaluation and
recommendation that a traffic signal at Springwood Drive while supported
by a large number of local users, would not be a responsible installa-
tion for the following reasons:
1. The level of service provided by Scholls Highway would be
reduced significantly due to signal-caused delays (a complaint
that is heard frequently by staff of all four jurisdictions).
Analysis shows that the new system of traffic signals at
neighboring intersections would create adequate gaps in traffic
during peak hours for safe vehicle entry and exiting at the
Springwood Drive intersection.
2. A signal at the Springwood Drive intersection would increase
traffic volumes on Springwood Drive - a neighborhood street.
Increased noise, faster speeds, and difficulty in backing
from residential driveways would be among the disadvantages
to the Engelwood neighborhood.
3. A pedestrian signal at Springwood Drive would not serve the
Greenway crossing at Fanno Creek as users would continue
to cross at mid-block. ~7
The TAC has recommended the installation of electrical conduit as
part of this project should a traffic signal be necessary at a future
date.
Fanno Creek Bridge
Included in the project, as a lower priority, is the raising and widen-
ing of the Fanno Creek Bridge to eventually provide north-south (under)
and east-west (over) pedestrian continuity. The existing bridge can
be striped for four lanes today and will therefore provide travel
lane continuity in the near term.` "
F
FA
r'
a
Soundwall LWalkLane de Bike Travel Travel Lt - Turn Travel Travel Bike Side Soundwall
Lane Lane Lana Lane Lane Lane Welk
c•li 'C:uNv:
Landscape/ 15'I 1 6' I 6' I 12' 12' , 14' ! 12'_I 12' I ti
Utility Strip i.- - ~ 111 -'`-'Utility Strip
100'
TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION
Travel Travel Bike RI-Turn Side Soundwall
Lane Lane Lane Lane Walk 11 7' 7' 12' 12' 4' 14'
6 15' Lendacape/
Utility Strip
Soundwall where cost effective TYPICAL HALF-SECTION
(In Area of Right-Turn Lane)
r PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
The projected increases in traffic will require four travel lanes
(two in each direction), a continuous left-turn median, and right-turn
lanes at major signalized intersections. New or reconstructed traffic
signals will be required at the intersections of Murray Boulevard,
135th, 130th, 125th (North Dakota), 121st, and Conestoga Drive, and
will be intertied to operate as a system. Shoulder bike lanes, curbs
and sidewalks throughout the 1.7-mile project length will improve
safety for both pedestrian and bicyclists. A landscape/utility strip
is proposed behind the sidewalk and, where effective, noise mitigation
will be provided.
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT A COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) made up of representatives from
the various jurisdictions was formed in February 1987 beginning the
initial development of the design. ODOT, assisted by local jurisdic-
tions met with local neighborhood groups and businesses to present
the design concept and to receive input on the project. A general
public information meeting was held in September 1987. With input
from public meetings, ODOT staff has prepared an Environmental Assess-
ment evaluating the build and no-build alternatives. A public meeting
is scheduled for January 12, 1989 to review the proposed design and
Environmental Assessment. The formal public hearing, scheduled for
January 19, 1989, will allow interested parties to offer testimony
on the document and designs.
Schedule
To assure the project goes to construction by the fall of 1990, the
target schedule proposes to concurrently prepare the revised Environ-
mental Assessment while final plans are being Dreoared and riaht-of-wav
is being acquired.
Phase I Engineering
(Conceptual Design)
Community Involvement
Public Meeting TARGET SCHEDULE
Draft Environmental Document
FINA Approval
Public Hearing
Alternative Selection b ~a
Hearing Study Report
Local Jurisdiction Concurrence/
ODOT Approval
Final Environmental Document
FHWA - Design Approval
Phase Z Engineering
(Preliminary Design)
R/W Descriptions b Acquisition
Final Design
Construction
i
1987 1988 1989 1990
A
I~
For further information about this project, please contact Mark Beeson, i
NOT project coordinator, at 653-3240, or Jerry Parmenter, Washington
County program manager, at 648-8823.
1/89/MB/po
r-
i
CONNENTS AND RESPONSES
KiRRAi --em. F"":::n CP.EEV
SCHOLLS HIGHWAY
6.
COMMENT: The south leg of the 130th and Scholls Highway intersection
should be improved as part of the project.
RESPONSE: Build Alternative No. 1 provides for a signalized access
to 130th to the south. Improvements to 130th itself are
not proposed as part of the Scholls widening project.
COMMENT: If project phasing becomes necessary, the project should
start on the west end.
RESPONSE: This construction phasing would create an "hourglass" or
"bottleneck" effect on traffic with four through lanes
on either side of a short two-lane section.
COMMENT: The 135th and Scholls intersection should be signalized.
RESPONSE: The build alternative provides for a traffic signal at
this location. The temporary traffic signal recently in-
stalled at the nearby Scholls at Old Scholls intersection
will eventually be removed.
COMMENT: Available money should be spent to resolve the worst severe
traffic congestion problems.
RESPONSE: Agree. This is consistent with the TAC phasing program
should additional funds not be fund prior to construction.
COMMENT: There is concern about impacts that may result during con-
struction. With heavy traffic on Scholls Highway, there
may be an increase in neighborhood street traffic trying
to bypass construction.
RESPONSE: Scholls Highway will remain open to traffic during construc-
tion. Access to local streets, residences and businesses
will be maintained.
COMMENT: The hearing map shows Murray Boulevard as the beginning
of the project. This is contrary to your proposed phasing
plan to start at the east end.
RESPONSE: Noted. As a book is read left to right, and from the top
to bottom of the page, highway engineers describe highways
north to south, and east to west (i.e. Murray Blvd. to
Fanno Creek). The "beginning and end" of the project as
defined on the hearing map is not consistent with the TAC
recommended phasing plan should phasing become necessary.
COMNENTS AND RESPONSES
MRRAY BLVD. - rANNO CREEK
SCROLLS HIGHi1AY
COMMENT: The south 1,3q of the 130th and Scholls Highway intersection
should be improved as part of the project.
RESPONSE: Build Alternative No. 1 provides for a signalized access
to 130th to the south. Improvements to 130th itself are
not proposed as part of the Scholls widening project.
COMMENT: If project phasing becomes necessary, the project should
start on the west end.
RESPONSE: This construction phasing would create an "hourglass" or
"bottleneck" effect on traffic with four through lanes
on either side of a short two-lane section.
COMMENT: The 135th and Scholls intersection should be signalized.
RESPONSE: The build alternative provides for a traffic signal at
this location. The temporary traffic signal recently in-
stalled at the nearby Scholls at Old Scholls intersection
will eventually be removed.
COMMENT: Available money should be spent to resolve the worst severe
traffic congestion problems.
RESPONSE: Agree. This is consistent with the TAC phasing program
should additional funds not be found prior to construction.
COMMENT: There is concern about impacts that may result during con-
struction. With heavy traffic on Scholls Highway, there
may be an increase in neighborhood street traffic trying
to bypass construction.
RESPONSE: Scholls Highway will remain open to traffic during construc-
tion. Access to local streets, residences and businesses
will be maintained.
COMMENT: The hearing map shows Murray Boulevard as the beginning
of the project. This is contrary to your proposed phasing
plan to start at the east end.
RESPONSE: Noted. As a book is read left to right, and from the top
to bottom of the page, highway engineers describe highways
north to south, and east to west (i.e. Murray Blvd. to
Fanno Creek). The "beginning and end" of the project as
defined on the hearing map is not consistent with the TAC
recommended phasing plan should phasing become necessary.
Recommended phasing attempts to provide the greatest benefit
to the motorist.
COMMENT: Fanno Creek Bridge raising should be done in the first
phase providing for a bicycle/pedestrian path along Fanno
Creek.
RESPONSE: Should phasing become necessary, raising the bridge in
earlier phases Will he considered.
COMMENT: S.W. Boones Bend Road, entrance to what is essentially
a private driveway to On the Green Condominiums, appears
to be getting special attention by constructing an improved
north leg of 121st intersection. The taxpayers should
not have to pay for this improvement to a private roadway.
RESPONSE: The grades approaching Scholls Highway from the north will `
require improvement both to match grades and provide a
safe operating intersection. Concerns were expressed early
during project development for the safety of this approach. p
The taxpayers will benefit with a safer overall operation
of this intersection. f
COMMENT: If a project currently proposed by the City of Beaverton
to connect Beaverton's 125th Avenue on the north with Ti-
gard's 121st Avenue on the south becomes a reality, signals
at 125th and Conestoga may not be warranted. The City f
proposes to pursue development efforts for this project
over the next nine months and will study 121st and 125th
intersections as well as land uses. Should this project
be advanced to construction prior to the Scholls Highway
project, the Scholls project should remain flexible enough
to accommodate this new alignment.
RESPONSE: This is possible. However, as there is no assurance of
this City of Beaverton improvement, contract documents
for the Scholls widening would be prepared based on the
build alternative as presented. These minor modifications
can be made prior to or during construction.
COMMENT: With the peak volumes (and weekday volumes) higher at Spring-
wood Drive, as well as increased business traffic in and
out of the Parkside Plaza, it would seem a traffic signal
at Springwood Drive would be in order. Also, since the
Fanno Creek Bridge widening is the lowest priority in the
project plan, this even further suggests the need for a
pedestrian-actuated traffic signal at the Springwood loca-
tion.
Left-turn in, left-turn out of the Parkside Plaza is extreme-
ly difficult.
The visibility as well as heavy foot traffic along the
park (especially in the spring) makes Springwood Drive
a dangerous intersection and the site of many traffic acci-
dents.
The signal proposed at Conestoga should be eliminated and
instead, a signal installed at Springwood Drive.
RESPONSE: The intersection of Springwood Drive has been one of the
most sensitive issues associated with this improvement.
Strong public support exists for both installing and not
installing a traffic signal at this location.
Traffic analysis was performed, rechecked, and confirmed.
It was concluded that this location would not be a respons-
ible installation.
From the hearing handout:
Intersection of Scholls at Sprinqwood Drive Technical
Advisory Committee concurs in ODOT evaluation and
recommendation that a traffic signal at Springwood
Drive would not be a responsible installation for
the following reasons:
The level of service provided by Scholls Highway
would be reduced significantly due to signal-caused
delays (a complaint that is heard frequently
by staff from all four jurisdictions). Analysis
shows that the new system of traffic signals
at neighboring intersections would create adequate
gaps in traffic during peak hours for safe vehicle
entry and exiting at the Springwood Drive intersec-
L tion.
A signal at Springwood Drive intersection would
increase traffic volumes on Springwood Drive,
a neighborhood street. Increased noise, faster
speeds, and difficulty in backing from residential
driveways would be among the disadvantages to
the Inglewood neighborhood.
A pedestrian signal at Springwood Drive would
not serve the Greenway crossing at Fanno Creek
as users would continue to cross at mid-block.
Operation of a progressive signal system would
be less efficient with both Conestoga and Spring-
wood signalized. Traffic volumes on Conestoga
are nearly twice those on Springwood. The major
movement from Conestoga is to the east and accom-
plished by making a left turn thus exposing a
side street vehicle to two potential conflicts.
Traffic from Springwood is primarily making a
right turn to the east - a single conflict poten-
tial.
The TAC has recommended the installation of elec-
trical conduit as part of this project should
a traffic signal be necessary at Springwood Drive
at a future date.
COMMENT: The phasing plan developed by the TAC whereby construction j
would begin at the east end makes good sense, particularly
. nit-y +v onAi+inn develon-
5'InCe the west end has more -ppvia,.u,,, ~,r ~ ..~v........
ers to build frontage improvements.
RESPONSE: Noted.
COMMENT: Sidewalks should be constructed on the backside of soundwalls
to protect pedestrians both from vehicles and traffic noise.
RESPONSE: From a vandalism standpoint, and for the sake of pedestrian
safety and property owner's protection and privacy, this
practice is avoided.
COMMENT: Visual screening (vegetative) of soundwalls should be con-
sidered as they are unattractive along the roadway. They
also provide a tempting canvass for painted slogans, etc.
RESPONSE: Visual screening as well as architectural treatment to
the face of soundwalls (suggested by a number of residents
throughout project development) will be considered during
final design.
COMMENT: A soundwall on the north between Fanno Creek and the Parkside
Plaza will hide the Plaza's entrance and block business
signs.
RESPONSE: No sound walls are proposed for the Parkside Plaza.
COMMENT: Vibrations of traffic will, over time, have a detrimental
effect on buildings i.e., plaster cracking and nails backing
out.
RESPONSE: Transmission of vibrations usually occur when a common
conductive material links the generator and receiver, a
condition which does not exist with the soft soils in this
location.
COMMENT: Will the railroad 'tracks at Fanno Creek be replaced? If
so, when?
RESPONSE: Not with this project. A separate project, "Fanno Creek
to Beaverton-Tigard Highway" would correct the adversely
banked railroad tracks. This project, although not totally
funded, is carried in the Six-Year Highway Improvement
Program for construction in 1990.
COMMENT: The Davies Road extension and traffic signal is not shown
on the map.
r
RESPONSE: These elements of the overall design layout are not included
in the current project. The Department and local jurisdic-
tions will be looking towards development to fund and con-
struct a realignment of Scholls Highway into Old Scholls
Highway at Davies Road with a traffic signal. The timing
of these elements will be determined by the timing of the
development that causes the need.
COMMENT: What is the frequency of accidents per vehicle that travel
this section of road?
RESPONSE: Generally such statistics are presented in terms of vehicle
accidents per million vehicle miles of travel within the
given highway section. For this project, that was 3.05
acc./mvmt.
i
i
i
r
r
r
t
i
~ APPENDIX A
i
i
i
PUBLIC HEARING
MURRAY BLVD. - FANNO CREEK
SCHOLLS HIGHWAY
WASHINGTON COUNTY
January 19, 1989
7:30 p.m.
f
PGE Auditorium, Beaverton
I
f DON ADAMS: Thank you very much for coming out tonight. At least
it's not cold and raining. Can you all hear me alright?
l My name is Don Adams. I am the Region Engineer for Region 1 for
the Oregon Department of Transportation, Highway Division. My
office is in Milwaukie. I will chair the meeting tonight and
cochairing the meeting with me is Jerry Parmenter from Washington
County. I will be assisted by Mark Beeson, the Project
' Coordinator, who will give a brief description of the "build"
alternative and Jeanne Gibson, the Right-of-Way Liaison Agent,
who will discuss the Right-oi-Way Acquisition Program a little
later.
_ The purpose of this evening's hearing is to hear your opinions and
to receive testimony on the proposed design development and comment
on the project environmental document. This is your meeting and
your opportunity to influence the design selected for the "build"
alternative or to recommend the "no-build" alternative. As you
know, currently, only about one-half of the construction funding
is available for the project. Construction will be phased to keep
1
i
f
t.
within the dollar limit that is available. You may also have some
specific ideas on how the project might be phased regarding
construction.
We will give you a brief description of the project, a brief
explanation of how Right-of-Way acquisition takes place and review
the hearing procedures for this evening. After these
presentations, we will ask for your comments. This is part of the
process that is required for all the Federal highway funded
projects and we follow that process even with the projects funded
by our own funds.
We will ask for your comments and they can be submitted in three
ways: 1) By testimony here tonight, 2) by writing in your comments
and sending them to me, (my address is posted here on the bulletin
board) or 3) by making a note on the cards that I believe you
received as you came in. All testimony, written or oral, will be
given the same weight in our-decisions and will become part of the
hearing's study report. If you wish to receive a copy of the
transcript of this evening's hearing, please place a check in the
box on the card you received. The transcript should be available
in about a month.
w
i
If you would like to discuss the "build" alternative with someone
or have a design related question answered, please take advantage
of the display and information we have in the other part of this
2 f f
s ~ f
L'
auditorium. We have staff back there to answer your questions.
I will not be answering questions tonight about details of the
project. This process is a hearing so we want to make sure we hear
everybody°s testimony. If there is a point needing clarification,
we'll try to get it straightened out as your testimony proceeds.
But our proceedings would be slowed considerably if we tried to
answer questions now. Please take advantage of our staff and
display at the back of the room if you have questions. As you
entered the auditorium, you should have received an information
packet with a small map and a hearing attendance card. If you wish
to give oral testimony, please fill out a card and hold it up and
we 111 have someone pick it up. If you didn't receive a card, raise
your hand. Does anyone need a card? Please fill out the card and
we'll pick it up. These will be my source for calling you forward
to testify. Please leave any other card that you might have if you
just want to leave a comment with any member of the staff and we'll
get it into the record.
The purpose of the proposed highway improvement project is to
increase the capacity of Scholls Highway improving it to a safe
and efficiently operating facility that will accommodate the
` projected tra..ffic through the year 2005. Traffic during the rush
hour is already congested and mora is expected to be generated by
future development. An Environmental Assessment was written to
evaluate the "build" and "no-build" alternative. This document was
approved in December of 1988 by the Federal Highway Administration
3
i
and has been circulated for public review. We also have copies
available at the table where you entered. If. the "build"
alternative is selected based on the hearing process, a second l
environmental document will be written, the final Environmental II
l
Statement. This revised document will elaborate on the selected
alternative and document the public review process meeting we held
last week. Approval of this document by the Oregon Department of
Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration will
constitute design approval of the Build-Alternative. Assuming we
proceed with this document, it will be made available for public
review. Also if you indicate on your card that you would like a
copy of the revised Environmental Assessment, one will be sent to `
you.
At this time I would like to ask Jerry Parmenter to discuss the
project funding and the relationship between the two State and
County facilities and the relationship between the local
jurisdiction.
JERRY PARMENTER: As Don Adams pointed out earlier, my name is
Jerry Parmenter and I am the MSTIP Program Manager for Washington
County, in the department of Land Use and Transportation. I would
like to point out that there are a couple of other key individuals
in the audience who participated in this cooperative effort; Randy
Wooley, City Engineer from Tigard, and Bud Roberts, Traffic
Engineer from Beaverton. As Don has pointed out, the uniqueness
4
of this project is that essentially it incorporates four
j
urisdictions. As you probably know, Beaverton is on the north of
Scholls and Tigard is on the south. Most of the projects on the
F Ic
road are presently under two jurisdictions; 1) The State
Y ) from Fanno
Creek to Old Scholls intersection ar:{ 2) from there, further west
to Murray Blvd. is the County's. We have agreed that once the work
is completed, that is the section from the Scholls intersection to
Murray, the jurisdictions will be swapped. Essentially, new
Scholls will become the jurisdiction of the County and 7 y Old Scholls
will become the jurisdiction of the State. This project was
initiated several years ago. The prospectus was basically put
t.
together by the Oregon Department of Transportation with the
cooperative effort of Washington County. The cost estimate was
included, as you recall in the
Y probably MSTIP program when that
was sent out to the voters for approval.
_ The cost estimate included in that report, I might add, was done
without the benefit of preliminary engineering. Since that time,
~v
we found other significant issues related to the project that
` needed to be corrected and consequently the cost of the project
has increased significantly. As Don has pointed out, additional
funding is needed forthwith and the project will be phased as we
discussed at our last public meeting. We will use your input and
and suggestions as to how the project might be phased. Again, the
project is a combined funding between the County and the Oregon
Department of Transportation. There was also some funding from
5
i
the City of Beaverton and that was applied to the Scholls-Murray -
intersection that we also discussed at the last public meeting.
With that I will turn the meeting back to Don to continue the
discussion.
.t
DON ADAMS: Thanks Jerry. Mark Beeson, would you please run
through a description of the project now?
MARK BEESON: Thanks Don. Everybody should have one of these
(hearing handout). Picked.up one when you came in today. If you
came last week you got one as well. Inside of it this week, a
little different from last week is one of these maps (hearing map) .
This map is the same thing as on the wall. When you come to give
4
your testimony tonight you may wish to point to the map and refer
to it on your lap now as you prepare. Also you will notice that
inside here there are two different colors as kind of an insert.
The outside is a fact sheet put together quite sometime ago and it
has been updated. The inside is some information that is
supplemental to your environmental document. Also it includes some
corrections to the document. If you refer to the vicinity map in "
this handout as well as your large color map, we see basically a
five-lane widening highway project starting at Murray Blvd. and
17 7
running to Fanno Creek. New or improved signals will be put in at
t
the intersections of Murray, 135th, 130th, 125th, 121st and at
r~
Conestoga.
f~
6 '
l~
The five lane section consists of four travel lanes, two lanes in
each direction, and a continuous left turn median. There are also
6 ft. bike path shoulders on each side as well as 6 ft. sidewalks.
Outside of that there is a landscape utility strip about 5 ft. wide
and behind that there are a lot of sound walls. Every place you
see a dash line, there is a sound wall. They are numerous and they
add about a million dollars to the total cost of the project. In
{ the environmental document, the cost in one place is $7 million
t and in another place it says $8 million. The project cost when it
began was $8 million. Now the installation of the Murray Boulevard
at Old Scholls intersection, including the traffic signal, is
nearly done, thanks to Beaverton and the local improvement
district. About $800 thousand was shaved off of that cost. Nearly
half a million dollars is in engineering. If you refer to the cost
breakdown, you see that the total price of the project, which
includes construction, all right-of-way and all preliminary
engineering, amounts to nearly $7.5 million. We can also see the
available revenues requiring the phasing program that Jerry spoke
about a moment ago.
DON ADAMS: Thank you Mark. Jeanne, would you like to come
up? This is Jeanne Gibson from our Right-of-Way office. She is
our Right-of-Way Liaison agent for this area and she will discuss
the right-of-way acquisition process and the possible impacts of
the project.
7
I
t
r
JEANNE GIBSON: Good evening. The hearing being held this
evening is to afford interested people the opportunity to express
their views regarding the proposed improvement to Scholls/ Old
Scholls hfahwav from Murrav Blvd.. intersection to the Fanno Creek
Bridge. The right-of-way needed for the construction of this
project will require the acquisition of 3.6 acres of land from
approximately 60 affected parcels, most of which consist of narrow
strips of residential frontage property up to 15 to 20 feet in
width along the existing highway. The project may require the
displacement of the occupants of the two residential units. It's
anticipated that- no business will be required to relocate as a
result of project construction. Two leaflets, "Acquiring Land for
Highways" and "Moving Because of the Highway," are available here
this evening. The first explains how the State obtains land for
public projects and the second explains the relocation benefits
provided for occupants who must move. If part of your property
will be required for this project or if you have to' relocate
because of it, please take a copy of the leaflet and read it
carefully.
Please note that those who move from affected properties before an
offer to purchase is made are not eligible for relocation benefits.
~r
Adequate time will be allowed for displaced persons to relocate
from their homes or business. Residents will not be required to F.
move until comparable replacement housing has been made available
r~
to them and owner occupants will not be required E>
to move until they t;
have been paid for their property.
r~
c .
{sj~
Ei
s~
The State is rec.rxired to and will comply with all State and Federal
,r laws in its dealings with owners and occupants of property needed
C for public purposes. If you have any questions about the Right-
of-Way Program, please feel free to see me at the close of the
hearing or contact me at the Region office. My name is Jeanne i
Gibson. As indicated in both of the leaflets mentioned earlier,
l my office is located at 2400 S.E. Mailwell, Milwaukie. My
telephone number is 653-3124. Thank you very much.
DON ADAMS: Thank you, Jeanne. That concludes the
statements that we have to make. If you wish to make a statement,
t would you please fill out one of these cards? I have just five
cards. If you decide later you want to testify because of
something you heard that triggers your comment, we can fill out a
f card for you then. If you want to wait a little longer, I will ask
again after I go through the cards I have.
The first card I have is Gary Andersen. Gary would you come
forward so we can get you on tape?
GARY ANDERSEN: I only have maybe two comments. One question.
On the sound barriers, how tall are they going to be?
DON ADAMS: How tall?
GARY ANDERSEN: Yes, are they going to be, are they going to
have sections of space in them
9
r-
DON ADAMS: I can't specifically answer that question but
somebody in the back can. T_ think, either Craig Markum, our
Environmentalist, who is closely involved with that or one of the
designers may be able to give you an answer to that.
GARY ANDERSEN: Okay, I will ask them afterwards. Another
i.
comment is that you keep referring to "from Murray Road up to Fanno
Creek" and I live up by Fanno Creek crossing on Scholls Ferry Road
up by Denny. So maybe you can he aware that there are two places
where it crosses and I came all the way over here tonight because
I thought it started there.
DON ADAMS: I'm sorry about that.
GARY ANDERSEN: That's okay.
DON ADAMS: You're not the first, by the way, to have made
that remark. Thank you Gary. Bob Fitzgerald...
BOB FITZGERALD: I just want to point out, Don, that I live
right down this road at 130th. This is nothing more than a
dedicated utilities easement dating back to about 1903 at the
southside. We have a tentative traffic light to go into at this
tl
particular intersection, the reason I was going to call your
f 9
attention, but right now this existing (inaudible) has a meeting
on Tuesday, I believe, on this approval of this agriculatural area
which is going to be - it's R25 on the north 15 acres - and it'si
260 units tentatively approved down here in the southside - that
i
f
10
4
11
6
is between 130th and 135th. And I'm sure that all of these
building structures will be going into effect before you are
driving stakes for the right of way so you want to give some
consideration to probably put in a ramp and railings so they are
on the south side as well as the north side at 130th. Because
there will be quite a multitude of people, one way or the other,
eventually, (someone) is going to get clobbered. It is a minor
situation, but I want to call your attention to it and it's going
to happen before long. Thank you.
4
{
DON ADAMS: Thank you Mr. Fitzgerald. I think we've taken that
into account in our design, have we not? Not, no, yes no
signals from the locals... okay, I'm not getting any signals so
we'll look at that. Thank you very much. Mr. Bob Tinsman
y
Bob Tinsman: The people who live in the Morning Hill area
down at 135th and even those further up on Walnut where it follows
through, are interested in seeing that the projects start in
reverse order to that mentioned in the pamphlet for two reasons:
1) We feel that the intersection at 135th is greatly in need of
a traffic signal at that point to facilitate left turns. The
second reason is that it would appear, I haven't checked this out
in detail, but it would appear that if the funds available, some r'
$3.7 million, were to be utilized from the Murray Road end that you
could accomplish a greater distance of improvement by starting at
that end than if you start down at the Fanno Creek end. I may be
wrong. But it just appears that way.
11
rti.
DON ADAMS: Your proposal then is to start at the west and
of the project and go east.
BOB FITZGERALD: Right.
r-
DON ADAMS: Okay, thank you. Randy Wooley...
r-
RANDY WOOLEY: My name is Randy Wooley. As City Engineer in
Tigard, I receive a great many calls and comments about Scholls
Ferry Road. I can tell you there is a great deal of support for
improvement and widening of Scholls Ferry Road and improvement of
traffic capacity. We're also hearing a great deal of concern about
the impacts of congestion on Scholls Ferry Road in terms of
increased traffic in the neighborhood adjoining Scholls Ferry Road
as drivers attempt to bypass the congestion. For these reasons,
I strongly urge you to proceed with the "build" alternative and to
proceed as soon as possible. Realizing that adequate funding is
e°
not there, I encourage you to proceed immediately with Phase 1, or
those portions of the project that can be built to resolve the most
severe traffic congestion problems. During the previous meetings
on this subject there has been concern about the intersection of
Springwood and Scholls Ferry Road and I know those concerns have
been heard and a design decision has been made. There were earlier
requests for a signal there and the decision has been made not to
put a signal there. I support that decision. It is also my
understanding that electrical conduits will be installed as part t
of this project to assure that if that decision proves to be wrong, r
12
1,
the signal can be installed there later. During the final design
of this project, I'm volunteering my staff to work closely with the
State's staff on details and, where necessary, to coordinate with
City vroiects. The City of Tigard has funding available to provide
improvements on the 121st Avenue approach to Scholls Ferry Road and
we propose to do those concurrently with the State project. Some
questions have arisen about Fanno Creek Bridge and I know that your
staff is addressing those and we're also prepared to work with you
on that during the final design. Finally, we have heard concerns
from our citizens about the impacts that may result during
construction. I am assured by your staff that the road will remain
open to traffic during construction and I know they are prepared
to provide adequate access to the adjoining streets and businesses.
Again, my staff is prepared to work with you wherever we are needed
to facilitate that part of the project. In summary, I strongly urge
that you proceed with the implementation of the "build" alternative
as quickly as possible. Thank you.
Thank you very much Randy.
DON ADAMS:
Lee Cunningham...(stepped out) Millie Davis?
MILLIE DAVIS: Good evening. I live on Scholls Ferry Road on
what is considered new Scholls. Am I correct in understanding your
map as the beginning of the project, where you are starting, to be
Murray or are you, actually, as you said or I understood you to say
last week, starting at Nimbus? Are you starting work at Murray or
are you starting at Nimbus?
13
_ f
E
(}G(
k
DON ADAMS: The proposal right now is to start at Nimbus. -
Millie Davis: Okay, so what the map shows as the end of the
t
~.~~.~....}7
project is actually the beginning of the project. ~ .
DON ADAMS: Correct.
MILLIE DAVIS : Okay, then I can proceed in the order I started
to. I would like to know why you evidently do not plan to lift up
t
the bridge over Fanno Creek in the beginning of the project. It
is where the worst traffic is currently. My understanding from
last week's meeting is that you are going to redo the painted lines
so that there are two lanes of traffic in both directions. What
is actually needed is not only the realigning of that but the
lifting up of the bridge so that you can put in the bikeway
immediately. If you're going to mess around with the bridge in any
way shape or form, will you please take that as a number one first
phase, "do it now consideration?" It needs to be done immediately.
It is extremely dangerous as all of us who have good knowledge of
that area would say. Okay? We would urge you to do that the
i
very, very first. Also I would like to add to what was previously
said when you do come through with your electrical conduit, would
~ E
you please box it off, or whatever, at Springwood so that, as we
y
suspect, when you find in the future that a light is needed at
Springwood you will save the taxpayers a few thousand dollars.
Third, could you explain to me, please, why the southwest Boones
14 s~.. E
~~F
Bend Road, which is part of 121st Avenue, feeds into a singular
apartment type complex? Why is so much of that being built up?
New construction etc.? I don't understand that when all your other
major or minor intersections are small. Why are the taxpayers
paying so much of what seems to be privately owned road. Why are
we paying for it?
DON ADAMS: I'm sure there is a good reason and I may
suggest you talk to the designers in the back room. It may be
because the grades dictate that we have to go back that far.just
to meet the road grades, so people can actually use it. That is
a guess on my part. But people in the back room can tell you
specifically. It's a pretty fair guess. Karen Moen...
KAREN MOEN: i just want to bring up, my husband was going to
come except he is stuck in Minnesota right now tonight. He wanted
to bring up that on Springwood Drive that we should have the
electrical conduit put in like you had suggested a year ago and
this plan didn't mention that because you might not want to put a
light there or just put a light that the kids could activate if
they want to cross over to the park. You know, like those at
school zones. That you could... the light is only activated when
there is a pedestrian. We also want to mention raising the bridge
for the walkway and we also would like the sound walls put in as
soon as possible.
15
7E
DON ADAMS: Okay, thank you. We'll put the conduit in. -
Alright, Dr. Ted Forcum...
DR. TED FORCUM: I'm kinda new to this area I just set up a
business in the last month. So I'm not altogether familiar with
the project but from just glancing over it the last few minutes or
so I really don't follow the thinking as to why a stop light is not
put in at Springwood Drive. Your peak traffic, as well as weekly
traffic volumes, are greater through Springwood and there is an
increased business traffic.going through Park Side Plaza which is
at the end of Springwood so you need a 4-way access at that
intersection versus a 3-way access elsewhere. Since the Fanno
Creek bridge project, being as stated low in priority, I think a
pedestrian activated signal light would be an excellent idea at
that location. This would allow pedestrians to cross, particularly
in the springtime, when there will be lot of runners as well as
children crossing back and forth over what is an extremely
dangerous area. For only being in business there for a month I
have seen what I considered to be an extraordinary amount of
traffic accidents right at that intersection. As visibility is
poor there, it seems like there is a little bit of hell right
there.
if
DON ADAMS: Did you have three things?
I
t
r;
16 'r
DR. FORCUM: Essentially there are two things; 1) Fanno Creek
Bridge being a lower priority. So I feel that the chances are it
will be long a time before it will be done or it will probably not
be done. That one where your peak traffic volume is higher at
Springwood versus Conestoga as well as your weekly peak, those are
the two I guess. It depends on how you add it up.
DON ADAMS: Thank you very much. Lee Cunningham...Is he back?
I can ask Bud Roberts to come forward.
BUD ROBERTS: I'm Bud Roberts, Traffic Engineer for the City
of Beaverton, and in Randy's testimony he brought up a couple of
things that reminded me of things I want to remind you of. There
f
are some assumptions that need to be part of the record that I
think are important. The City of Beaverton has
just gone through
a transportation plan update for south Beaverton. One of the
elements that had been considered in that transportation plan
update was a direct connection between your 125th, an arterial, and
Tigard's 121st, a major collector. That is one reason why that
intersection needs to be as large as it is. Boones Bend Drive, of
course, is a private street and I think part of the reason the pink
shows on there is so that we can construct that first portion as
a public street. The part is shown in pink to the north. What I
want to point out is that, initially, it was our feeling that with
the construction of the 125th to 121st connection, if that winds
up on Beaverton's plan, that there may not be a need for a signal
17
T ~
{
at North Dakota-125th. That traffic would be diverted within
Beaverton to the intersection at 121st and further, for our own
circulation in south Beaverton, the street pattern would encourage
traffic, instead of using the Conestoga/Scholls intersection to
come over to the 121st/ Scholls intersection. Therefore, there may
not be a signal warranted at Conestoga, either, as a result of that
reconfiguration. our plan is to study the 125th and 121st
connections as both a transportation and land use issue and we will
be doing that study over the next 9 months to a year. We expect
to have made that decision. before you have finished final design
for construction. And we would like you to be able to keep enough
flexibility to adjust according to the actual traffic forecast
based on the final street configuration. Another assumption that
I think is worthy of pointing out is that there are four _
jurisdictions that make up the Technical Advisory Committee which
is involved in this project. They have made a commitment to
whatever extent possible to require any new developer adjacent to
this project to make those improvements that those projects front.
In that way, hopefully, we overcome some of the shortfall in the
project funding. That, again, is part of the reason why starting
at the east end of the project makes sense because more of the
t
development has already taken place at the east end; also less
opportunity for developers to use overtime to do these improvements
s
for us exists at the east end. Those all add up to me,
particularly since traffic is heavier toward the east end. All add
up to requiring, or at least suggesting heavily, that we ought to
18
. i
begin at the east end. In answer to some questions last week, a
number of people were concerned about the timing of the
construction of sound walls and I want to reiterate here that the
answer given was that the intent would be to build sound walls
early on so that the construction itself on the roadway would be
_ shielded by the sound walls as well as the completed project.
That's all I have.
DON ADAMS: Thank you. Good suggestions. Lee Cunningham
try it again. He doesn't okay. John Gallagher...
JOHN GALLAGHER: Good evening. I am currently the Manager
j of Pacesetter Athletic, an athletic shoe store that is located in
the Park Side Plaza and we'll be directly affected by the lack of
any kind of signal at Springwood Drive. The business has been
there a year now. Starting their second year in business in
February and since we are an athletic running shoe store I really
observe a great deal about the use of the bike path and jogging
path right outside my door, especially during the lunch hour, the
peak hour when a lot of people are coming in to use the restaurant
there at Theo's Pizza. There is an awful lot of traffic, an awful
lot of joggers, an awful lot of bikers, and putting a five-lane
highway where it's going to be, the speed limit is going to be
considerably higher and they do fly by there pretty quickly
already. Probably one of the major complaints I have from most of
my customers who come in right after work in the peak rush hour
19
period in the evening, is that they can't get in or out if they're
making a left hand turn. Again at lunch time, trying to make a
left hand turn in or out of the Park Side Plaza is extremely
difficult not to mention I have heard opinions from a lot of the
residents who are on the other side of the street in Tigard off
Springwood. They come in and ask my support and register their
complaints with me about putting a traffic light there so the
children have access to the park. The other point is, again not
being wholly familiar with the project, according to the studying
I have done this afternoon, it seems that the numbers for the
traffic patterns going through there, I_find it curious that the
numbers for the Park Side Plaza area are the same as for the
residential areas. It doesn't take into account there are retail
businesses there and a restaurant and three or four openings yet
in that plaza. Once those fill up it's going to be a higher
traffic area. I realize that the conduit will be laid and I
comment that I am glad that will be done. And probably we'll find ;
very soon that a traffic light will be very necessary in that
intersection. Thanks.
DON ADAMS: Thank you. Mark Chadwick...
fj
MARK CHADWICK: I'm a resident on the north side of Scholls
~t
Ferry on Evarts Court just off of Conestoga. I just... I didn't
r~
get any information on this. So I may not be completely up-to-date
and I may ask questions that have already been answered. The first
t1
20
i~
part I want to do is reiterate what people have already said about
raising the Fanno Creek Bridge. I noticed also that is at a low
priority and if nothing else I would like a clarification of that.
Most of my concerns are dealing with safety. I think you can't put
a price on safety for one thing and you have a lot of people
crossing there. The other thing is that the other side of the park
is virtually unused. We have public land there that is being
( unused because people can't cross. So I think that a path
underneath would be a big benefit.
t-
DON ADAMS: You're saying... that the south side of the
road is not being used as much as the north side.
I.
MARK CHADWICK: Yes, that is correct. I've run there several
times and I've never passed anybody down there. I very seldom see
a bike down there. And I also would like to reiterate what people
have said about starting on the Fanno Creek end instead of the
other end. would like to support that position because most of
the people will be coming from, you can think of it kind of like
as a tree, everybody coming from the branches and everybody is
going to be going towards either Washington Square, 217th or the
Nimbus Technical Center. To start on the other end to me would
serve less people so if you start on the Fanno Creek end, as
proposed, I agree with that. The other thing I want to bring up
is the left hand turns off Springwood. Even before I heard any of
these complaints about Springwood I intended to bring it up
21
.i
F:
myself. I feel that it's very dangerous for people to be making
left hand turns there regardless of how much traffic. There is
really no safe way to do that. And you are just about forced into
trying to straddle the middle passing lane instead of trying to
wait for traffic in both directions to stop. It's dangerous. I
can just see an accident ready to happen. And I propose that
instead of just laying the conduit, we think what we want to do
here and put a stop light there. The other proposition I would
like to bring up, and I don't know if this has been thought about
because I haven't been able to read through the environmental
impact, is possibly put in sidewalks on the other side of the wall
for the safety of people walking by. They will not have to be
exposed to the noise. There may be good reason for that and I
r
would like to know why all the sidewalks disappear on the highway
side of the wall. And the last one, I thought I heard some reasons.
for it but I am not quite sure what it says. Since I live right
off Conestoga and my wife has to make a left hand turn from
Conestoga onto Scholls Ferry every morning I was a little bit
concerned about the paragraph that says "if, in the future, the
status of 125th or 121st is revised, it may be possible to remove
the signal on 125th. It may also eliminate the need for the
proposed signal at Conestoga." I don't know if that means we don't
plan on putting a signal there, we're thinking about it or if it's
going to be taken down. That concerns me very much. So I would
guess I would like clarification on that wording.
r
22 '
t
_ DON ADAMS: I believe there is an existing signal on
125th, is that correct? I think what that is trying to say is that
if the connection the city of Beaverton is studying and will be
i
studying for the next year is built, we'll be able to take the
signal on 125th down and we won't have to put the signal in at
Conestoga. That decision, if I understand it correctly from the
city, will be done well before we're ready to construct.
MARK CHADWICK: Okay. Thank you.
t
DON ADAMS: Thank you. Lyle Laverty
LYLE LAVERTY: I live up on the Morning Hill area and I would
like to make a request that you consider construction to begin from
the other end. I've heard the testimony on the other side and I
think its important that I perhaps.maybe show you a couple of
thoughts that concern me. There has been some work done on the
intersection of 135th and Scholls with a placement of a signal at
the old intersection there. Arid if you try to make a left turn off
135th onto Scholls Ferry in the morning or perhaps in the evening
time, not being a traffic engineer but I am an observing citizen,
I find that my patience gets very short. As I watched people
making those turns and nearly coming into contact with a number of
cars, I think it's a hazardous spot even though the frequency of
travel that comes in the far end of the section of Scholls Ferry
perhaps is less than the other end. Onv- of the things I can't find
23
in the assessment here tonight is the frequency of accidents per
vehicle that travel on that section of road. And I would just
venture to say, based on my observations of glass on the road and
from what I had been able to see, that that may perhaps be a more
hazardous intersection than any of the others you have, including
the merge that takes place down at Fanno Creek Bridge. I pass
r•
A
through there every night so I know what that experience is. But
I also know what the experience is on turning onto 135th. I
encourage you to consider that part of it as you make the
assessment. You have made several references to phases of i.:
construction and it was not evident to me in the presentation where
those different sections or phases would or would not begin. I
think that is important for us to know. I particularly want to be
able to do what I can with the Legislature to encourage those folks
to make this a high State priority and I think that is something t:
we can do collectively. If you could share that with us it would
t
be helpful. The third thing that I have, maybe you can share with
me, is my concern about the sound walls and sound barriers. I know
from a perspective of reducing the sound and the noise impact of
the traffic on that road that it is important and I guess I would
encourage you to do all you could, that is, vegetative screening
C
and anything to minimize the visual impact. I don't find the sound
walls beautiful attractions along the roads and I think if there
is anything you can do to minimize the visual impact and still meet
the sound objectives you're after, I encourage you to do that. Il
hope that in the plans there is some opportunity for some type of r;
E ~
24 s
vegetative screening as well as the hard wall barriers that are
required to break that sound down. But if you could share with us
where those different phases would begin if you were to begin at
,t
` the Murray Creek end or Murray Road or if you were to start at the
other end. Where would those begin and end:
DON ADAMS: Right now the schedule is to start at Fanno
Creek Road and go through 125th and not widen Fanno Creek Bridge.
The rest of the section would go from some point west of 125th to
Murray Road. But I don't have any idea how that funding split
would work but presumably you would be able to come back to
somewhere close to 125th if you just turned that around. The cost
of the split of the phases is that the second phase is a higher
cost than the first phase. Yes, the second phase is more expensive
than the first phase so you could not come as far.
LYLE LAVERTY: okay, the second may be a follow-up question,
t then if you built the first phase and the money ran out, when would
t the next phase begin?
£ DON ADAMS: Maybe Washington County would come up with some
more money. But barring that, the State would have a Six-Year
Highway Improvement Program update that we'll get started and it
would have to work itself into that Six-Year Highway Improvement
Program. Generally, the projects that are added to the Six-Year
Highway Improvement Program are added in the last two years of the
25
Six-Year Program. So you can imagine it would be six years or so.
r ;
Unless some other funding was available and we could put some kind
of a package together.'
is
r,
LYLE LAVERTY: Maybe just one last question and I'll sit down.
How does this project relate in terms of State priorities with
other projects for these funds?:
DON ADAMS: These funds that we have well let's just
say " How does it rate?"
g
Fes;
~l
LYLE LAVERTY: Yea, how does it rate?
s"
r,
DON ADAMS: Reasonably high. We've gotten local
participation in the financing and that g
gives us something of a ~
leg-up and still there are four projects for every one that we can
build so the competition for projects is fierce as you might
imagine. It's going to depend on what our financing looks like for ¢
r
the next Six-Year Program update. See how far we could stretch our
dollars to see if we can catch this kind of a project. We have had
some very bad luck in the last two updates because of Federal ~-i
funding reductions. They cut us pretty badly. °j
LYLE LAVERTY: I see.
26
: ?
JERRY PARMENTER: I might add to Don's comments. You
alluded to statements to the Legislature in support of whatever
'l funding they may come up with. That certainly should be encouraged
as Don has said, also the Six-Year Plan update will be a process
probably starting in late spring of this year and when that Six-
Year Plan comes out in draft form and then is put in preliminary
form, there will be
public hearings, probably about a year from
now. That would be a good opportunity for all of you to come to
give testimony at that point in time as far as your priorities on
how funding should be spent.
LYLE LAVERTY: Okay, thank you.
DON ADAMS: Thank you Jerry, for the good publicity
( and advertisement. I haven't answered any questions. I see people
( kind of drifting out. I'm not putting you off. But will be happy
i to answer specific questions a little later, if you want, after we
get done. Still have two more folks who would like to testify.
Don Price... not testify, but give their input.
DON PRICE: I'm one of the runners that tries to figure out
how to get back and forth across Scholls Ferry out there and use
the trails to the fullest and, believe me, they are full. I would
like to concur with your comment that on the south side, as many
times as I run there, I've been by myself. Mainly you dodge the
cars and get across as best as you can. Then the whole south end
27
r^
opens up to you. So I'd like to see, certainly, some consideration
to open up those park areas. Another comment that I'd like to make
since I have a double whammy out of this, being a homeowner on the
green which will be affected by this and secondly, being involved
with Pacesetter Athletic store in the Park Side Plaza, it kind of
comes and talks to me in two different directions. I am very
interested in doing something to offset the Southern California
look, if you will, and that is being perhaps a little in acid, if
you will, but I just spent three years down there and left a heck
of a job to come back to where it's nice to live. It scares me
when I see these walls going up and the walled cities and that kind
of thing. So anything that would support your suggestion that we
do something to provide a green belt or green barrier, if you will.
Go ahead and put up the wall but cover it up. At least to this
point we don't have anybody with spray cans who will be out there
writing on them for us. I have a question on the wall height.
That will be a part of the barricade from, say, Fanno Creek on up
to Park Side Plaza. And as I look at the proposal there, you show
the walls stopping just short, it seems, of the Park Side shopping
center there. I raise the questions for two reasons. Number one,
there is always a problem.... people trying to explain why Park Side
Plaza is rather small. You're merging at that point, obviously,
and it does not stand out, that section, as the one with Burger
King and the big flag, etc. So if you put up a very high wall, you
do two things, I think. Number 1, you will block the view and make%
it harder to find than it is now. And second, I'm not too sure e
28
f
~l
that it may not cover up some of the signing that identify the
businesses in there. If that's a 12 ft. wall, perhaps I don't know
what the height is. But if it were a 10 or 12 ft. wall, we might
as well tear down the signs. I don't know if you will be able to
see them.
DON ADAMS: From 8 to 10 ft. wall...
DON PRICE: That is getting close and if you're sitting
down in the car as close as it looks, it looks like a we're going
to have to put bumpers on the corner of that one building at Park
Side to keep the car paint off. Its coming awful close to that
j building by the looks of the map. And so I guess my concern is,
l
do we lose sight of the signs for the merging center, our business,
i some of the other businesses there?
DON ADAMS: We would have some certain responsibility
to the homeowners and responsibility through our efforts to
mitigate noise to put the walls in. I think we'll be obliged to
do that.
DON PRICE: Okay, and that touches on my last point. I,
at one time, lived near the St. Louis Airport and recall how all
the nails used to back out of the ceiling due to the jets going
over frequently. We have a tremendous amount of dump truck traffic
back and forth on Scholls and I suspect the road. probably won't
29
P
last too long if that keeps up. But I guess the question I make
then, with that traffic now coming extremely close to the other
buildings even with the sound barriers, will not the vibration and
the ear shattering exhaust sounds be a detriment to the buildings
themselves? It's a question I have because I have seen it happen.
How long before we'll see the plaster cracking then the nails
coming back out of the ceiling? Will the wall, do you think, take
care of that?
DON ADAMS: I hope we don't see the nails coming out of
your ceiling. The walls should take care of the noise. The
vibration will depend on the structure of the ground under the
highway.
DON PRICE: Well, I'm not sure that these were necessarily
built in recognition of what was coming down the pike for years.
f.
Why? I* really don't know. It is a question I raise and ask if any
of this has been considered in the plan.
DON ADAMS: Highway will be new, it will be smooth. I
haven't got anybody to point a finger out here. It will be smooth. j
t.)
DON PRICE: You sound like a million bucks until two years of~
snow tires and chains and then everything will start to bounce
again. Alright, well thank you.
11
30 's_
DON ADAMS: okay, thank you. Gene Filip...
C
GENE FILIP: My name is Gene Filip. I have been against the
signal that comes at Conestoga from the very beginning. I know
Randy concurs with your decision not to put a stop light in at
Springwood Drive. Without having those stop lights at Contestoga,
we're now getting a tremendous amount of traffic onto Springwood
` Drive which is trying to bypass the stop light at 121st. I have
a question for Bud. "Bud, can there be a tie-in or can people
presently travel from Conestoga to Boones Bend Road?"
BUD ROBERTS: Boones Bend Road is a private street.
l
( GENE FILIP: Private street?
t
f BUD ROBERTS: Yes.
t. .
GENE FILIP: But can it be used, can people use Boones Bend
from Conestoga or from that area?
BUD ROBERTS: Yes, they do.
GENE FILIP: Okay, my thought here, then, is to eliminate
the stop light at Conestoga and I hate to disagree with Randy. He
has the expertise and I don't. But I would like to see a stop
light at Springwood Drive. I think you can accomplish two things.
31
• r-
I don't think you would then need to raise Fanno Creek Bridge. If
i
you're going to have a walkway, a bikeway, people coming down from
the south to Scholls Ferry could then drive over or walk over to
the stop light at Springwood Drive, cross at that point. Now this
will accomplish several things. The gentleman who spoke earlier
about the business in that Park Side shopping center would then
have access to Scholls Ferry Road without taking their lives in
their hands. It will also give access to walkers, hikers, bikers,
or to the other side and north side of Scholls Ferry Road. I don't
know what the purpose is of eliminating the stop light at 125th but E
I would urge you not to do it. It's a very busy intersection and
before it was ever put in, anybody that ever tried crossing Scholls
Ferry Road really took their lives in their hands. And I hope that
doesn't come about. But I would like you to consider the
possibility of eliminating raising the bridge at Fanno Creek.
Widening it is fine, but not raising it and then having guide signs
for the hikers, bikers, to go down to the stop light at Springwood
Drive and cross there. I know I am asking for trouble but if you
have a stop light at Conestoga we're going to get a lot of people
on Springwood Drive. So you might as well have one at Springwood
Drive where everybody is going to benefit from it and hopefully it
will work out that way. Thank you.
r:.
DON ADAMS: Thank you. We do have to widen the Fanno
Bridge and I suppose it would be a nice attraction if the bikers s,
and those others could have a crossing under that highway and not
32 t !
have to use the traffic signal both from the standpoint of the
- bikers and hikers convenience, and the motorists convenience
because they don't have to stop at the signal for the pedestrians.
Were there any other people who would like to comment? I'm out of
cards now. I'd be happy to stay around, and the staff will too, to
answer any questions. There have been some good questions about
sound walls. And we have some information at the back of the room
on sound walls that we could fill you in on and about some things
1
that we have in mind that we're going to do with landscaping and
the sound walls. Let me ask you some questions for the group. Is
landscaping included in the estimate or not? Minimum, a little,
a tree... one bush? We do have some landscaping in the project.
t Let me finish the hearing process and I will stick around but I
t want to wrap up the meeting. Maybe we're all done. If you have
. any additional comments that you would like to make, we will f
receive comments for ten days and they will be included in the
testimony. If you have any questions you'd like to ask, just give
us a call. I think you could get hold of Mark and get his phone i
number and he can answer any of your questions as you become
interested in the development. This process for the final
f
environmental impact statement will take three or four months
before we have any kind of approval and we can't begin the Right-
of-Way acquisition until we have the approval of the final
environmental impact statement. We will do a little bit of the
design work and the final design work to keep this project on a
kind of fast track. Right-of-Way has 60 parcels that they have to
33
• i ,
i
deal with so it is going to take some time to process the actual
negotiations and it will be a little while yet before we're ready
for construction. With that, I will close the hearing, formal
hearing, and be happy now to answer any questions that you might
have.
CARD COMMENTS:
Tom Clodfelter: Will the railroad tracks at Fanno Creek be
replaced? If so, when?
John M. Gallagher: I am the Manager of a retail business which
will be affected directly at Springwood intersection and I wish to
comment.
Karen Moen: Do you still plan to put in a "dead ended" electrical F
circuit for possible future lighting at Springwood? If not, why
not? We who live in the Springwood area would like you to leave
future lighting of this intersection open.
,
Gale Stover: The Davies Road extension is not shown on your map.
Any reason for this? Also, is a signal not going to be installed
at Davies, the access for the retirement home (Forest Glen)?
i
R. F. (Bob) Tinsman: I request that the project begin at the
t
Murray Road end.
End of hearing.
r~
34
r'
y
®Rrr.. Cvr-
January 24, 1989 TO~~~
Cs~:. JAN 2 1989
RtUS Regior* 1 K: r?
PA Elul 'rw;
Mr. Don R. Adams
Region 1 Engineer
Oregon State Highway Division
9002 Southeast McLoughlin Blvd.
Milwaukie, OR 97222
Dear Mr. Adams:
I attended the Oregon Department of Transportation meeting
regarding the highway improvement of Scholls/Old Scholls Ferry
Road from Murray Boulevard to Fanno Creek which was held on
Thursday, January 19, 1989. I did not testify at the meeting,
however, I would like to add my comments to the record at this
time. My family and I reside at 11490 SW Springwood Drive,
Tigard. As you are aware, the intersection of Springwood Drive
and Scholls Ferry is one of the most widely debated portions of
this improvement project. While we appreciate the safety
concerns expressed by many people regarding the intersection of
Scholls Ferry and Springwood Drive, we strongly support the
conclusions of the Technical Advisory Committee that the
installation of a traffic signal at that intersection would not
be a responsible installation. We believe that the reasons
expressed in the Fact Sheet, which was distributed at the
meeting, are all accurate assessments of the situation. We
are primarily concerned that whatever is done to Scholls Ferry /
not increase the traffic on Sprringwood Drive as this will
increase the safety hazard to our children and the Engelwood
neighborhood.
I am hopeful that the conclusions of the Technical Advisory
Committee will stand and that a traffic signal will not be
installed at the intersection of 7yholls Ferry and Springwood
Drive. While there was very little testimony in support of
this position at the meeting of Thursday, January 19, I believe
that is due to the fact that those people who support that
position did not feel the need to attend and testify since they
had received a favorable outcome for their position. Had the
conclusion of the Department of Transportation been different
than the one stated, I am sure there would have been a very
large contingent of those people who do not want a.traffic
signal at that intersection.
e
Mr. Don R. Adams
} January 24, 1989
Page Two
I appreciate the efforts of the Department of Transportation to
involve the community in the decision-making related to this
project. Please let me know if I can provide you with any
r_
further information in regard to this matter.
E[ Sincerely,
M. Edward Trachtenbarg
11490 SW Springwood Drive
Tigard, OR 97223
r 639-8397 (H)
(t 626-1700 (B)
I.
fr
i
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: April 24, 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: April 14, 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 89-02 PREVIOUS ACTION: Reviewed by Planning
& ZC 89-02 (Sanders/Planning Commission-on April 4 1
Resources Inc. PREPARED BY: Jerry Offer Asst. Planner
DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OK - REQUESTED BY:
P LILY ISSUE
Should the City allow an increase in density from 12 units per acre to 25 units
per acre on a 4.27 acre portion of property on the north side of Naeve Street?
Will the proposed greater density be compatible with adjoining properties and
neighborhoods?
INFORMATION SUMMARY
On April 4, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal to amend the
Comprehensive Plan map from Medium Density Residential to Medium-High Density
Residential and to amend the zoning map from R-12(PD) (Residential, 12
units/acre, Planned Development) to R-25(PD) (Residential, 25 units/acre,
Planned Development) for an approximately 4.27 acre portion of an 8.27 acre
parcel located at 11165 SW Naeve Street. The remainder of the parcel
presently is designated Medium-High Density Residential by the Plan and is
zoned R-25(PD). The Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed
amendments. The Planning Commission also recommended that the Council direct
the staff to develop a method by which the currently permitted densities on the
two portions of the property may be averaged or to develop a zone that would
allow 15 units per acre which could be applied to the property.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Approve as recommended by staff.
2. Deny as recommended by the Planning Commission. Direct the staff to
develop a method by which the currently allowed densities may be averaged
or else direct the staff to develop a new zone which would allow
residential development at 15 dwelling units per acre.
3. Deny the proposed amendments.
FISCAL IMPACT
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve the proposed Plan/zoning map amendments. Adopt the staff report as
findings supporting the approval.
dj/CPA-SS.JO
E
r. Q S,w, to
r p1 IT.
0
S.W- tERR
NAIEItREE
.4 IF
J `
o S . .•°.d ACE.` Q
I yE,r c{ 4
CAI Ijy ~1 -4 *S
7Jy
P • 1+ NC ~ AYE tn
^ N Y,4S ~ Y
q
w \ It
wt ~ E
wlr . N oEOR Le V
~ c ; • A h
t,f P J O
4 ~ ` ~ f 34 FIR Sy. n
ya0{ ~ ` c + hpA, E rfgR 0~ ."L'
W 117 r S, h. F{jR
. ` ~ ~ LR BEM' ~y
qA oA"s c
a vE.
~ n
• ~ sY~
11 AV A it ^ ERpt
Ct AVE
t q
A xAro ; {f1
WEST 3 ac w ,o
t u > 4 1
3
JJ i E
3'JMMER~IE:C to
TXL 5 At
OmmIUMS {pp
A A&
a„r ~ O iRx s ~
r ! = S.W. 'y .
IOt+h
109% E. a GT fOWES
Jvj ^ x
f+ q~
`
~ ~ WAr+cINS
In
' 4, • V
aW. i a A ~ C
lANO 1+{Lt. sw p1 TX 'rvN
i
N u N
N AYE ~ a 0 g
>E ~ ~ r a~ ~c
O AYE.
• ~ ~ c ~ sw. loss $ eF
~ gamma lo:.°
P ~ ~ a 00 lN. AYE y. //~7~
t~ ► t a / "
n
R E R: w t
k
a ~
•OO+a
- 1 T_ T-111i
NlmG MAP
ir .1
s.r veer TEPP t - a w.
L ,Pl - ° 'tFW
' - .YF
ARR
t r m:
TJ
~ } -I Imo- P,seAaow r ' TWALITY
r- j- JUNIOR
r_r.f KOH
i - O. w _J _-J 1 1 i ,s? .i SCHOOL r
O --rte- r -w
{ O f ,
._1_ /a F a I _ o(_' - _ "1-I _..1 - 1~'✓r`~UAD•tG 'S r
O// fi_ < r 1 7EMPLETON
~ ELEMENTARY'
r - -r ( i r r CHOOL
R-4 010 ~O . I - s t
r..
_ S
f - ~ T~ ftr D)V
_
r' ~ ,^w.~j^ I I T'T
-T 4 7_14,
rp.
n
i O f_~._~CN • ✓ .sPP Nf .C tt - fTr /f ~ w - `
z u w t t; J w ~tlwEAr h JV ' 1 •-i+v`C 'v 9. 1.
((A~~,,~[`~'j~{ i-~ 1 ~ .i cc'{JJ ``'i~',
C-~ _ _ TG,IANar r~-' i =1._ i.~.t 11~1_~~I('- • ~i •
- ~ - I ,J _ ~._{-J - _ .L. ~ 1_l~ 111.11..: •!._S
~ ~ IS r YI.ATMG •?1~ .y
1 5 TlF7 4 l ii) NYTN. ST
<ENj s,~ t fit < F 7 TI rY e?
moo
`aj1a4a4a.a I
as -7LT_
.f I 1 . i
- .......-..:::.r~.._ . ..........1Y:u.t:..vr~~m...» - .CBS'
• 1lAO
W
;z a \
cl, 12 g
0 1,........
Q
Iz f -2
ZO 1 J n ~ ~i
:z , ^ 1i a
v ! 4
.Z g 4 p
X N 4 S q
.Q
WI^ /
vI
1 Y
• IY
~ I 1>f.0I,~0.0i
,r (0011 1001)
i
co 020
STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM 5.2
4r APRIL 4, 1989 - 7:30 P.M.
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
TIGARD CITY BALL - TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BLVD.
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
A. FACTS
1. General Information
CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 89-02, Zone Change ZC 89-02
REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Medium Density
Residential to Medium-High Density Residential and a Zone
Change from R-12 (PD) (flulti-Family Residential, 12 units
per acre, Planned Development) to R-25 (PD) (Multi-Family
Residential, 25 units per acre, Planned Development) for
approximately 4.27 acres.
APPLICANT: Planning Resources, Inc. OWNER: William & Claire Sanders
3681 SW Carman Drive 2236 Bents Street NE
Lake Oswego, OR 97035 Aurora, OR 97002
LOCATION: Eastern half of 11165 SW Naeve :street (WCTM 2S1 IODB, tax
( lot 200).
2. Background Information
This parcel and adjacent- parcels were annexed to the City of Tigard in
1981 with a Washington County zoning designation of RU-4 (Residential,
4 units/acre). City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Revision CPR 1-81
approved redesignation of the entire parcel from Low Density
Residential to Medium Density Residential and a zone change to R-12
(Residential, 12 units/acre). The Planned Development (PD) overlay
zone was added to the requested R-12 designation so that all
development proposals for the property would be required to be reviewed
by the Planning Commission.
In December 1986, the Tigard City Council gave conditional approval to
the Albertson's Comprehensive Plan Amendment for changing the Plan
designation of several properties located at the southeast corner of
Durham Road and Pacific Highway. This approval redesignated these
properties from High Density Residential to General Commercial. The
result of this decision was the removal of the opportunity for
approximately 400 potential multi-family housing units from Tigard's
inventory of vacant, buildable land. The Metropolitan Housing Rule
(Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660, Division 7) requires that
Tigard provide a housing opportunity for at least 50 percent
multi-family units and a net minimum housing density of 10 dwelling
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 1
units per acre un vacaot uuilua`uie laird witi~iii t~5 2 City' , :;ruwn
Planning Area. The Albertson's CPA was granted on the condition of
redesignation of sufficient residential land to higher densities to
make up for the housing opportunity shortfall created by the decision.
Several sites throughout the City, including the subject parcel, were
considered for increased residential densities to make up for the
housing opportunity shortfall created by the Albertson's decision. The
western half of the subject property and the parcel to the west were
proposed for Plan/zone redesignation from Medium Density
Residential/R-12 (PD) to Medium-High Density Residential/R-25 (PD) (CPA
87-07(G)/ZC 87-02(G)). No change in designation was proposed for the
eastern half of the Sanders' parcel. The proposed redesignation of the
western half of the property and the adjacent parcel was approved by
the City Council on April 13, 1987.
No other land use applications regarding this parcel have been reviewed
by the City.
3. Vicinity Information
The Sanders' property is surrounded by the following zoning districts:
R-25 (PD) (Residential, 25 units/acre, Planned Development) to the west
and south; C-G (PD) (General Commercial, Planned Development) to the
southwest; R-25 to the southeast; and R-12 (PD) (Residential,
12 units/acre, Planned Development)to the north. Parcels to the west,
east, and north are undeveloped, tree-covered, and together with the
subject parcel form the southern slope of Little Bull Mountain. The
Fountains at Summerfield condominiums are located directly south of the
Sanders' property. To the southwest are several undeveloped parcels as
well as Hector's Nursery which fronts on Pacific Highway.
The Sanders property has approximately 220 feet of frontage on Naeve
Street. Naeve Street is designated as a minor collector street by the
City's Transportation Plan Map. Naeve Street is generally substandard
in width and in state of improvements, with the exception of the
frontage of the Fountains at Summerfield directly across from the
Sanders' property. Half street improvements including 30 feet of
pavement, curbs, a sidewalk, and streetlights have been installed along
the Fountains' frontage. The developers of the Fountains have also
installed a 20 foot wide interim road surface westward to Naeve
Street's intersection with Pacific Highway.
Pacific Highway, a four-lane divided arterial, is located approximately
500 feet west of the Sanders' property. A left turn lane onto Naeve
Street is provided for southbound traffic. The intersection of Naeve
Street and Pacific Highway is not signalized. SW 109th Avenue is
approximately 450 feet east of the property. South of the
intersection, SW 109th Avenue is a fully improved street leading into
the Summerfield planned community with connections east and west
leading to Durham Road. SW 109th Avenue, north of the intersection
with Naeve Street, is a steep gravel road extending approximately 1,200
feet to a dead end. SW 109th Avenue continues approximately 200 feet
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 2
further north of i:ne dead end. This northern section of SW 109th Avenue extends northward to Canterbury Lane. The City's Transportation
Plan Map calls for the two segments of SW 109th to be connected in the
future.
4. Site Information and Proposal Description
Tax lot 200 is an 8.27 acre parcel presently developed with one single
family residence and several outbuildings. The property slopes
generally to the south and west with an average grade of 12 percent.
The property formerly was used as a nursery. The site is mostly wooded
with a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees. The largest trees
are on the northernmost portion of the property. The southernmost
portion of the property, between the house and Naeve Street, is mostly
open.
The property is presently served by a septic system and a well. A
sanitary sewer and a storm sewer are located nearby at the intersection
of SW Naeve Street and SW 109th Avenue. An 8-inch diameter water main
is located along Naeve Street.
The Sanders' property presently has split Plan and zoning
designations. The western 4.0 acres is designated Medium-High Density
Residential by the Comprehensive Plan Map and is zoned R-25 (PD). The
eastern 4.27 acres is designated Medium Density Residential and is
zoned R-12 (PD). The applicants request that the eastern 4.27 acres be
redesignated Medium-High Density Residential and be rezoned R-25 (PD).
The applicants cite difficulties in marketing the property for
development purposes because of the split designation. The Planning
Division has previously responded to the owners' and potential
developers' inquiries regarding the possibility of averaging the
allowed densities for the two portions of the parcel with an
interpretation that averaging was not possible. (Exhibit 1: July 11,
1988, letter to William Sanders from Jerry Offer.)
5. Agency and NPO Comments
The Engineering Division has reviewed the proposal and offered the
following comments:
The subject site fronts onto SW Naeve Street, a largely
unimproved minor collector street. Improvements to Naeve
Street would be required as a condition of any development
of the property. The improved roadway should provide
adequate vehicular access for the site at the increased
density.
Sanitary sewer and storm drainage improvements would have
to be extended from existing manholes at SW Naeve Street
and SW 109th Avenue. The sanitary sewer system is capable
of providing _the necessary service at the requested
increased density. The existing storm drainage system
would be required to be evaluated as a condition of
development of the site. Increased density will typically
increase runoff slightly but the overall impact on runoff
from this site should be minimal.
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 3
~ ~c Oregon State ~~.'.j.ti...,
T .....a~~ Division has offered v v ~'..,^j'.~.^.. ~t...... or comments
regarding the proposal but has noted that future development of the
site at either the existing or proposed densities may necessitate
improvements to Naeve Street's intersection with Pacific Highway.
Improvements would need to be constructed at the developer's expense.
The Tigard Water District has commented that its water system has the
capacity to serve the development. However, the Water District added
that it may be necessary to serve the upper portion of the site from a
pumped water line from Canterbury Lane and to serve the lower portion
of the site from a main located along SW Naeve Street because of
difficulties with water pressure.
NPO ,#6 has commented that the western half of the property should be
down-zoned to R-12 rather than having the eastern half of the property
up-zoned to R-25. The NPO feels that this would make the parcel a more
homogeneous, developable property that would be compatible with the
existing neighborhood.
Tigard School District 23J and Washington County Fire District fil
reviewed the proposal and have offered no comments or objections.
No other comments were received.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2,
and 10; Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 6.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.8.1,
8.1.1, 8.1.3, 8.2.2, and Chapter 12, Locational Criteria; and the
change or mistake quasi-judicial map amendment criteria of both the
Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code.
The Planning staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the
applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines based upon the
following findings:
1. Goal #1 is met because the City has adopted a Citizens
Involvement program including review of all development
applications by the Neighborhood Planning Organization (NPO). In
addition, all public notice requirements have been satisfied for
this application.
2. Goal N2 is met because the City has applied all applicable
Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan Policies and
Community Development Code requirements to the review of the
proposal.
3. Goal #10 is satisfied because the proposal will provide for
additional housing opportunities as promoted by the City's
Comprehensive Plan and the Metropolitan Housing Rule (Oregon
Administrative- Rules, Chapter 660, Division 7). Approval of the
proposal would increase housing opportunities on the city's
developable residential lands to 10.21 dwelling units per acre.
The
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 69-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 4
Metropolitan Housing Rule requires that the City maintain a
minimum housing opportunity rate for developable lands of 10
units per acre and a minimum 50/50 opportunity mix for single
family and multi-family housing.
The Planning staff has determined that the proposal is consistent with
the relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings
noted below:
1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because Neighborhood Planning
Organization #6 and surrounding property owners were given notice
of the hearing and an opportunity to comment on the proposal.
2. Plan Policy 6.1.1 is satisfied because the proposal would provide
the opportunity for additional multi-family development and would
increase the net housing opportunity on buildable lands in the
City. This is detailed in the discussion for Goal 10 above. The
City of Tigard is obligated through the Metropolitan Housing Rule
to provide for an equal housing opportunity mix of single family
and multi-family units with an overall development density of 10.
units per acre. The City must ensure that sufficient higher
density areas are available so the intent of the Housing Rule can
be met. The proposed redesignation would further the City's
compliance with these requirements. Reducing the allowed density E
on the property, as the NPO has recommended, would bring the City
closer to non-compliance with the Housing Rule requirements.
3. Plan Policy 7.1.2 is satisfied because adequate public service
capacities are available to serve potential development on the
1 site at the proposed increased density as indicated by the
comments of service providers. Storm sewer and sanitary sewer k;
extensions will be necessary to serve the property. This can be a.
accomplished as a condition of developing the site.
f:
4. Plan Policy 7.8.1 is satisfied because the Tigard School District'
e:.
was informed of this proposal. The School District is presently;
constructing an addition to the Durham Elementary School and is
also reviewing proposed changes to school attendance boundaries. i'
These actions are intended to alleviate overcrowding in existing`
classrooms and to provide additional capacity to serve future
growth in the area. s
5. Plan Policy 8.1.1 commits the City to plan for a safe and
efficient street and roadway system that meets current needs and
anticipated future development. This policy would be satisfied
because additional anticipated traffic resulting from the
z
increased number- of dwelling units that could be developed on the s
site would not cause SW Naeve Street and adjacent streets to F
i
exceed normal traffic levels for their functional
classifications. SW Naeve Street and SW Summerfield Drive, which
is located to the south, are both functionally classified as
minor collector streets. SW 109th Avenue and other streets in
the area are functionally classified as local streets.
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 5
The applicants have submitted a preliminary traffic analysis
prepared by Robert Keech and Associates, consulting traffic
engineers (Exhibit 2). This analysis concludes that the proposed
redesignation would be expected to result in an additional 320
vehicular trips per day from the site beyond what would be
expected under full development with the existing zoning. The
traffic analysis projects that 38 percent of these trips, or 122
trips per day, would be anticipated to travel south and east
through the Summerfield planned community to Durham Road. The
analysis projects 42 additional trips would travel westbound on
Summerfield Drive and 80 eastbound trips on Summerfield Drive.
Although any additional traffic on Summerfield Drive will be of
concern to residents of the Summerfield community, the potential
additional traffic should not result in the suggested traffic
range of SW Summerfield Drive being exceeded. The suggested
traffic range of minor collector streets, as specified by the
Transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan, is up to 3,000
vehicle trips per day. The additional traffic also should not
exceed the suggested traffic range for SW 109th Avenue which is
functionally classified by the Plan as a local street. The Plan
states that the suggested traffic range of improved local streets
is up to 1,500 vehicle trips per day.
The traffic analysis projects that an additional 198 vehicle
trips westward on Naeve Street would be anticipated from full
development at the proposed density as compared to full
development at the current density opportunity applicable to the
Sanders' property. This additional traffic is not anticipated to
result in exceeding the suggested traffic range of SW Naeve
Street, a minor collector street, or Pacific Highway which is
functionally classified as an arterial. It is noted, however,
that any development of the Sanders' property, either with the
density limits of the current or proposed zoning, will likely
require cuff-site interim street improvements to Naeve Street in
both directions as well as improvements to the intersection of
Naeve Street and Pacific Highway.
Because the proposed redesignation would not result in normal
traffic ranges of adjacent streets being exceeded by traffic
generated by the additional dwelling units that could be
developed, and also because the parcel is served by an adequate
network of minor collector streets and an arterial, Plan Policy
8.1.1 would be satisfied if the proposed redesignation is
approved.
6. Plan Policy 8.1.3 will be satisfied as a condition of approval of
any future development of the property. Necessary right-of-way
dedication and street improvements would be required at that
time. The City's Engineering Division and the Oregon State
Highway Division will review any development proposal for the
site.
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89•-02/ZC 89-•02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 6
r
7. Plan Policy 8.2.2 is satisfied because Tri-Mu t offers bus service
on Pacific Highway less than one quarter mile from the property.
8. The Locational Criteria specified in Chapter 12 of the Plan for
' Medium-High Density Residential use are satisfied for the
following reasons:
a. The property is within a "Developing Area" which is not
committed to low density development.
b. The property is approximately 400 feet from the nearest
properties designated by the Plan for single family
residential use; future development on the site would
therefore be adequately separated from low--density
development thereby minimizing the potential for conflicts.
C. The parcel has direct access to Naeve Street, a minor
collector street, as well as indirect access to Pacific
Highway, an arterial street, as designated by the
Comprehensive Plan's Transportation Plan Map. The parcel
is less than 500 feet from Pacific Highway.
d. Serious development limitations affecting the site are not
evident and public facilities can be extended to serve the
property.
e. Public transit is available on Pacific Highway within a
quarter mile of the site.
f. Convenience retail service is available nearby along
Pacific Highway. Commercial and business centers are
located approximately 0.5 to 1 mile from the parcel.
g. Property north of the site has slopes in excess of 25
percent that will be difficult to develop and therefore
will likely remain as private open space. Common open
space and recreational facilities that cusomarily are
provided with multi-family development will also likely be
provided as the subject property is developed. No public
open space is located within the vicinity of the parcel.
In order to approve a quasi-judicial amendment to the Plan and Zoning
Maps, the City must also find that there is evidence of a change in the
neighborhood or community which affects the subject partcel.
Alternatively, the City must find that there has been a mistake or
inconsistency made in the original designation of the parcel.
(Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2, Policy 1.1.1, Implementation Strategy 2;
Community Development Code Section 18.22.040(A)). Staff concurs with
the applicant's assertion that a mistake was made in designating the
Sanders' property with two Plan and Zoning designations splitting the
parcel longitudinally. The current split designations makes the parcel
very difficult to develop because the allowable densities of the two
zones cannot be averaged over the entire parcel. The staff believes
that it would be better to distribute the units throughout the site
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 7
with respect to any at;Lual development constraints or upportunit:ies
inherent in the site rather than with respect to an arbitrary zoning
district boundary. The proposed redesignation would correct the
mistake that was made in the original split designation of the parcel.
C. RECOMMENDATION
The Planning staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a
recommendation for approval of CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 for the eastern
portion of the Sanders' property (11165 SW Naeve Street, WCTM 2S1 1ODB,
tax lot 200) to Medium-High Density Residential and R-25(PD).
PREP ED BY. err fer APPROVED BY: Keith Liden
U Ass ant Planner Senior Planner
br/9412D
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-02/ZC 89-02 (SANDERS) - PAGE 8
F
~ e
July 11, 1988;
F;
T ~
W. B. Sanders CI I i OF • IIFA~ :
23256 Bents Road NE
Aurora, OR 97002 OREGON 4.
RE: Zoning of 11165 SW Naeve Street
r
You have asked whether the density limits imposed by the zoning designations
applied to your parcel at 11165 SW Naeve Street (WCTM 2S1 10D, Tax Lot 600) may G'
be averaged. The eastern half of this parcel is zoned R-12 (PD) which allows a
maximum residential density of 12 units per acre. The western portion of the i-
property is zoned R-25 (PD) which allows a maximum density of 25 units per
acre. The zoning on the western half of the property was changed from R-12 4i.
(PD) to R-25 (PD) by the City Council on April 13, 1987. w:
i-
4
Mixing or averaging of allowed densities on the different tuitions of tax lot
600 is not permitted. Density averaging would be tantamount to a rezoning of
the eastern half of the parcel without the benefit of public review of the
intensification. Density averaging could conceivably result in impacts upon
properties adjacent to the eastern portion of your property or upon systems,
such as transportation or drainage, specifically related to the eastern portion
of the property.
Because any increase in density on the eastern half of tax lot 600 would result
in a density greater than 12 units per acre, a plan amendment from Medium
t
Density Residential (6 to 12 units/acre) to Medium-High Density Residential
(13 to 25 units/acre) would be necessary, as well as a zoning designation,
amendment. The City. .'Council is the decision-making body for plan amendments.
The City Council will consider plan amendments only at its October and April
meetings. Applications for plan amendments to be heard in October need to be
filed with the Planning Division no later than August 12. Application for a''..
plan amendment to be heard in April would need to be filed by mid-February.
A pre-application conference with City staff is required prior to filing an
application. The purpose of the conference is to allow the applicants and .
staff to discuss the application requirements and hearing process, review the
criteria for a plan amendment, and discuss specific issues that would need to
be addressed for a particular property. Of particular concern with your
property would be the affects of increased density upon the roads in the area.
Please contact me if you have any further questions or would like to schedule a
pre-application.conference.
Sincerely,
v
G
erry 0 fer
Assistant Planner
131AV4MA%1vd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 HIBI . O"
Land Use
n w w`V' ~ w w i /1 R P Pfannina
L/N ~ ~ V I ~ Services
RESOURCES, INC.
3681 S.W. Carman Drive
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035
(503) 636-5422
March 7, 1989
Mr. Jerry Offer, Associate Planner
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
RE: The William Sanders Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change
Applications
Dear Mr. Offer:
The applicant is aware of the concern regarding the potential traffic
impact this application may have on the adjoining neighborhood,
therefore a preliminary traffic analysis has been completed and is
submitted to you. The maps and documentation resulting from this
analysis are attached.
The total daily generated traffic resulting from the current zoning
would be 876 trips/day. The total daily generated trips resulting from
the proposed zone change would be 1195, for a difference of 319.
It is the professional judgement of the consulting traffic engineer that
approximately two-thirds of the traffic will travel to the north on
Pacific Highway and the remaining one-third of the traffic will travel
toward 109th Avenue, dispersing to the east and southwest.
The difference in impact on local streets between the project developing
under existing versus proposed zoning is 42 additional trips on
Summerfield west-bound and 80 additional trips on Summerfield east-bound
from Highland. Because this traffic is dispersed over several streets,
the overall affect of this proposed change should remain within the
normal range for local streets.
Of the total number of trips generated from the proposed Zone Change and
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the majority will travel toward Pacific
Highway and not through the existing neighborhoods.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact our
office.
sincerely, -
Lori Mastrantonio
Planner
EXHIBIT TWO
s
t~1'-V Tr
7► _
r
ROAD ONO Nt]RTH td
0~ 1 sg Sp,.t-TLER STREET
1
1 ~ ~ cn
(d
c~ F ST ~
LL `~`G ~ zo'lb
U
DURHAM ROAD
1 .
~G $41-6333
~ C~ Nssoo
11 ~R A~~ 91229 'Q3
c ,~'1 1E ~ N`H l~URRp
J 1
-PoT
{
PROJECT SITE TRAFFIC GENERATION
Worksheet
SITE NAME: Sander Property (As Zoned) j
SITE USE: Apartments (ITE land use code 220)
SITE SIZE: 151 units
UNADJUSTED DAILY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATE: 6.1 trips/unit
ESTIMATED TRANSIT USE: 0.05
ADJUSTED DAILY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATE: 5.8 trips/unit
TOTAL DAILY GENERATED TRIPS: 876 trips/day
PERCENTAGE OF TRIPS OCCURING DURING AM PEAK: 8.7%
AM PEAK HOURLY GENERATED TRIPS: 76 trips/hour
AM ENTER TRIP SPLIT: 0.18 in/total
AM TRAFFIC VOLUME IN: 14 trips/hour
AM TRAFFIC VOLUME OUT: 62 trips/hour
PERCENTAGE OF TRIPS OCCURING DURING PM PEAK: 11.0%
PM PEAK HOURLY GENERATED TRIPS: 96 trips/hour
PM ENTER TRIP SPLIT: 0.68 in/total
PM TRAFFIC VOLUME IN: 66 trips/hour
PM TRAFFIC VOLUME OUT: 30 trips/hour
Source: 4th edition 'Trip Generation" (ITE, 1987)
1
I
i
PROJECT SITE TRAFFIC GENERATION
Worksheet r
SITE NAME: Sander Property (As Proposed)
SITE USE: Apartments (ITE land use code 220)
SITE SIZE: 206 units
UNADJUSTED DAILY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATE: 6.1 trips/unit
ESTIMATED TRANSIT USE: 0.05
ADJUSTED DAILY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION RATE: 5.8 trips/unit
TOTAL DAILY GENERATED TRIPS: 1195 trips/day
PERCENTAGE OF TRIPS OCCURING DURING AM PEAK: 8.7%
AM PEAK HOURLY GENERATED TRIPS: 104 trips/hour
AM ENTER TRIP SPLIT: 0.18 in/total
AM TRAFFIC VOLUME IN: 19 trips/hour
AM TRAFFIC VOLUME OUT: 85 trips/hour
PERCENTAGE OF TRIPS OCCURING DURING PM PEAK: 11.0%
PM PEAK HOURLY GENERATED TRIPS: 131 trips/hour
PM ENTER TRIP SPLIT: 0.68 in/total
PM TRAFFIC VOLUME IN: 89 trips/hour
PM TRAFFIC VOLUME OUT: 42 trips/hour
Source: 4th edition 'Trip Generation" (ITE, 1987)
I
r
m
r
NpR~H c
8~~p ROAD 60
1 ~ 1
1
sly 1 to
ca Sr ~ ~ PNp v
CL N 5v~ ppRH~M RONO
er ~s } ER
o
CI N~~~E
S
NS
~~G E 641_63
Tw
'I
r
ROAD NaRZH
LkA
Sy~31 1 ~
~ c0 cn
c~ F 33 v
1
CL N 5v~ pURH A~ ROAD
ZK tt
~ FF~G ~3 641.633
. KE~ G 1R A 97229 50 ~ .
cc
E R 1225 N`N vot1RRAY
SJ
ELL
R ~Tf
S J
PO Oro ~p a
Q a-, a ralr[
O
r
-2 5
r
(Pp f
Site - l
i
t!
• Y ~ ~ l ~ MfwIFW
•o
- ••l E9r we c:
~ lF.r
CT.. Y r
KFT R .
I ' J •0~4•, c~ w
~ I
•y FK. ; ~
- CCLr'i ~
' s, uvc r• , ~
R
R /S sn i
AYE. • • V
r
~~111M r l^L%`~' F~ r F ' ' ( 4.%f'L►.im ~✓J ~ 7~
61,164
6610960
0
Figure 1
Existing Zoning
1
1 iRRr jY ~ .
Q P ~ f J u }
r
I J pOp L" ~
1 / J ~ p °a
r a
` J r "o w r o~
j sr =
7 • rR* ~T
Yi ~ Mt Od"RLO
A ~
V V T[ ~ S ?.f y iLRG+L ST
J
f ~ Z V~ t Y O ~Y~tjt f. 1
7 ~ * lA Li ~+7Vp ~ . SM
trf
RR fJ V `'1
•R ! l
3
.tea T Y
JA1.t'f
jvjtA
10 r"v. ~ 'vim •
ir-
MOM,
SC i
V~ "r T~ rvr •x
yw 6
T". r `G ~ r CP ' t
y. _ ~~~111'~`~JJJ111JJJry .l
• ~'1i_ site
So
' rI ' AI,
VC or. T
7 .i f' w 5 C 0}}...,t.LiVr e
11II _ F
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT &
ZONE CHANGE REQUEST
Naeve Street
Tigard, Oregon
Prepared For:
Mr. William Sanders
Prepared By:
Planning Resouces, Inc.
February, 1989
f:
INTRODUCTION
I.
This application involves a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Medium f
Density Residential to Medium-High Density Residential and a Zone Change
from R-12 (PD) to R-25 (PD) for a 4.27 acre site located east of
Pacific Highway, north of SW Naeve Street and approximately 450 feet
west of SW 109th Avenue. The subject property is described as part of
Tax Lot 200 of Assessor's Map 2Si IODB.
This site and the 4.0 acre parcel west of and contiguous to the site is
under one ownership. However, the adjacent 4.0 acre site is designated
in the Comprehensive Plan as Medium-High Density Residential and zoned
R-25 (PD) (Multifamily residential, 25 units `
Y , per acre, Planned
Development). This application seeks to make the zoning of the entire
property owned by Mr. Sanders consistent. In 1987, Tax Lot 300 and only
part of Tax Lot 200 were rezoned from R-12 to R-25 Residential with a
corresponding Plan change from Medium to Medium-High Density
Residential. '
Having part of Tax Lot 200 zoned R-12 and the remaining part zoned R-25
makes marketing the parcel a difficult task as evidenced by the attached
letter from Paul K. Bartholemy of Columbia Equities, Inc. dated November`
21, 1988. One of the reasons given by Mr. Bartholemy for rescinding an
offer to purchase the subject property was the split zoning. {
This report has been prepared on behalf of William B. Sanders, owner of
Tax Lot 200, 8.27 acres. Tax Lot 200 has been used as a nursery for many
years and it presently contains a residence and several outbuildings.
This report will demonstrate that this application is consistent with
the policies of the City of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan, locational
1
criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan, volume 2, provisions of the
Community Development Code and the applicable Statewide Planning Goals
and Guidelines.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
In December 1986, the Tigard City Council gave conditional approval to
the Albertson's Comprehensive Plan Amendment for changing the zoning of
the southeast corner of Durham Road and Pacific Highway. This proposal
involved rezoning these properties from High Density Residential to
Commercial. The result of the decision was the removal of about 400
potential housing units from Tigard's inventory of buildable land. In
order to meet the Metropolitan Housing Rule adopted by the LCDC, the
city had to attain 10 residential units to the net acre.
The Albertson's CPA was granted on the condition of a rezoning of
sufficient residentially zoned land to make up for the shortfall created
by this decision. The rezoning of Tax Lot 300 and part of Tax Lot 200
were a part of the City's attempt to maintain compliance with the
Metropolitan Housing Rule of 10 units per net acre.
EXISTING LAND USE
The site contains a residence and several outbuildings and has
approximately 220 feet of frontage along Naeve Street.
To the north is Little Bull Mountain, to the South is the Fountains at
Summerfield and the properties east and west of the site are currently
vacant.
The properties to the north are presently zoned R-12. The city limits of
King City are to the west (across Pacific Highway). The properties to
the south are zoned C-G (General. Commercial) and R-25. The property to
the east is zoned R-12. Further east the property is zoned R-3.5.
2
PHYSICAL FEATURES
i+
The property slopes generally southerly and westerly with an average:
slope across the site of approximately 12%.
The site contains deciduous and conifer trees. The more quality trees
are located at the northern portion of the site. Part of the front
portion of the site is cleared.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
. Sanitary Sewers: Sanitary sewer service is available and can be
extended from an 8" sanitary sewer line that rune to the intersection of
r
109th Avenue and Naeve Street. j
i
Water Service: Water service to the site is provided by the Tigard
Water District, which has an 8" main located at the intersection of
109th Avenue and Naeve Street. The Tigard Water District has indicated
that a water main would need to be extended to serve the site. The
District has indicated that an easement would need to be obtained from
the abutting tax lot to the east, Tax Lot 100, to extend the water main
to the site. This would be done at the time the property is developed.
Storm Sewers: Storm drainage can be provided by extending the existing
30" storm sewer line at the intersection of 109th Avenue and Naeve
Street.
Streets: The site has approximately 220' of frontage along Naeve Street
and is approximately 700' from Pacific Highway. Partial street,
improvements have been completed along Naeve Street as a result of the
development of the Fountains at Summerfield Condominiums across from the
site. At the time-the subject property is developed, additional street
improvements along Naeve Street will be required.
3
A preliminary traffic analysis will be submitted to illustrate the
general traffic patterns that would occur if the site were developed at
the R-12 versus the R-25 density.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
City staff has provided the applicant with a list of the appropriate
City Plan policies, locational criteria, Community Development Code
provisions and applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines to be
addressed. These are presented and evaluated below.
POLICY 2.1.1
THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND SHALL
ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN
ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.
Comment: Part of the application process involves public hearings
before both the Planning Commission and City Council after appropriate
legal notice to the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding
property owne::s. These public hearings will provide the opportunity for
citizen input regarding this proposal.
POLICY 6.1.1
THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING
DENSITIES AND RESIDENTIAL TYPES AT VARIOUS PRICE AND RENT LEVELS.
Comment: According to City staff, the City is obligated through the
Metropolitan Housing Rule to provide for a mix of single family and
attached units with an overall development density of 10 units per acre.
The City must ensure that sufficient higher density areas are available
so the intent of the housing rule can be met. Providing more acreage
4
y
for higher density housing will result in additional multifamily housing
i
units for those community members in the market for rental housing and t
more affordable housing. k
f.
e
POLICY 7.1.2
THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRE-CONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT:
a. DEVELOPMENT COINCIDE WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE
SERVICE CAPACITY INCLUDING:
1. PUBLIC WATER;
2. PUBLIC SEWER (NEW DEVELOPMENT ON SEPTIC TANKS SHALL NOT BE
ALLOWED WITHIN THE CITY); AND
3. STORM DRAINAGE
b. THE FACILITIES ARE:
1. CAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SERVING ALL INTERVENING PROPERTIES
AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT; AND
2. DESIGNED TO CITY STANDARDS. G:
c. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES TO BE PLACED UNDERGROUND.
i
r
Comment: As previously discussed, this policy is satisfied because
adequate service capacities either are available or can be extended to
seive-the site. Utility extensions (i.e. sewer, water and storm) can be
provided to serve the property at the time of development.
POLICY 7.8.1
.
THE CITY SHALL WORK CLOSELY WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS" TO ASSURE THE
MAXIMUM COMMUNITY USE OF THE SCHOOL FACILITIES FOR TIGARD RESIDENTS
5
THROUGH LOCATIONAL CRITERIA AND THE PROVISIONS OF URBAN SERVICES.
Comment: Tigard School District 23J provides educational services for
this site. Templeton Grade, Twality Junior High and Tigard High Schools
serve this site at this time. According to the School District,
additional classrooms have been added to two grade schools in the
district plus a new grade school is under construction at Durham.
Therefore, adequate school facilities are available to serve this site.
POLICY 8.1.1
THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OF THE TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING PROCESS WITHIN THE CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN AREA THROUGH
COOPERATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS.
Comment: The subject property is served by Naeve Street, a minor
collector and Pacific Highway, a major arterial. At the time the site is
developed, street improvements along Naeve Street to Pacific Highway
will be required as well as additional right-of-way. Bus service is
provided near the site along Pacific Highway.
APPLICABLE LCDC GOALS AND GUIDELINES
GOAL 11: DEVELOP A CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM THAT ENSURES THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO GET INVOLVED IN ALL ASPECTS OF THE PLANNING
PROCESS.
Comment: Part of the application process involves public hearings
before both the Planning Commission and City Council after appropriate
legal notice to the Neighborhood Planning Organization and surrounding
property owners. These public hearings will provide the opportunity for
citizen input regarding this proposal.
O
6
C f~
GOAL #2: ESTABLISH A LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS AND POLICY FRAMEWORK AS
THE BASIS OF ALL LAND USE DECISIONS AND ACTIONS, AND ENSURE AN ADEQUATE
FACTUAL DATA BASE TO SUBSTANTIATE THOSE DECISIONS AND ACTIONS.
Comment: This goal is met as this application is following the process
and addressing the policies and criteria specified by the City.
GOAL #10: PROVIDE ADEQUATE HOUSING FOR THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY,
REGION AND STATE.
Comment: In order to provide adequate housing, there needs to be an
opportunity to allow various housing types on undeveloped land; single-
family as well as multifamily housing. Allowing a higher density of
residential development on this site will allow the opportunity for
affordable housing in the community.
The Metropolitan Housing rule adopted by LCDC requires a minimum of 10
units per net acre. According to City staff, the density designations
currently in the Plan just reach this target. Approval of the
application increases housing density potential within the City,
complies with the purposes of Goal 10 and benefits the City's goal of
providing for a mix of housing opportunities.
LOCATIONAL CRITERIA
The Locational Criteria in Chapter 12 of the Plan are satisfied as
described below.
Medium-High and High Density Residential
a. The property is within a "Developing Area" which is not
committed to low den Aty development. The development south of
the site is designated in the Plan as -Medium-High Residential
and zoned R-25.
7
b. This property could be buffered from Low Density Residential
areas in order to maximize the privacy of established low
density residential areas through design, however, there are no
low density developments adjacent to the site.
c. The Parcel has direct access to Naeve Street, a minor collector,
and is approximately 700 feet from Pacific Highway, a major
arterial.
d. There are no apparent development limitations on this site.
e. As noted previously, public facilities including sanitary sewer,
storm and water services are available and can be extended to
serve the property.
f. The site is well within one-quarter mile of public transit; Tri-Met
bus service located off of Pacific Highway, approximately 700' from
the site.
g. The site is within one-quarter mile of an area that is zoned and
developed as C-P (Commercial-Professional) north and west of the
property along Pacific Highway. The site is also within 250' of
an area that is zoned General-Commercial which is southwest of
the property.
h. Property north of the site has slopes that exceed 25%, therefore
that property will have the potential for having either private
or public open space.
The provisions of the Community Development Code will be addressed at
the time the site is developed.
8
f
l
CONCLUSION
The criteria for both a Zone Change from R-12 to R-25 and Comprehensive
Plan Amendment from Medium to Medium-High Residential have been met.
The requested designation will allow the development of needed
additional multifamily housing in this community.
It is important to note that the R-25 zone includes the Planned
Development overlay. This means that any development will be reviewed
by the Planning Commission in terms of preserving to the greatest extent
possible the existing landscape features and amenities and maximizing
the opportunities for innovative and diversified living environments.
This requested plan designation will also maximize the use of available
public facilities, transit and transportation networks. For these
reasons, we request that this application be approved.
i
r:
e
9
d
t
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
o Commissioner Castile favored the proposal with conditions proposed at the
previous hearing. He felt that this was not a normal right-of-way.
o Commissioner Saporta hack previously opposed the request, however, after t
visiting the site he felt it would be difficult to construct another type
of sign. He favored the proposal with conditions previously proposed.
I
c Commissioners Rosborough, Leverett, and Pyre agreed and favored the
proposal. - j.
t
o Commissioner Barber and Peterson opposed the proposal. They did not feel t
a sign should be permitted in the public right-of-way.
* Commissioner Castile moved and Commissioner Saporta seconded to approve
SCE 89-04 and V 89-04 with the following conditions: t
G
1. The existing sign is to be removed.
2. The new sign will be constructed as proposed.
3. The electrical line will be moved.
4. The sign will be subject to a license.
5. The applicant will obtain a street opening permit. r
6. No freeway oriented sign will be permitted on the site. f
f
Motion passed by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioners Barber s'
and Peterson voting no.
5.2 COMPREMMSIVE PLAN Ai4ENDMENT CPA 89-02, ZONE CHANGE ZC 89-02 SANDERS fi
(PLANNING RESODRCS.S, INC.) NPO # 6 Request for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Medium-High Density;
Residential and a Zone Change from R-12 (Residential, 12 units/acre) to
R-25 (Residential, 25 units/acre) for approximately 4.27 acres. The
remainder of the parcel is designated Medium-High Density Residential and
is zoned R-25. LOCATION: Eastern half of 11165 SW Naeve Street (WCTM
2S1 1ODB, eastern half of tax lot 200).
Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal and made staff's recommendation
for approval. Adding that the primary concern was for transportation and
the effect it would have on Summerfield. Discussion followed with
Commissioners regarding the history around the rezoning of the Albertsons'
site and how the property ended up with a split zone.
APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION
o Bill Sanders, 22362 Bents Street NE, Aurora, OR 97002, explained that s
their representative had not arrived and they would like the opportunity
for him to be able to speak. He stated that they had purchased the
property in 1950 and had operated a nursery business until 1975 when the k
State took away their water rights. Now they were trying to sell the F
property and finding it difficult because of the split zoning.
PLANNING COMISISSION MINUTES - APRIL_4, 1989 - PAGE 2 i
F F
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
o Dave Atkinson, 10460 SW Century Oak Drive, Tigard, OR 97224, a Summerfield
resident, stated he had been involved in the density planning process for
eleven years. His primary concern was for traffic. He stated that Naeve
Road at 109th had been intended to be block off to protect the residential
area of Summerfield. He explained that Summerfield is unique and because
of the golf cart traffic does not have normal traffic patterns. He
disagreed with staff's estimate regarding traffic. He questioned why NPO
# 6 was required to absorb the increased densities resulting from the
rezoning of the Albertsons' development. i.
o Jane Miller, 10920 SW Highland, Tigard, OR 97224, agreed with Dave
Atkinson and added that both she and Dave had served on NPO # 6 when the
Comprehensive Plan was first implemented. She opposed increasing the
density because of the traffic impact to Summerfield. She read a portion s
of a letter which had been directed to Phil Pasteris, former NPO # 6
Chairperson, from Randy Wooley, City Engineer, regarding traffic concerns.
She read and submitted into the record a petition from the residents of
the Fountains opposing the density change.
o Rick Givens, Planning Resources, Inc., 3681 SW Carmen, Lake Oswego, Or,
97035, representing the Sanders, reviewed the proposal and difficulties
they were encountering with the split zoning. He stated that their goal s
was not to increase density but to allow for homogeneous development. i
The roads are designed to handled the proposed density. He added that the
adjoining property had been purchased by a church which indicates that it
will probably be development as a church facility. He concluded that the
density requested is compatible with the surrounding area and requested
that the Planning Commission recommend approval.
f.:
o Discussion followed with staff and the commission regarding the split
zoning, approval criteria, approval based on specific plan, and blocking
off 109th and Naeve Road.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
o Consensus of the Commission was to leave the zoning as is. Discussion
followed regarding the possibility of allowing the site to develop by
combining the densities, which would allow 15 to 18 units per acre for the
entire site. Discussion on the type of recommendation that could be made.
* Commissioner Castile moved and Commissioner Leverett seconded to
recommend denial of CPA 89-02 and ZC 89-02. Motion carried unanimously by
Commissioners present.
* Commissioner Castile moved and commissioner Peterson seconded to recommend
to City Council that some type of method be worked out to average the s
density and allow development of 15 units per acre over the entire site to
allow for a uniform development. Motion carried by majority of
Commissioners present. Commissioners Barber, Rosborough, and Saporta
voting no.
MT-n 5 APRIL 4, 1989 - PAGE 3
FOUINTR I INS
P.O. Box 23713, Tigard, OR 97223
April 3, 1989
Planning Commission
City of Tigard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
We, the undersigned, do not want the Planning Commission to approve a density change for the
property whose boundary is along Naeve Road from R-12 to R-25
Most of us moved to the Summerfeld area because it was quiet and we felt safe walking around our
neighborhoods. If you approve this density increase there will be a lot more traffic through the
Summerfeld area headed towards Durham Road and we feel this is unsafe and unfair. Tigard has
already approved many new apartment complexes along Durham Road which have had a negative
impact on our area and we hope you will have concern for the residents of Summerfield and not
approve any additional increase in density.
Thank you.
Fountains Condominium Association
Unit Owners /f
ell
;mow zt:10'j
74-
; 01
e~~Ae
0, 41 Y,7
na.,
f OUNTA I NS
P.O. Box 23713, Tigard, OR 97223
s
April 3, 1989
4
f
S;.
t
tE`
S.
Planning Commission
City of Tigard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
k .
t'
We, the undersigned, do not want the Planning Commission to approve a density change for the
property whose boundary is along Naeve Road from R-12 to R-25
Most of us moved to the Summer field area because it was quiet and we felt safe walking around our
neighborhoods. If you approve this density increase there will be a lot more traffic through the
Summerfield area headed towards Durham Road and we feel this is unsafe and unfair. Tigard has
already approved many new apartment complexes along Durham Road which have had a negative
impact on our area and we hope you will have concern for the residents of Summerfield and not `
approve any additional increase in density.
Thank you.
r:
i
Fountains Condominium Association
Unit Owners
GC LLe.,ti. C.l~rc-<.G ~.S' Y /~~2 G~7 02
(f _7
i./..Z /77
d-I
E />C ~ a" ~L~ 1-90
/a h
c~ C,(-
Just thought you would be interested in the enclosed
articles - I know you have a hard job balancing all the i
pros and cons, but please do not allow a density increase !
on the Sanders property -
You would be supporting both the NPO #6 and the Planning
Commission.
x
See you Monday night. r
Sincerely, E_
\ .91
3pLne P. Miller
10920 SW Highland Dr. (Summerfield)
Tigard, Oregon 97224
620-2038
r
s
APRIL 19, 1989 • THIS WEEK • SECTION A • PAGE 5
FRANKTALK really makes for better-and
less costly-communities
than the urban sprawl it
replaced.
'd11The need to rethink land-
use planning is particularly
acute in Oregon. Statewide
planning has resulted in the
abuse of property rights. It
Joice Booth has. been used as a club
against communities which
Time . to rethink planning have dared to different. It
has raised the cost of develop-
Suburban communities the metropolitan areas. meat by making litigation
were once dominated by In the Portland metro area, almost the name of the game
homes surrounded by green for example, it's almost im- in land use matters. Worst of
lawns. There were places for possible to find new housing all, it has eroded local control
children to play. Places for that isn't in a high-density ur- of what people want for their
family barbecues. A certain ban setting. Building your own communities.
amount of privacy. "own place in the country" is * -Other states are showing a
No more. Today, apartment darn near impossible. It has monotonous sameness in land-
complexes dominate. In Bea- almost become a thing of the use planning . too. Oregon,
verton and Tualatin there are past-not for lack of land but however, takes the cake. By
literally blocks of such devel- because of the state planning. forcing state guidelines on
opments. Some are land- The state requires that counties and cities throughout
scaped. Most are not. You growth be contained. In the the state-regardless of re-
don't see many children. metro area-and other places gional and local differences in
When you do, they're playing across the state-an artificial resources, needs, and de- 1
in the parking area. line has been drawn beyond sires-it has ensured the ex-
The change is largely the which new development is not tinction of innovative plan-
result of "planning." Plan- permitted. Among other ning. p
k
ning became a national cru- things, this has accentuated a If planning as it exists to-
sade in the 1970s In part, it problem found among plan- day continues much longer,
was a backlash against "ur- ners everywhere. I call it the I'm not sure we won't wake up
ban sprawl," which was seen "rack-'em-up, stack-'em-up" one morning to the realization
as a wasteful, inefficient use philosophy of urban planning. that Oregon has lost its
of land resources. It's interesting that the livability. Livability consists
Planners got rid of sprawl same planners who have of many things: diversity,
but the costs have yet to be pushed high-density living on clean air and the freedom to
assessed. Suburban areas suburban communities have build a home on one's proper-
have been turned into high simultaneously pushed for tY- f
density urban extensions of low density business and in- These options have been q'
the cities people once fled. dustrial parks. closed in Oregon and, with
Traffic congestion, crime, air They're easy to spot. them, the dreams of many j.
Pollution, and higher taxes They're beautifully land- Oregonians. '
have come in the wake of the scaped and surrounded by
fight against sprawl. acres of lush green lawns.
So has the loss of communi- Wouldn't it be better if it
ty identity. Banks of apart- were the other way. around:
ment buildings, malls, and of- more land and lawns where '
fice parks make one place in people live rather than where;
Ruburbia..look._._ucettv_...mx,ch they work? :
like another. Statewide plan- The time has come to
fs
ning in Oregon has been par- rethink land-use planning. To
ticularly destructive of sub- ask if we are better off with g=
urban values. There's a same- what it has wrought than we u
ness across the state that's were before. To question
n IRmb3: 6t1 Flln g. Lveri AIl1t i% W&PNt.2c UVf1r1j
1
THE SUNDAY OREGONIAN, SEPTEMBER 4, 1988 ® L11
`Progress' proves peril
to quality. of life on earth -~E
Dear Ann Landers: Do you cerned about this, they look at me as
recall that Joni Mitchell song: if I was some kind of nut.
"They took all the trees, put 'em in West Virginia, miners'used to facing the civilized world.
in a tree museum, take canaries down into the mines. "Progress". has 'poisoned the atmos-
"And they charged the people a When the birds keeled over, it was a ,'here, polluted our rivers and lakes,
dollar and a half just to see'em clue that the mine held poisonous depleted the forests- and'hatched a .
"Ya don't know what you got 'till gases and was unsafe. How smart do whole new set` of..problems that
it's gone. • • you have to be to realize that when.
P creatures in nature start to go belly- threatens our survival.
paradise an put u•.v
"They paved d
a parking lot" up, conditions might be hazardous If we don't get some balance in 1
Today on TV, I saw a report that for our environment soon, life on this
_ humans, too-?
said industrialization has all but if we were immune to all planet, as we know it, is finished.
wiped out the butterflies. The Even toxins (which we're not),I'm Yoo-hoo. Paging the Environmental
government has built a special these Protection Agency. Where are you.
t_. building so schoolchildren can come not sure I would want to live in a
to see what a butterfly looks ike. world where you have to go to a
The children were amazed when the museum to see a butterfly. How Problems- Write to Ann Landers
teacher told them that many years about you? In care of The Oregonian, 1320 S. W..
- Beaumont, Texas . Broadway, Portland 97201. Please 1
ago, butterflies flew all over the enclose a self-addressed, stamped
fields and people did not have to go ;
.
to a special building to see one. Dear Beaumont: You've hit on envelope fora personal reply.
Some of the butterflies have one of the most critical problems o IM,V+Tunnw Creamrss"vScatft
become so rare that the cases are
guarded by security officers to make
sure no one steals them.
Ann, what in the name of heaven
is it going to take for the human race
to wise up? We simply must recog-
nize the fact that we are killing the
environment
When I tell my friends I am con-
kig®rd covenant church
C tt c r +5r
APR 2119$9 April 21, 1989
Dear Ms. Carver,
Enclosed please find a letter from the president of the Covenant Development
Corporation. This is in reference to an application by Planning Resources,
Inc. to be discussed at your meeting on April 24th. We intend to be represented
at that meeting in case you have any questions of us.
Thank you,
O,Z, o -C-tc'
Art Greco
Pastor
p.s. It occurs to me that you may have a question about our affiliation with
the Covenant Development Corporation and this property. At present, the plan
is to locate our church on this site. Thus, our interest in it.
8955 A SW Commercial St.. Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-3084
c~
Covenant Development Corporation
5101 North Francisco Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 50625
312/784-3000 Cable Address: Covenant Chicago
APR loan
March 31, 1989
Sue Carver, Chairperson
Tigard Planning Commission
P.O. Box 23397
Tigard, OR 97223
re: Tigard, OR
Your File No. 89-02
Dear Ms. Carver:
This letter is given on behalf of the North Pacific Conference which is the owner
of record of property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of US 99W
and Naeve St, which I believe is Tax Lot 300.
In consideration of the application by Planning Resources, Inc, your File No. 89-02,
I wish to call to your attention our concern for access to subject property. While
the North Pacific Conference does not now object to the application, it is
concerned about the development of proper access to and from subject property
and US 99W.
One of the requirements which should be imposed by the Planning Commission, if
it acts favorably on the application, is that the applicant should either improve SW
Naeve St, to its intersection with US 99W, including some traffic control at the
intersection, or some other access.
An alternative, which in my professional opinion is a better solution, is to
construct a new street which would intersect US 99W and continue westward as
Beef Bend Road. Should the Commission concur in my opinion, I believe that my
client, the North Pacific Conference, would be willing to cooperate with the
applicant insofar as such right-of-way might affect property owned by the
Conference. It seems to me, without adequate on-site inspection, that the traffic
control devices already in place at this intersection would provide a less hazardous
situation than routing the substantial traffic which would be generated by the
applicant via SW Naeve St.
Should the Commission wish to pursue my proffered proposal, I would be pleased
to meet with representatives of the Commission and the applicant to determine
whether the proposal is feasible. I would do so, as a representative of the North
Pacific Conference.
Thank yo o your consideration.
Since 1
Robert Cr. Larson, AYCP
President
RCL:r1
cc: Roy M. Lindquist, Arthur V. Greco, Jr
CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
4r COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
AGENDA OF: April 24, 1989 DATE SUBMITTED: April 14, 1989
ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 89-03 PREVIOUS ACTION: Reviewed by Planning
& ZC 89-03 Duvall Street Commission on April 4 19
' PREPARED BY: Jerry Offer est. Planner
DEPT HEAD ITY ADMIN O REQUESTED BY:
OLICY ISSUE
Should the City allow for the eventual development of the Duvall Street
neighborhood for commercial use?
INFORMATION SUMMARY
On April 4, 1989, the Planning Commission reviewed a proposal to amend the
Comprehensive Plan Map from Low Density Residential to General Commercial and
to amend the zoning map from R-4.5 (Residential, 4.5 units/acre) to C-G
(General Commercial) for approximately 6.4 acres bisected by SW Duvall Street,
west Of SW 72nd Avenue. The area is currently developed with 13 single-family
residences. The Commission concurred with the staff's recommendation for
approval of the proposed amendments. The Planning Commission, however, also
recommended that the Council should consider the property tax impacts of the
proposed redesignations should the options for purchase of the subject
properties not be executed. The current property owners then would own
properties which would be taxed at commercial property tax rates. The
applicant's submittal, the Planning Division staff report, and the Planning
Commission minutes are attached.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1. Approve as recommended by the Planning Commission and Planning Division
staff.
2. Deny the proposed amendments.
FISCAL IMPACT
SUGGESTED ACTION
Approve the proposed Plan/.zoning map amendments as recommended by both the
Planning Commission and staff. Adopt the staff report as findings supporting
the approval.
dj/CPA-SS.JO
FT I- LVAS UNI
4192 . e M - 4
p
3nr L_L~r w
g i/• V/99
ya r
w W Y/Y 'M't fll1. MM
Z Y VI [9 ,Np 1'f
sw, fem 9►ptrAY : t
. iAl' W `$e 0
W
Y
a Yi n / 'al
M / / ! j
9nY It
a YYZL
,i
•M•c et a
w' w Y
N1 YIL 1•i
~r
W V
~ ~ i I
FTI
AY I f 'Iii ~ •1 1 ~l ~ :'!T
FM
M19Y s . . • • • y
• • • • 7G.. • • • e • • • • `•r
000,
r WAS 't '0 • • • 1•r•
13 M.t w rl 11
nr YIN i ~ ~ • • •
•r
'r- \ lug « J y,^ ! r 4. v T .I ~i .
J (BOPOERSJ I STPE[T•~ G/,•y_~~ l.J_1L c Y M! y ~l- ATj: , ' L
F _F -
5. BAP "t- r~TLT ! t
7~ yr r'T'- _ ~ SM .CMIURA ~i'
' PLYIC[k ! l
- STREET ~ i I I - _I _ •c l.. _.4A .DR ~
• i N4`.
MING MAP 1- -1-r
0
!STREET / i _ ISM tAP:Myy_ CVIHBL • /I 7
r- rte-, .T • ( J I 7 1 F- r T T _oR!vE~ `j
12625 s»1 -1I_..
- - r
7
i: _ 3 5F36 .1 it r' (T-. r r - I- 36
1 } 71
( r T. a°5 1, J _'JI L_-i - 1 L Sr L zjT II
r r T T- r T,, t
-APIEI EA-f .1J IL I ;STRELi
.1.--
, I ~1l?', , (r f -r - r ' t i t . .JJ i1 I[_ L» li STRE
1_4
r r J L-! f...l._. ) i n '--L_L°.AR :~-~..i i---~-~ . . r 7- _
o~kj sT I_ J ~l i - * z I} i 1
r-r- T -
T FT
i _Li r-.-~ L- Lam- I..l~ STRLET ;
rj1 rTT r ETT -E
- - a
__sPRUCE 1
T T I T. T
t Z' 1 101
T SUBJECT AREA
~ , ATIARTJ Sf
Ac p
L
~ t Sr I ~ Yl L_ STPE i ,
IMP 1 S r Mc` ^ `-~1 `I - ! / - s:.' c IProM TRELT ~ / -
s V ( r
0000
o \ 1 ! PRyo~[O I I I I r St.
00-
00
L
36 -7 I [RT[M[ION o►
10
4 •r. WaR •c
• ~ • • \ ^ ~ fRANMLIN n W
• • \
• 7 r •t
~ • • ao 1[v[~AR -
G• ST
\ PIML LEWIS sr. •01~A•R `T
•
• • ;~,rr/•'`:•'... ~+ri• ELEMENTARY
• • ' • SC 00L a •
TT
c
t
STAFF REPORT AGENDA iiEM 5.3
APRIL 4, 1989 7 , 30 P.M.
TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
TIGARD CITY HALL - TOWN HALL
13125 SW HALL BLVD.
TIGARD, OREGON 97223
A. FACTS
1. General Information
CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 89-03, Zone Change ZC 89-03
REQUEST: For a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density
Residential to General Commercial and a Zone Change from R-3.5
(Residential, 3.5 units/acre) to C-G (General Commercial) for
approximately 6.4 acres.
APPLICANT: Riverwood Properties OWNER: Several
3483 River Road N See Addendum 1
Salem, OR 97303
LOCATION: 11630 through 11965 SW Duvall Street (WCTM 2S1 36DC, tax lots
600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600,
1700, 1800, 1900, 2000, and 2100).
2. Background Information
No previous land use applications have been reviewed by the City
regarding these properties.
3. Vicinity Information
Properties to the north, west, and south of the Duvall Street
neighborhood are zoned C-G (PD) (General Commercial-Planned
Development). The multi-screen Tigard Cinema development is located
to the north. To the west is a 9.5 acre parcel containing only one
single-family residence. To the south are three long narrow parcels
and fourth, smaller parcel. 'These four parcels contain three
single-family residences. Further south and west are other
undeveloped parcels which are also zoned C-G (PD).
Across SW 72nd Avenue from the subject parcel is a developed
residential neighborhood of approximately 15 acres that is zoned R-3.5
(Residential, 3.5 units/acre). This neighborhood is developed
primarily along SW Baylor and SW Clinton Streets. The Baylor-Clinton
neighborhood is surrounded by C-P (Professional Commercial) properties
to the north and east and C--G zoned properties to the south and west-.
The Duvall, Baylor, and Clinton Street neighborhoods are within the
Tigard Triangle. The Triangle, bounded by Interstate 5 on the east,
Highway 217 on the southwest, and Pacific Highway on the northwest, is
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-03 and ZC 89-03 (RIVERWOOD PROPERTIES) - PAGE 1
predominantly retail and office commercial, area. Several small
residential neighborhoods are also included in the Triangle area. The
City has proposed construction of the Dartmouth Street extension into
the heart of the Triangle in order to improve access to the area.
4. Site Information and Proposal Description
The Duvall Street neighborhood is a small, single-street subdivision
with 13 single-family residences on 15 lots. SW Duvall Street is a
paved 16-foot wide street within a 30-foot wide right-of-way. Except
for the four lots with frontage on SW 72nd Avenue, all lots are
approximately one-half acre in size. The 72nd Avenue lots are
slightly smaller.
The applicant requests a Comprehensive Plan map redesignation from Low
Density Residential to General Commercial and a rezoning from R-3.5 to
C-G for the Duvall Street neighborhood. The applicant has either
purchased or entered into agreements to purchase all of the 15 parcels
involved in the application. The applicant is involved in the
potential commercial development of properties to the west of the
Duvall Street neighborhood and would like to add the subject area to
the available commercially developable property on either side of the
proposed Dartmouth Street extension.
5. Agency and NPO Comments
NPO H4 has reviewed the proposal and has commented that the proposed
redesignations are consistent with potential usage of adjacent
properties and would not jeopardize the viability of other
residentially developed areas in the Triangle. NPO members feel that
the approval of the proposed plan amendment/zone change should be
conditioned upon the applicant exercising the options for purchase of
all involved properties so that the existing property owners are not
saddled with commercial property tax rates on residential property.
The Engineering Division will review the traffic and utility impacts
of any future proposal for development on the site.
No other comments were received.
B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9,
and 10, and City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan policies 2.1.1, 5.1.4,
7.1.2, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, the locational criteria for General Commercial
designated areas (Section 12.2), and additional Code and Plan requirements
for a quasi-judicial plan amendment.
The staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the applicable
Statewide Goals based upon the following findings:
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-03 and ZC 89-03 (RIVERWOOD PROPERTIES) - PAGE 2
1. Goal 1 is me( because the City has adopted (•a citizen involvement
program including review of development applications by the
neighborhood planning organizations. In addition, all public notice
requirements have been met with regard to this proposal.
2. Goal 2 is met because the City has applied all relevant Statewide
Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan policies, and Community
Development Code requirements in the review of the application as
described herein.
3. Goal 9 is met because the proposal would increase the City of Tigard's
readily developable commercial land base thereby increasing economic
opportunities within the City.
4. Goal 10 is satisfied because, although the proposed action would
reduce the amount of residentially designated land in the City, the
area to be redesignated is adversely affected by adjacent commercial
development and nearby major highways and thus is not well suited for
continued residential use. Redesignation of the area will not affect
the City of Tigard's compliance with OAR Chapter 660, Division 7 - the
Metropolitan Housing Rule's housing opportunity requirements for
single family - multi-family mix and minimum residential density for
developable residential properties since the properties are presently
developed and therefore are not considered buildable land by the
Comprehensive Plan.
The staff concludes that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan based upon the following fihdings:
C 1. Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because Neighborhood Planning Organization
#4 and surrounding property owners have been given notice of the
hearing and an opportunity to comment on the applicant's proposal.
2. Policy 5.1.4 is satisfied because the proposed redesignation would not
result in commercial encroachment into any residential neighborhood
other than the neighborhood proposed for total redevelopment. The
neighborhood has been adversely affected by recent commercial
development of adjacent properties and would likely be further
impacted by future development on nearby vacant commercially
designated properties and therefore the neighborhood is no longer well
suited for continued residential use.
3. Policies 7.1.2 and 7.6.1 are satisfied because adequate public
facility (i.e., sewer', water, storm drainage) capacities exist to
serve the area and any future development on the properties will be
required to connect with those systems as a condition of approval for
any future site development. Washington County Fire District 01 will
be given the opportunity to review any proposal for development on the
site.
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-03 and ZC 69-03 (RIVERWOOD PROPERTIES) - PAGE 3
4. Policy 8.1.1 is satisfied because additional traffic generated by uses
that would be allowed on the situ by the C-G (General Commercial) zone
should not result in traffic capacities of SW 72nd Avenue and other
nearby streets being exceeded. The City is planning for the
development of the Dartmouth Street Extension, a new major collector
street that would link I-5 and Pacific Highway, providing additional
transportation capacity to serve the Tigard Triangle area. In
addition, the Oregon Department of Transportation is considering other
highway improvements that will provide improved access and capacity to
serve the Tigard Triangle area. These possible improvements include
widening Highway 217 and Pacific Highway, and reconstruction of the
I-5/Highway 217 and Highway 217/SW 72nd Avenue interchanges. The site
should therefore be adequately served by the existing street network
and by street improvements proposed for the area.
5. The applicable locational criteria for General Commercial development
are satisfied for the following reasons:
a. Spacing and Location
i
The property is adjacent to other residential property only to the
east across SW 72nd Avenue. The locational criteria state that a
maximum of two sides of a commercial site may be adjacent to
residential districts. This criterion is met.
b. Access
Future commercial development on these properties will not likely
create unacceptable traf is congestion as discussed above with
regard to Policy 8.1.1. A traffic analysis study will be required
as part of any future Site Development Review for this site.
Measures to mitigate adverse traffic impacts of any proposed
development may be required as a condition of development.
Direct access to a major collector street, SW 72nd Avenue, is
available. Pacific Highway, Highway 217, and I-5 are all
arterials that also are in close proximity to this area.
Public transportation is available on SW 72nd Avenue. All access
criteria are therefore satisfied.
C. Site Characteristics
The size of the area, especially when considered in combination
with adjacent C-G zoned parcels, is large enough to accommodate
all uses allowed by the proposed General Commercial d:asignation.
The site is highly visible from SW 72nd Avenue. The site
characteristic criteria are therefore satisfied.
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-03 and ZC 89-03 (RIVERWOOD PROPERTIES) - PAGE 4
I
d. Impact Asseosment i
Without an actual development proposal, it is difficult to assess
whether the scale of development on a property will be compatible
with adjacent uses. However, in the present situation the site is
adjacent to a major roadway, to commercial development, and to
vacant commercially designated properties, and therefore it is
reasonable to conclude that uses which might develop on the site
would not be incompatible with adjacent uses. Review of any
proposed development for the site through the Site Development
Review process will assure that compatibility with surrounding
uses will be assessed prior to development.
The staff also concludes that the proposed redesignation complies with
the Community Development Code and Plan requirement applicable to
quasi-judicial map amendments that there be a finding that there has
been a change of circumstances affecting the property or that a
mistake was made in the original land use designation for the property
(Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2, Policy 1.1, Implementation Strategy 2;
Community Development Code Section 18.22.040(A)). The applicants
assert that there has been a change in circumstances affecting this i
neighborhood that supports the request for redesignation to a
commercial designation. Staff concurs based on the following findings:
Recent redevelopment of the adjacent Tigard Cinemas property and t
the apparent imminence of construction of the Dartmouth Street
Extension have apparently changed the opinions of neighborhood
residents regarding the long term viability of the area for
residential use. This change in the neighborhood's opinion
constitutes a change in circumstances which helps justify the
proposed redesignation. During the development of the
Comprehensive Plan, the City determined that the Tigard Triangle
was best suited in the long run for commercial use because of the
unique access available to the area and also because the area t.
already was affected by neighborhing commercial uses and r
highways. However, in order to maintain the integrity of existing E;
neighborhoods in the Triangle that were not ripe for
f'?
redevelopment, the City applied residential Plan and zoning
designations to certain areas in order to prevent incremental
commercial intrusion into these neighborhoods. The City, however,
committed to reconsider the designation of these neighborhoods at
a later time when the commercial redevelopment of these areas was
determined to be appropriate. In the present situation, as in the
earlier SW 79th Avenue redesignation, the neighborhood has
indicated its assent to the redesignation thereby providing s
evidence of a change in circumstances affecting the involved
properties.
C. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
a
In conclusion, the stuff finds that the proposed Plan Amendment from Low
Density Residential to General Commercial and the proposed Zone Change
from R-3.5 to C-G for the Duvall Street neighborhood are consistent with
all applicable Statewide Planning Coals, City of Tigard Plan policies, and
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-03 and ZC 89-03 (RIVERWOOD PROPERTIES) - PAGE 5
the locational criteria for General Commercial deveiopment. In addition,
the impacts of recent commercial development on these properties along
with proposed improvements to nearby roadways have altered neighborhood
sentiments regarding keeping this neighborhood designated for residential
use. This change in neighborhood sentiment constitutes a change in
circumstances which makes the proposed redesignations timely. Therefore,
the staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward CPA 89-03 and ZC
89-03 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval based on the
above findings and conclusions.
V~
PREPARRtV BY: rry Tr APPROVED BY: Keith Liden
sis Planner Senior Planner
ke/9382D
~0
I
W
y ST. Q
/ S.W. A
PUBLIC 41
ROADWAY >
4BAYL
i I
r 1 D AL EE
1 ~
r
S.W. CLIIt STREET
-TON
_
~ \R~OSE'O a
SOP L
a R MOUTH EXTENSION= pP1
``I rrT r
STAFF REPORT - CPA 89-03 and ZC 89-03 (RIVERWOOD PROPERTIES) - PAGE 6
MILDRED RIBACK
7390 SW DUVALL ST
TIGARD, OR 97223
1800
CIO GRACE MARIE MITCHELL
,ATRICIA BAUGHMAN 7340 SW DUVALL ST
11665 SW 72ND AVE TIGARD, OR 97223
:TIGARD, OR 97223
700 & 800 1900
ROGER RANDOLPH JAVEST II OREGON LTD.
1771 SW WOODLAND TERRACE 33 SW 3RD
LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 PORTLAND, OR 97204
900
WILBUR & NINA HALFERTY
720 NE 91ST
PORTLAND, OR 97220
1000
MARSHALL Y BARBARA THORSEN
7375 SW DUVALL ST
TIGARD, OR 97223
1100 2000
RICHARD GEORGE & NETA BUSH STEVE & LILLIAN TOWERS
X435 SW DUVALL ST 11735 SW 72ND AVE
GARD, OR 97223 TIGARD, OR 97223
1200 2100
RICHARD & CYNTHIA CLARK LOIS BRINK
7465 SW DUVALL ST 11765 SW 72ND AVE
TIGARD, OR 97223. TIGARD, OR 97223
1300
HEMAPALA & LINDA MARAMBE
7505 SW DUVALL ST
TIGARD, OR 97223
1400
ALBERT & VIOLA PEARSON
7500 SW DUVALL ST
TIGARD, OR 97223
1500
JOHN & CAROL PAXMAN
7460 SW DUVALL ST
TIGARD, OR 97223
C
1600
RAYMOND Y JUDY BURMAN
7430 SW DUVALL ST
TIGARD, OR 97223 ADDENDUM ONE
REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AND REZONE PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF TIGARD
FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL
THE REQUEST
i
This request is submitted Riverwood Properties to amend the
City's Comprehensive Plan on approximately 6.4 acres in the
northern portion of the Tigard Triangle. The property is specifi-
cally located on the west side of Southwest 72nd Avenue, immediate-
ly south of the new Tigard Cinemas, and includes all of the lots
adjacent to Southwest Duvall Street.
i
The property is presently designated Low-Density Residential
on the City's Comprehensive Plan and is zoned R-3.5, single-family
residential. !
r,
}
The specific request is to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan
Map and Zoning Map (Ordinance 83-24) to CG, General Commercial.
THE PROPOSAL
Riverwood Properties has either purchased or entered into
agreements to purchase all of the 15 individual parcels that
comprise the Duvall Street neighborhood including the 13 homes on
those lots. s.
In the spring of 1988, Riverwood Properties proposed to the f.
City of Tigard a rezoning of a 19 home subdivision known as Twin
Oaks in an area generally west of the Duvall Street neighborhood.
At that time, Riverwood had entered into a development agreement
with the adjacent properties to develop an approximately 12 acre
shopping center. The City approved the rezoning of the Twin Oaks
subdivision in April 1988. Since that time, Riverwood has
proceeded with preliminary development plans for the original 12
acres, but has in addition entered into additional agreements with
other adjacent properties which would allow development of a much
larger commercial center in the area generally north and south of
the new Dartmouth Street alignment. With this expanded commercial
4
1
f Proposed Plan Amendment
and Zone Change
e•
Residential to General Commercial
Riverwood Properties
February 1989 r f
all
04. i - I 1 - r - 1 ~_s IRL I ~J ~ I I T i l I^ 1
I~ ,I I I { I f I, j j
1 MORY !T - I
SID
-4i I
660
i I I e 1 y o~ ! ' ab
I r ~ Li I ~ I 1 - ~I ; I
I _
DUVALL STREET LTL1RIL , S., ♦-I~:% - NEIGHBORHOOD 14.11 1-1 a T-
1w a DY V.LI f `
"r ' - •e- - I 1 / _ _ L - C y , • I vRyTHVI[r ST f -
1 r _
SMIT
a e1•
,M , R
36 J 3h IL . l poyw s L
LTLNIOM__ p►~ 1.1 c sC1 [^-J~
-SOY....
y • ~L113L1 = ,
~T RYp t
_l
\ ~ ~ ~ _ Lr- 111. MRLIM !T r ~ f
DIV*
Sw T-4
.w s u1«r00D
S.W. KvlLLYO NO.
II R Y.
PHIL LEWIS - LONTALp al l
ELEMENTARY ' s. I_t !t • •
\ SCHOOL + + _ 1-
I L
._...lr «A tOR Sr J
center concept, the Duvall Street neighborhood properties are an
essential part of that larger commercial development. To exclude
the Duvall Street neighborhood from such a development would not
only constrict the development of the larger commercial center but
would also isolate the Duvall Street neighborhood area, severely
limiting its long-term redevelopment for commercial uses.
Conversion of the Duvall Street neighborhood to Commercial is
both appropriate and timely to provide for the effective utiliza-
tion of property that surrounds the Dartmouth Street extension into
a single unified commercial center.
THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING VICINITY
The Duvall Street neighborhood is a small, single-street
subdivision with 13 homes on 15 lots. Southwest Duvall Street is
a public rights-of-way, although only 30 feet in width, with a
poorly maintained approximately 16 foot paved street. Except for
the four lots with frontage on the west side of 72nd Avenue, the
remaining lots are all approximately half acre in size. The 72nd
Avenue lots are slightly smaller.
To the north of the Duvall Street neighborhood is the new
Tigard Cinemas project. This 10 acre property, formerly the site
of the old Tigard Drive-In Theater, has recently been redeveloped
into a major multi-screen cinema complex. To the south of the
( Duvall Street neighborhood are a series of four relatively long and
narrow parcels which are zoned General Commercial and largely
undeveloped except for a single home on three of the four parcels.
To the west of the Duvall Street neighborhood is a large ap-
proximately 9.5 acre parcel that is undeveloped with one single-
family home.
To the east of the Duvall Street neighborhood is a residential
neighborhood known as Elnola Heights. This two area was originally
part of an area known as Fruitland Acres and is essentially two
small neighborhoods bordering Southwest Baylor Street and Southwest
Clinton Street. These two neighborhood are generally surrounded
by commercial property zoned Professional Commercial.
The Baylor, Clinton and Duvall Street neighborhoods are part
of an area known as the Tigard Triangle. This area, bounded
generally by Interstate 5 on the east, Highway 217 on the southwest
and Highway 99 on the northwest is predominately a retail and
office commercial area. In amongst the retail and office commer-
cial properties are several small residential neighborhoods, each
zoned Low-Density, R-3.5.
When the City developed its Comprehensive Plan, it was
acknowledged that the Tigard Triangle area would ultimately be
fully developed with retail and office commercial uses. However,
several small neighborhood areas were identified in the Comprehen-
2
sive Plan and residential zoning applied to protect the integrity
of those neighborhoods for as long as property owners wished to
remain.
In October, 1986, a request was made of the City to amend the
Comprehensive Plan and rezone only a portion of one of these
residential neighborhoods along Elmhurst Street (CPA 8-86; ZC 16-
86). The specific request was to rezone the property from R-3.5
to General Commercial.
Staff recommended denial of this request but, in their staff
report, made the following statement:
"It should be noted that the City intends to leave the option
open to eventually utilize residentially zoned property in the
[Tigard] Triangle for commercial development. However, this
transition will be best accomplished with the consent of
entire neighborhoods rather than the incremental approach
presented in this application." (CPA 8-86; ZC 16-86, Staff
Report, page 3.)
Testimony presented during the public hearing before the City
Council illustrates the expectations of residents and the City
Council with regard to the residential areas in the Tigard
Triangle. According to City Council minutes of November 3, 1986,
City staff advised the City Council that the Planning Commission
and staff had both recommended the denial of the request on the
basis that the proposal was "premature" (page 2). Staff went on
to point out that the "consensus of the Planning Commission and
Planning staff was that future rezoning should be done on a
neighborhood basis... in order to reflect the integrity of the
current residential property." (Council Minutes, November 3, 1986,
page 2.)
The Council minutes record the testimony of Joanne Nordling,
a property owner on the affected street:
"Several years ago she [Joanne Nordling ] served on the NPO for
this area. At that time she decided it was 'holding back the
tide' to attempt to prevent this area from becoming commer-
cial." (Page 3.)
In the approval of the Riverwood request in April, 1988 for
the conversion of the Twin Oaks Subdivision to General Commercial,
the Planning Commission reaffirmed the basic principle that:
1. The City expects residential properties within the Tigard
Triangle to convert to commercial uses; and
2. That it expects to convert those uses on a neighborhood
by neighborhood basis with the concurrence of all residents within
each individual neighborhood area.
3
C ~
Within the Duvall Street and Elnola Heights area, there are
three, relatively distinct neighborhoods, each centered on a local
residential street. The Clinton Street neighborhood appears to be
the best preserved of the three individual neighborhoods. In part,
this is a function of the relative isolation of the neighborhood
since Clinton Street does not physically connect to any street to
the east. In addition, Clinton Street, while developed to rural
standards is relatively wide and well maintained. The Clinton
Street neighborhood is very characteristic of many typical small
block oriented neighborhoods that exist throughout the west side
of the metropolitan area.
The Baylor Street neighborhood is the least well defined
residential area. There are two principle reasons for this lack
of a strong neighborhood identity to the Baylor Street area.
First, the north side of Baylor was not subdivided at the time the
Elnola Heights Subdivision was platted. There are six parcels on
the north side of Baylor Street ranging in size from .26 acres up j
to .95 acres. There are five homes on these six parcels. on the
south side of Baylor Street, there are seven subdivided lots, all k
approximately the same size at about 15,000 square feet. There are !
homes on each of these lots. In general, the homes along the south
side of Baylor Street were built in approximately same time as
compared to chose on the north side which were built at various
times over the years.
( The second factor that makes it difficult for Baylor Street
to retain a strong neighborhood identity is that it ultimately
connects to 70th AvPn1uE:_. Unlike the Clinton Street area where no
physical connection is possible and therefore the neighborhood is
isolated, the Baylor Street neighborhood is exposed to a relatively
high level of through traffic to the properties to the east.
The Duvall Street neighborhood is composed of 15 lots,
subdivided sometime prior to Elnola Heights. The Duvall Street
neighborhood is relatively isolated from either the Baylor or
Clinton Street neighborhoods by 72nd Avenue, the major collector
connecting Highway 217 with Highway 99W. Although an older area,
because Duvall Street terminates at the western end of the platted
lots, the Duvall Street neighborhood is relatively intact.
'r
5
CHANGES IN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE
t
one of the significant factors in the redevelopment of the
Tigard Triangle for retail and office commercial uses is the
transportation system adjacent to and within the Triangle area. {a-
While the Triangle is bounded by three major highways, access into G
the Triangle from those highways is limited and inadequate. There
are several factors which are beginning to occur which are designed
to rectify this transportation problem and increase the overall
developability of the Tigard Triangle area.
4
r
a
In the fall of 1988, the Tigard City Council approved the
formation of a Local Improvement District to construct the
Dartmouth Extension Collector Street to connect Highway 99W with
the Haines Road Interchange on Interstate 5. This collector will
provide a level of access to the interior of the Tigard Triangle
which is contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan and is essential
for the development of vacant and older properties. In f act,
Policy 11.4.2 of the Comprehensive Plan makes the following
statement:
"In the Tigard Triangle..., those parcels designed for any
commercial development shall not develop for such use if not j
already so developed unless a major collector, connecting the
area on Pacific Highway at approximately 78th Avenue and the
westerly portion of Haines Road Interchange at Interstate 5...
be constructed, be guaranteed within one year for construction
by a public agency, or be approved for construction as a part
of a Local Improvement District..."
Formation of the Dartmouth LID has satisfied this policy.
While that local improvement district has been challenged in court,
city officials expect that challenge to be resolved within 90 to !
120 days. At such time, it is believed that bonding can proceed
and construction could begin in 1989. In any case, development of
the properties that generally surround the proposed Dartmouth
Extension as contemplated by the development plans of Riverwood
Properties would provide an alternate mechanism for the construc-
tion of Dartmouth through the development approvals process.
In addition to the Dartmouth Extension, the State Department
of Transportation has plans for improvements on each of the three
major highways bounding the Tigard Triangle. According to State
Transportation officials, Highway 217 is scheduled for widening
within the next 10 years; the Interstate 5/Highway 217 Interchange
is scheduled for reconstruction in the 1993 to 94 period; the 72nd
Avenue Interchange at Highway 217 is scheduled for reevaluation
along with the Interstate 5/Highway 217 Interchange project; and
Highway 99W is scheduled for widening between at least the
Dartmouth Extension and Greenburg Road.
CRITERIA FOR AMENDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS
The Comprehensive Plan and Development Code outline standards
which must be met in order to amend the plan and zoning maps. In
order to find that an amendment is appropriate, the Planning
Commission and Council must find that:
1. The change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
policies;
2. That there has been a change of physical circumstances;
or
5
i
}
3. That a mistake was made in the original land use
designation for the property.
This application will rely on the consistency of the proposal
with the Comprehensive Plan and that a change in physical cir-
cumstances is occurring within the Tigard Triangle which makes this
proposal appropriate.
Section 18.22.040 of the Tigard Community Development Code
(Ordinance 85-07) establishes more detailed standards which must
be used to make a decision to amend the plan and zoning map through
a quasi-judicial procedure. The City Council and Planning
commission must find that a request meets:
1. Statewide planning goals;
2. Comprehensive Plan policies;
f
3. Standards in the Community Development Code;
4. Evidence in a change in the neighborhood or mistake in l'
the plan; and
5. Evidence that a change will not adversely affect the 4.
health, safety and welfare of the community.
Statewide Planning Goals
e
Section 18.22.040(a)(2) states that Statewide Planning Goals
must be addressed in a quasi-judicial amendment until ac-
knowledgement of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances."
The City's Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code
were acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development
Commission on October 11, 1984. This standard is no longer
applicable.
However, had this standard not already been met by the
acknowledgement of the City's Comprehensive Plan, Statewide
Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, and 10 would be considered relevant to this
proposal.
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement €r
Comment: The City has adopted a citizen involvement program
which includes review of development applications by Neighbor-
hood Planning Organizations. In addition, the City will
provide public notice to all adjacent residents of the
proposal and provide an adequate opportunity for public
comment during the hearings process. This goal's requirements "
have been satisfied by the City's procedures.
C
6
Goal 2 Land Use Planning
Comment: The requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 2 will
have been met through the City's application of all applicable
Statewide Planning Goals, City Comprehensive Plan policies,
and Community Development Code requirements in the review of
this proposal and any subsequent development review applica-
tions on the property.
Goal 9 Economy
Comment: The City's Comprehensive Plan anticipates that all
of the Tigard Triangle area will eventually convert to either
General Commercial or Professional Office Commercial.
Conversion of this proposed neighborhood area from Residential
to General Commercial is consistent with those policies. In
addition, the City sees the Tigard Triangle as an integral
part of its long-term and total economic development program.
Conversion of the Duvall Street neighborhood from Residential
to Commercial will enable the continued consolidation of
adjacent parcels and the subsequent development of a large,
single commercial center within this immediate vicinity. The
requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 9 are met because the
proposal will increase the City's readily developable
commercial land base thereby increasing economic opportunities
within the City.
Goal 10 Housing
Comment: Statewide Planning Goal 10 and its administrative
guidelines require that cities adopt policies and standards
that will maintain an adequate inventory of developable
residential land. Except for one parcel, the Duvall Street
neighborhood area is fully developed with existing single
family homes. Therefore, no significant undeveloped residen-
tial land exists within the neighborhood and therefore its
conversion from Residential to Commercial will not materially
affect the City's compliance with OAR 660, Division 7, that
establishes a minimum residential density for new construc-
tion. In addition, while the redesignation from Residential
to Commercial will reduce the amount of residentially
designated land within the City, the Duvall Street neighbor-
hood area is presently adversely affected by surrounding
commercial development and new proposed commercial development
and thus is not well suited for continued residential use.
Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies
The City's Comprehensive Plan consists of:
1. Statements of intent and purpose;
7 t
i
t2. Findings;
3. Policies;
4. Directives;
5. Implementation strategies; and
6. Locational criteria.
Not all of these materials are applicable to each proposal.
However, the relevant criteria in this request are policies 2.1.1,
5.1.4, 7.1.2, 11.4.2 and the Locational Criteria For Commercial
Development (Section 12.2).
Policy 2.1.1: The City shall maintain an ongoing citizen involve-
ment program and shall assure that citizens will be provided an
opportunity to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
Comment: The three implementation strategies in the Com-
prehensive Plan assign the responsibility to implement this
policy to the City.
This policy will be satisfied when the City provides
public notice to the surrounding property owners and Neighbor-
hood Planning organization No. 4. Surrounding residents and
the Neighborhood Planning Organization will be provided an
opportunity to comment during the hearing before the Planning
Commission and City Council.
Policy 5.1.4: The City shall ensure that new commercial...
development shall not encroach into residential areas that have not
been designated for Commercial... uses.
Comment: If converted from Residential to Commercial zoning,
the property would be zoned consistent with all but the
eastern most portion of the surrounding properties. Proper-
ties to the north, west and south are all zoned and in some
cases developed for general commercial uses. The subsequent
development of the Duvall Street neighborhood for commercial
use, in conjunction with the adjacent property to the west and
south will not cause commercial development to encroach into V
other existing residential areas within the Tigard Triangle.
Conversion of this property to Commercial from its present
Residential zoning will ensure that as the adjacent commercial
property to the west and south develops, the existing homes f:
in the Duvall Street neighborhood will not be affected by that
development. In addition, conversion of the property at this
time allows its consolidation with the properties to the west
and south so that a single commercial development program can
take place. Conversion at some later time, after the L:
development of the western and southern commercial properties
8 r
pY
4
F
i
would preclude effective utilization of the Duvall Street
neighborhood area for any subsequent commercial uses.
Policy 7.1.2: The City shall require as a pre-condition to
development approval that
a. Development coincide with the availability of adequate
services,
b. The facilities are capable of adequately serving
properties that are designed to City standards,
C. That all new development utilities be placed under
ground.
Comment: Water service is available to the property from
lines in 72nd Avenue and the properties to the north. The
Duvall Street area is presently not connected to sanitary
sewer although an existing 10" sewer line exists immediately
west of the property. Water and sewer services therefore are
available to serve commercial development of this property.
However, in conjunction with the development of the properties
to the west and south as a single commercial center, full
urban-level water, sewer and drainage services will be
designed as a part of the total development project.
All utilities will be placed underground in accordance
with City policies.
Policy 11.4.2: In the Tigard Triangle... parcels designated for
any commercial development shall not develop... unless a major
collector, connecting... Pacific Highway... and the... Haines Road
Interchange at Interstate 5... [is] constructed... [or] guaranteed
within one year for construction by a public agency, or... [is]
approved for construction as a part of a Local Improvement
District.
Comment: The Dartmouth L,-)cal Improvement District has been
approved by the Tigard City Council. Pending resolution of
a court challenge within the next 90 to 120 days, that Local
Improvement District will proceed to construction in 1989.
If the Dartmouth Local Improvement District should not survive
the court challenge, construction of that or a comparable
facility can be accomplished as the Duvall Street neighborhood
area in conjunction with the adjacent properties to the west
and south develop as a single commercial center.
9
f
Specific Locational Criteria
2. General Commercial
(1) The commercial area should not be surrounded by
residential districts on more than two sides.
Comment: The present property is zoned residential. The
property is presently surrounded on three sides by commercial-
ly zoned and developed property. Development of the Duvall
Street Neighborhood for commercial uses will be consistent
with the surrounding property and will eliminate any incom-
patibility between the commercial development of adjacent
properties to the west and south and the continued existence
of the Duvall Street neighborhood.
(2) Access.
(a) The proposed area... shall not create traffic
congestion or a traffic safety problem.
Comment: Southwest 72nd Avenue provides direct collector
access to Highway 217 via the 72nd Avenue Interchange or
connection to Highway 99 via a frontage road to the north.
As the Duvall Street neighborhood area is redeveloped for
commercial uses, Duvall Street will be vacated as part of that
l development process. In combination with the development of
adjacent properties to the west and south, the Duvall Street
neighborhood area will have direct access to both 72nd Avenue
and the proposed Dartmouth Extension. A detailed traffic
analysis will be submitted as a part of the total development
program when the Duvall Street neighborhood area is combined
with properties to the west and south as a part of that
commercial development project.
(b) The site shall have direct access from a major
collector or arterial street.
Comment: The Duvall Street neighborhood area presently has
direct access from Southwest 72nd Avenue, a major collector.
Under any circumstance that access can be maintained for the
development of the Duvall Street neighborhood area. However,
the proposed joint development of the Duvall Street area with
the properties to the west and south as a single commercial
project will allow direct access onto the Dartmouth Extension.
Such access, and its connection to Pacific Highway, will
ensure adequate traffic controls and safety to handle the
proposed level of commercial development on the property.
(c) Public transportation shall be available to the site
or general area.
10
I
Comment: The Duvall Street neighborhood area is served by bus
lines on Pacific Highway and Highway 217.
(3) Site Characteristics.
(a) The site shall be of a size which can accommodate
present and projected uses.
Comment: The Duvall Street neighborhood area is presently
developed as a single family subdivision with 13 homes. The
property is appropriately sized for that use. However,
because of the surrounding commercial properties and its
immediate adjacency to large undeveloped commercial proper-
ties, continued long-term use of the property for residential
purposes is inconsistent with the development of the surround-
ing commercial areas and preservation of a high-quality
neighborhood environment. The 6.4 acre size of the redevelop-
ed subdivision is adequate to accommodate many types of
commercial retail uses allowed within the General Commercial
zone. However, its combination with the adjacent properties
to the west and south will result in a total commercial
project of approximately 40 acres capable of accommodating in
excess of 500,000 square feet of retail commercial space.
Such a commercial center will likely be developed with several
major anchor tenants from 45,000 to 75,000 square feet each,
along with numerous small secondary retail businesses. The
site size and shape are particularly well suited for such
commercial development.
(b) The site shall have high visibility.
Comment: The Duvall Street neighborhood area is not par-
ticularly visible from either Pacific Highway or Highway 217.
However, the Duvall Street area does have good visibility from
72nd Avenue, the major north-south collector serving the
Tigard Triangle. In addition, in combination with the
properties to the west and south, the Duvall Street area will
have high visibility both from 72nd Avenue and the proposed
Dartmouth Extension. To preclude conversion of the property
from Residential to commercial and allow the subsequent
development of the commercial properties to the west and south
would isolate the Duvall Street neighborhood area making it
very difficult to develop the level of visibility that would
allow the property to be effectively used for commercial
purposes.
(4) Impact Assessment.
(a) The scale of the project shall be compatible with
the surrounding uses.
C
11
Comment: The conversion of the 6.4 acre Duvall Street
neighborhood area to General Commercial is consistent with the
general parcel sizes of the surrounding properties. The
property immediately adjacent to the west is approximately 9.5
acres. The properties to the south are each approximately two
acres or in combination are approximately 8.5 acres. The
combination of both the Duvall Street area and the properties
to the west and south, therefore, will yield an approximately
22 acre development parcel. In addition, in combination with
other adjacent properties a total of approximately 40 acres
of consolidated commercial land will be made available for
development.
(b) The site configuration and characteristics shall be
such that the privacy of adjacent non-commercial uses can
be maintained.
Comment: The Duvall Street area is surrounded on three sides
by commercial properties either fully developed or ready for
commercial development. Only on its eastern side does the
Duvall Street neighborhood abut an existing residential area.
However, 72nd Avenue, a major collector, separates the eastern
portion of the Duvall Street neighborhood from the residential
areas to the east. The development of the Duvall Street area
either alone or in combination with the properties to the west
and south for commercial purposes will not intrude into the
privacy and integrity of the two neighborhood areas east of
72nd Avenue. Both Clinton Street and Baylor Street provide
some level of refuge for those neighborhood areas and 72nd
Avenue ensures that a relatively significant transportation
barrier exists between the commercial development of the
western properties and the continuation of the neighborhood
properties to the east.
(c) It shall be possible to incorporate unique site
features into the site design and development plan.
Comment: There are no unique features to the Duvall Street
area that would suggest special considerations for its
development for commercial purposes. However, its most unique
feature is its relationship to the commercial properties to
the west and south. Including the Duvall Street area with the
development of these adjacent properties will ensure the
development a much more efficient and effective commercial
center particularly in relation to the Dartmouth Extension.
In addition, not developing the Duvall Street area along with
the adjacent properties to the west and south would make any
subsequent redevelopment of the Duvall Street area for
commercial uses very difficult.
(d) The associated lights, noise and activities shall
not interfere with adjoining non-residential uses.
12
f-
Comment: The only existing non-residential use adjacent to
the Duvall Street area is the Tigard Cinemas immediately north
of the property. Any commercial development of the Duvall
Street area either alone or in combination with the properties
to the west and south would likely face southerly and westerly
to the new Dartmouth Extension and back up to the Tigard
Cinemas on the north. It is not anticipated that any
activities associated with commercial development of the
Duvall Street area would produce noise or lights that would
in any way interfere with the cinema activity, an activity
conducted indoors.
Applicable Standards Of The Tigard Community Development Code
18.62CG (General Commercial District)
18.62.010 Purpose
The major purpose of the General Commercial area is to provide
for major retail goods and services.
I
(1) The uses classified as General Commercial may involve `
drive-in services, large space users, a combination of
retail, service, wholesale and repair services or provide
services to the travelling public.
(2) The uses range from automobile repair and services,
supply and equipment stores, vehicle sales, drive-in
restaurants to laundry establishments.
(3) It is intended that these uses be adjacent to an arterial
or major collector street.
Comment: The Duvall Street area is surrounded on the west and
south by undeveloped General Commercial properties. The
conversion of the Duvall Street area to General Commercial is
consistent with the surrounding uses. The development of the
Duvall Street area alone or in combination with the adjacent
properties to the west and south into a large single commer-
cial center will allow for the types of retail uses an-
ticipated in the General Commercial district.
4
Development of the Duvall Street area either alone. or in
combination with the adjacent western and southern commercial
properties will provide access immediately to Southwest 72nd
Avenue, a major collector, and the new Dartmouth Extension,
a major collector.
13
Evidence Of A Change In The Neighborhood Or Community.
~P.
Comment: The proposed Dartmouth Extension Local Improvement
District will provide a major collector transportation linkage
between Highway 99W and Interstate 5. This change, while con-
templated in the Comprehensive Plan, was the basis for the
plans anticipation of commercial development and redevelopment
of the Tigard Triangle area. In addition, decisions made at
the time the Comprehensive Plan was being prepared, to
designate several residential areas inside the Tigard
Triangle, were made in the belief that those neighborhoods
should be preserved as long as the local residents wished to
remain. The staff report and Planning Commission recommenda-
tion and City Council ac-cion along with supporting testimony
in two previous plan amendments (CPA 8-86, ZC 16-86, CPA 88-
01, ZC 88-03) demonstrate that the City acknowledges the
ultimate conversion of these residential neighborhoods into
commercial uses and that the conversion process should be on
a neighborhood by neighborhood basis.
Riverwood Properties has either purchased or entered into
agreements to purchase all of the 15 residential lots and 13
homes that exist within the Duvall Street neighborhood area.
Therefore, all of the residents within this area have
expressed, by their willingness to sell, a desire to leave the
neighborhood and allow their property to be otherwise used for
commercial purposes.
The other factors which are creating a change within the
Tigard Triangle area are the plans by the State Department of
Transportation for reconstruction and widening of Highway 217,
Highway 99W, the Highway 217/99 Interchange, the Interstate
5/Highway 217 Interchange and the 72nd Avenue Interchange with
Highway 217. Each of these projects, while anticipated to be
staged over the next 10 years, are designed to provide
additional capacity on the three major highways adjacent to
the Tigard Triangle and to increase the overall accessibility
of the Triangle from its adjacent roads. Such changes clearly
provide the transportation facilities necessary to accommodate
the ultimate conversion and development of all properties
within the Tigard Triangle for commercial purposes. Planning
for these changes has accelerated the anticipated change in
land use within the Tigard Triangle so that the long-term f
continuation of at least the Duvall Street neighborhood area
is no longer viable.
Evidence That The Change Will Not Adversely Affect The Health, t
Safety and Welfare of the Community.
Comment: Development of the properties adjacent to the Duvall
Street area for their zoned commercial uses along with planned
expansion and reconstruction of Dartmouth Extension, 72nd
3
14
6
f
I
Avenue and other highway projects, will continue to decrease
the overall liveability of homes within the Duvall Street
neighborhood area. The redevelopment of the adjacent vacant j
commercial lands will severely impact the residences of the 4
Duvall Street neighborhood with activities that are generally
incompatible with residential use. The general welfare of
people within the Duvall Street neighborhood will be severely
impacted by these impending activities. A conversion of the
Duvall Street area to commercial uses and its subsequent i
redevelopment with the adjacent properties to the west and
south into a single retail commercial center will greatly
enhance the overall developability of the commercial proper-
ties and provide increased flexibility to the property owners
and the City is accommodating traffic, noise and other
activities within this immediate area. At the same time,
conversion of the Duvall Street neighborhood area and its
subsequent development either alone or in combination with the
adjacent commercial properties to the west and south, will not
adversely affect the long-term continuation of either the
Clinton Street or Baylor Street neighborhood areas. 72nd
Avenue effectively provides a barrier between the commercial
properties to the west of 72nd and the existing residential
areas to the east of 72nd.
f
i~
I
i
I
I
i
i
i
I
1
15
i
R
6
C
RECESS 8:50 PM
RECONVENE 8:55 PM
i
5.3 C0XPR$88NSIV8 PLAN AMENDMENT ..IMAL,89-.03, VARIANCE V 89-03 DUVALL STREET
(RIVSR[i00D PROPBTtTIBS) *P0 . `4 A request for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment from Low-Density Residential to General Commercial and a Zone
Change from R-3.5 (Residential, 3.5 units/acre) to C-G (General E.
Commercial) for approximately 6.4 acres including properties on either
side of Duvall Street west of SW 72nd Ave. LOCATION: WCTM 1Sl 36DC, Tax
Lots 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300, 1400, 1500, 1600, 1700, s
1800, 1900, 2000, 2100, and intervening public right-of-way.
Senior Planner Liden reviewed the proposal, the history of the Tigard
Triangle, and made staff's recommendation for approval.
APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION
o Gordon Davis, 1020 SW Taylor, Portland, OR, Riverwood Properties explained
that it has been clearly recognized that the Tigard Triangle will
development with commercial and office uses. In 1986 a proposal was made
where a portion of a neighborhood requested rezoning and it was made clear s.
f
by the City.that an entire neighborhood needed to convert at one time and
this is what they are proposing. Regarding the NPO's concern if the deal
falls through, he felt the City would initiate a change back to .
residential.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY ;
5.,
o Dick George, 7435 SW Duvall, one of the properties stated that all of the
neighbors are in favor of the change, however, they do not want to be left
having to pay commercial assessed values on residential property if the F•
deal falls through.
i
O Bill Horne, 7160 SW Baylor, opposed the request. He stated he was already
having a problem with cars parking along both side of Baylor. He wanted
his neighborhood to remain residential.`
a
r
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
o Consensus of Commission was for approval. Commissioner Castile was
concerned regarding the trend that individuals would have difficulty in
converting their property to commercial and that outside big developers
would be the only ones who would gain from this process.
i
* Commissioner Barber moved and Commissioner Castile moved to forward a
recommendation for approval to City Council, also recommending that a
condition be added which would allow for the properties to change back to
residential if the deal would fall through. Motion carried unanimously by
commissioners present.
t
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 4, 1989 - PAGE 4
6. OTHER BUSINESS
o Registration for a Planning Commission Training Program on Saturday, May
13, 1989, at the Red Lion Inn, Portland Center.
o The Commission requested staff to investigate the possibility of having a
study session prior to the public hearing.
7. ADJODRNM W - 9:25 PM
Diane M. Jelder , Secretary
ATTEST:
.Y
Milton F. Pyre, Vice President
C dj/PCM4-4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINOTSS - APRIL 4, 1989 - PAGE 5
DUNN, CARNEY, ALLEN, HIGGINS & TONGUE
ROBERT L. ALLEN AARON J. BELL'
BRADLEY O. BAKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW JONATHAN A. BENNETT'
ROBCRT F. BLACKMORE 851 S. W. SIXTH AVENUE, SUITE 1500 DAVID B. 13ROWNHILL
JOHN C. CAHALAN PACIFIC FIRST FEDERAL BUILDING I. KENNETH DAVIS
ROBERT R. CARNEY TELECOPIER (503) 224-7324 BRYAN W. GRUETTER"
GEORGE J. COOPER, 111 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-1357 RUSSELL R. KILKENNY
ANDREW S. CRAIC SALLY R. LEISURE
MICHAEL J. FRANCIS TELEPHONE (503) 224-6440 MARSHA MURRAY-LUSBY
JACK D. HOFFMAN GREGORY C. NEWTON
ROBERT L_ NASH- CENTRAL OREGON OFFICE JEFFREY F. NUDELMAN'
JOAN O-NEILL P.C.' 709 N.W. WALL STREET, SUITE 103 MICHAEL W. PETERKIN"
GILBERT E. PARKER, JR. BEND, OREGON 97701 MARK A. PRATEW
CHARLES D. RUTTAN TELECOPIER (503) 389-6907 HELLE RODE
G. KENNETH SHIROISHI' TELEPHONE (503) 382-9241 JOSEPH P. SHANNON
THOMAS H. TONGUE SHANNON 1. SKOPIL'
ROBERT K. WINGER DONALD E. TEMPLETON'
V. VAN DYK
April 18 , 1989 DOUG DANIEL LAS F. VIDAS
JACK H. DUNN
RETIRED
JOHN J. HfGGIN3
• J _ _ 11927-1987)
NATHAN L. COHEN 4~
JAMES G. SMITH WILLIAM H. MORRISON
i~
( 1 897-1 983)
OF COUNSEL
City Council APR I 19, .`j 04
City of Tigard 4 ADMIT fED IN OREGON
_ ••••~-•y I AND WASHINGTON
13120 S.W. Hall Blvd. - "RESIDENT, BEND OFFICE
Tigard, Oregon 97223 ~Ra a;/' _ _A_Yelderk_5
RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 89-03,
Zone Change ZC 89-03
Dear Council Members:
Our office represents Gordon R. Martin and
Gordon S. Martin. On behalf of the Martins, we are presently
challenging the continued validity of the Dartmouth LID in
Washington County Circuit Court.
Riverwood Properties has applied for a comprehen-
sive plan amendment and zone change to convert 6.4 acres of
residential property to a general commercial designation (the
"application"). The parcel is located within the Tigard
Triangle. It abuts the properties included within the Dart-
mouth LID.
The Duvall Street Properties will rely
substantially, if not primarily, on the Dartmouth LID roadway
for access into and out of the Triangle.
As set forth in the application:
"[TJhe proposed joint development of the Duvall
Street area with the properties to the west and
south as a single commercial project will allow
direct access onto the Dartmouth Extension."
(Application at 10.)
The application suggests that commercial development of the
Duvall area will face Dartmouth Street and will rely on
Dartmouth for traffic access:
1:.
City Council
April 17, 1989
Page 2
"Any commercial development of the Duvall
Street area either alone or in combination with the
properties to the west and south would likely face
southerly and westerly to the new Dartmouth Exten-
sion and back up to the Tigard Cinemas on the north.
"Development of the Duvall Street area either
alone or in combination with the adjacent western
and southern commercial properties will provide
access immediately to S.W. 72nd Avenue, a major
collector, and the new Dartmouth extension, a major
collector." (Application at 13.)
The applicant also states that the Duvall Street development
would have "high visibility both from 72nd Avenue and the
proposed Dartmouth extension." (Application at 11.)
Riverwood Properties, by its own admission,
concedes that the Duvall Street properties are benefitted by
construction of the Dartmouth LID. The Duvall Street
properties are a good example of the "public" benefit that
will arise from the Dartmouth LID if it is constructed. This
application is illustrative of why the City of Tigard should
absorb a significant portion of the assessment for the
Dartmouth LID rather than charging it all to the property
owners within the LID boundaries. In other words, the City
should identify a mechanism for funding the Dartmouth LID
that equitably distributes its cost to all benefitted
parties, including the City itself.
Very truly yours,
Charles D. Ruttan
CDR:DVD0413-1:dr
cc: Mr. Timothy Ramis
Mr. Gordon R. Martin
Mr. Gordon S. Martin