The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 02/26/1990 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to speak on an REGULAR MEETING AGENDA agenda item should sign on the appropriate FEBRUARY 26, 1990 5:30 PM sign-up sheet(s). If no sheet is available, TIGARD CIVIC CENTER ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the 13125 SW HALL BOULEVARD beginning of that agenda item. Visitor's TIGARD, OREGON 972223 Agenda items are asked to be two minutes or less. Longer matters can be set for a future Agenda by contacting either the Mayor or the City Administrator. o STUDY SESSION - Agenda Review (5:30 p.m.) o TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE WORKSHOP (6:30 p.m.) 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 p.m.) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council and Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 3. PROCLAMATION: GOOD TURN DAY o Mayor Edwards 4. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 4.1 Approve Council Minutes: January 23, 29, and 31, 1990 4.2 Local Contract Review Board: Authorization to go to Bid for Senior Citizen Center 5. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMIIVDMEN`i' CPA 90-02 NOFMH AST BULL MOUNTAIN TRANSPORTATION STUDY REPORT, NPO #3 AND 7 Consideration of the recommendation of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study Report. The Report recommends that the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map be amended as it pertains to the collector street system in the northeast area of Bull Mountain. The Report further recommends certain design considerations for the roadway system in the north east area of Bull Mountain. The area considered by the Report is generally bounded by Bull Mountain Road, 141st Avenue, Walnut Street, 121st Avenue, Gaarde Street, and Pacific Highway. 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: Resolution No. 90- COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 1 6. NON AGENDA ITEMS: From Council and Staff 7. EXECL]TIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 8. ADJOURNMENT cca226 COUNCIL AGENDA - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 2 T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MEETING MINUTES -'FEBRUARY 26, 1990 o Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Edwards. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz. Staff Present: Randy Wooley, City Engineer; Tim Ramis, Legal Counsel; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder. 2. STUDY SESSION: SW North Dakota Street: Citizens in the Anton Park area were requesting consideration of closure of a portion of SW North Dakota Street. Council had considered this issue at a meeting in February 1989 at which time Council requested several measures be implemented to ease concerns. The residents were reporting that, while some measures were somewhat helpful, a closure of the street was necessary because of safety concerns. Councilor Johnson noted that the one solution of road realignment between Tigard and Beaverton had been discussed, but did not look feasible now. The Beaverton School District may not relinquish land which would be C necessary for the realignment. There was Council discussion on increased traffic and safety issues. Also discussed was the history of the street and its status as the area developed. Council requested staff research the record and pull aerial photos from past years for Council review. Mayor advised he would prefer to have more information before making the decision as to whether this issue would be called up for review by Council. NE Bull Mountain Transportation Study City Attorney advised this Agenda item represented a decision which would be a broad enactment affecting a large number of people. Therefore, any action taken by Council would be deemed "Legislative." In response to a concern from Councilor Johnson, City Attorney advised that contact from the ccumunity would be expected as part of the decision making process. If this were a "quasi-judicial" item and prior contact had been made, then disclosure of the nature of outside contact would be necessary. In addition, if such contact would bias a Councilor in their ability to reach a decision, then the Councilor should excuse self from considering the issue. City Engineer reviewed the study process. He distributed minutes from NPO #3 of their 2/20/90 meeting. He also submitted a portion of the 1/30/90 Planning Commission minutes which had been reviewed. City CITY COUNCIL MEETING M NUIES - FEMZUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 1 Engineer advised that, in general, there was broad consensus of support for most of the Plan, but Planning Commission had heard objections to the proposed Gaarde Street extension and the existing plan for Murray Boulevard extension. Council discussed the Urban Planning Area Agreement with the County which would be in effect until December 1990. City Attorney advised of the importance of working with the County through this agreement because of State land use planning concerns. There was discussion on the Murray Boulevard extension and its status. City Engineer noted that reservation of right-of-way for up to 5 lanes was recommended between Scholls Ferry Road and 135th Avenue to provide for future needs for additional lanes at intersections. There was discussion over concern that this street would be utilized to carry a great amount of traffic should other routes not be built or improved (i.e. western bypass, improvements to Beef Bend Road). It was also noted that several developments on Bull Mountain are scheduled for construction in the near future. 3. TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMIT= WORKSHOP: Cancelled Business Meeting: Called to order by Mayor Edwards at 7:30 p.m. 4. VISITOR'S AGENDA: a. Jane Miller requested putting a moratorium on building until solutions have been found concerning traffic congestion and safety problems. 5. PROCAMATION FOR GOOD TURN DAY a. Mayor proclaimed March 3, 1990 as Good Turn Day in the City of Tigard. The Boy Scouts, Cub Scouts, and Explorers will collect donations of clothing and household items and deliver the items to the Goodwill Industries of the Columbia Willamette. The citizens of Tigard are encouraged to participate by filling the collection bags, provided by the Scouts, with usable items. 6. CONSENT AGENDA: 6.1 Approve Council Minutes: January 23, 29, and 31, 1990 6.2 Local Contract Review Board: Authorization to go to Bid for Senior Citizen Center Motion by Councilor Johnson, seconded by Councilor Schwartz, to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was passed by unanimous vote of council present. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 2 • 5 2 F 7. PUBLIC HEARING - CCMMIENSIVE PLAN AN NT CPA 90-02 NORTHEAST BULL AIN TRANSPORrMON STUDY REPORT, NPO #3 AND 7 Consideration of the recoitm►endation of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study Report. The Report reccmaiends that the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map be amended as it pertains to the collector street system in the northeast area of Bull Mountain. The Report further reams certain design considerations for the roadway system in the north east area of Bull Mountain. The area considered by the Report is generally bounded by Bull Mountain Road, 141st Avenue, Walnut Street, 121st Avenue, Gaarde Street, and Pacific Highway. a. Public hearing was opened. Mayor reviewed hearing process and the issues before Council. He also noted this was the first hearing Council has had on the study. Mayor listed material received by Council provided to them for study of the issue. b. Declarations and Challenges o Councilor Johnson declared that her residence is on Walnut street which is in the study area of the proposed Comprehensive Plan change. She stated that the discussions she has participated in with residents of the area and legal counsel will not prejudice her; she indicated that she will be participating and will receive testimony in an objective manner. 1. o Councilor Eadon stated that she lives in an area which is included in the study area. She stated that she has taken part in discussions concerning the area which would be affected by the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and that she believes she can maintain an unbiased involvement in this legislative matter. o Councilor Schwartz reported that he had also had conversations with citizens regarding the Bull Mountain Transportation Study Report and indicated his participation will be unbiased by previous discussions. o Councilor Kasten stated that although he does not live in the study area, he has had conversations with individuals regarding the Study. He does not feel that these conversations will affect his objectivity. o Mayor Edwards also stated that he had had conversations about the issue. He does not live in the study area. He indicated that he would be unbiased in the decision-nuking process. C. Summation by City Engineer: The City's Conprehensive Plan includes a transportation plan for the entire City. The amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map pertain to the northeast area of Bull Mountain and are being recolmTended to keep up with the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MniUrESS - FMZUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 3 i l changing traffic needs brought about by the new development occurring in this area. The alignments of the proposed streets are not clear and there has been disagreement between the City and County as to the street alignments. The Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study was undertaken to look at the long-range planning for the streets in this area. City Engineer pointed out that Comprehensive Plans, by their nature, do not have a schedule for implementation; but they provide plans to show what streets will be needed in the future so that as development occurs, a street-system plan is in place. The proposal is a Comprehensive Plan change; not for street construction. He outlined the study area noting much of the study area is outside the city limits but within the area known as the City's active planning area in which the City takes the lead responsibility for long-range planning. He stated the County provided a great deal of support in this joint effort. He noted the assumption was made that land use designations and zoning would remain unchanged. The assumption was also made that existing comprehensive plans for adjoining areas would not change. In projecting future development, it was also assumed that the maximum densities allowed by zoning in the study area would not be reached due to terrain problems and past building patterns. Traffic was projected based on those predicted densities. Using the traffic model provided by the Metropolitan Service District, a projection was made to forecast future traffic growth. The street system was then plane d based on the expected future full development of the study area. There is disagreement whether the Murray Boulevard extension, in the existing Comprehensive Plan, is still a good idea. He stmntarized the public input received stating that concern was expressed about protecting existing neighborhoods in the Bull Mountain area. Rec ndations were received from the Planning Commission, NPO #3, and CPO #4B. He displayed maps of the different alternatives suggested. Additional traffic projections were then run by the county to include these various recommendations. The reed alternative in the final report assumes extension of Murray Boulevard to 135th Avenue. The NPO recommendation is similar to the Planning Commission's but with some smaller streets designed for slower speeds. A comparison of projected future peak hour traffic at "Build-out" showed the different traffic volumes expected based on each scenario. An information sheet was distributed showing these numbers for each street. Through-traffic versus local-traffic was discussed with respect to different definitions of the terms. He discussed the areas where there is disagreement with the plan. CITY COUNCIL MEE= MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 4 o Disagreement over whether the Gaarde Street extension should be extended to Walnut or west to 132nd. There was agreement, however, that Gaarde should be extended to serve the undeveloped area west of 121st. o Disagreement over the extension of Murray Boulevard. o Disagreement with design standards for minor collector streets. d. Public Testimony: o Herman Porter, representing NPO #3, expressed concern that the plan should be developed in keeping with the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan adopted in November 9, 1983. He quoted Policy 11.3.2: "The City of Tigard shall work with other governmental bodies for the developmezt of an arterial route connection from Murray Boulevard or Scholls Ferry Road to Pacific. This arterial route should be locate west of Bull Mountain and should not utilize roads which pass through existing residential areas within Tigard." He urged Council to continue with the Comprehensive Plan position. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan had much wider public involvement and input than the Urban Planning Agreement, and therefore should take precedence over the Urban Planning Agreement. o He reviewed his educational/vocational background. He stated that he received his PhD in Urban and Transportation Geography from Northwestern University and then worked for several years for Service Bureau Company in transportation related computer work. He presented three maps which are the models used to depict traffic flow over Bull Mountain. He suggested that traffic models are, by nature, not very reliable as they are often based on assumptions which are not realistic. Therefore, he felt that models are not to be depended upon in this type of decision-making process. He objected to the Murray Boulevard extension based on the expectation that businesses and people will relocate to take advantage of the major traffic route, causing a population influx which would not naturally otherwise occur. He suggested that land use zoning would have to be changed if Murray Boulevard were extended. o Cal Woolery, Chain of CPO #4 B, expressed his total agreement with Mr. Porter's viewpoint that Murray Boulevard not be extended to bring traffic to a restricted developed area. CITY COUNCIL ME=4G MIN= - FEBR PM 26, 1990 - PAGE 5 v i AV RECESS: 8:50 PM REOONVENE: 9:00 PM e. Mayor Edwards asked the audience for a show of hands of those persons who are opposed to the Murray Road extension, which showed that many hands were raised; no one raised a hand in favor of the extension. Public Testimony continued: o Larry Lewis, 12415 S.W. 122nd., Tigard, is the President of the Lake Terrace Home Owners Association. He stated that he and the home owners he represents are opposed to the amendments to the Couprehensive Transportation Plan as proposed by the staff because of the increased inter-regional traffic which would result through established and planned residential areas. Specific recmnendations include: - encourage minor collector and residential streets designed to handle local requirements and discourage through traffic; - develop alternative north/south arterials in conjunction 4.. with county and regional plans; - connection of Murray Boulevard to 135th and Walnut not occur until satisfactory improvements are made to old Scholls Ferry Road west of Murray and also Beef Bend Road to Pacific Highway. o Paul Heavirland, 8685 SW McDonald, stated that the residents living on McDonald do not want a westside bypass running along McDonald, and that their property values are going down because of the possibility of the Murray Road extension. He contended that a bypass should be constructed in an undeveloped area which is not already an established neighborhood, because already developed neighborhoods are essential to maintain Tigard's liveability and population stability. o Don Forrest, 8985 SW McDonald, stated that he has owned his hoarse on McDonald since 1944. He expressed concern that the Council and elected officials are not responding to the citizens who have been attending and participating in the meetings designed to encourage their input. He recon¢nended that if the concerned citizens are frustrated with the outcome of this issue, they should consider starting an initiative measure as a method of bringing about a different decision. CITY COUNCIL MMTING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 6 o Nancy Smith, 12630 SW Walnut Street, resident of Tigard for 32 _ years, agreed with the previous speakers. She visited over 100 hcves with a petition opposing the Murray connection, and said that only one person did not wish to sign it. she further stated that the other people who took petitions around the neighborhoods also reported the same responses. She expressed concern about the report and its lack of adequate detailed description of the Murray Boulevard extension. She felt that it was confusing to have the information pertaining to the Murray extension not included in the body of the report but found in an appendix. She requested that the Council reject any plan for a five-lane Murray extension which would bring about inter-regional traffic that the residents of this area do not want. o Dana Barker, 11340 SW Viewmount Court, spoke about increased noise and air pollution which would impact the neighborhoods if the proposed extension is completed. She stated that increased crce and lower property values would accompany the increased traffic. She expressed concern that Durham and Hall would be adversely impacted by a greater traffic flow as well. o Rich Pearson, 13830 SW 114th, described the objectionable noise level he now experiences living eight to ten blocks from Pacific Highway. He agreed with the previous speakers that a large area of residential neighborhoods would be unlivable is the extension is built. He noted that about 70 square blocks of residential area would be adversely affected by this plan. He requested the Council to reject the three alternatives b presented, and urged them to continue with the Comprehensive Plan as it is now which calls for no new arterials and only for collectors. o Ralph Flowers, 11700 SW Gaarde Street, recounted the history of the Edwards and Ames Additions and their respective streets. He reported that at the tim of the annexation, the neighbors living in the area were promised that there would never be a direct connection at the corner of 122nd and Gaarde Street. McFarlane, which is a winding road, would be the main f access road to discourage higher speed traffic. f o Robert Root, 12045 SW Rose Vista, referred to the Washington k County Transportation Plan and pointed out the 65% traffic growth which occurred on Highway 217 between 1982 and 1986. He also noted the absence of a major highway from the Tualatin-Hillsboro corridor between I-5 and Sunset north of Hillsboro. He suggested that extending Murray Boulevard would turn McDonald Street into a major collector and therefore a truck route. He described Murray Boulevard in Beaverton as a CITY COUNCIL MEETING MDRYIES - FEBRUARY- 26, 1990 - PAGE 7 's t r traffic problem aril asked if anyone wants to bring this problem to Tigard. o CouncUor Johnson corrected the outdated information concerning the truck routes listed on the map Mr. Root was referring to. She stated that Durham and McDonald are not now, nor are planned to be truck routes in the future. The map was determined to be a 1985 printing. Mayor Edwards stated that the streets were taken off in 1987, and the streets are posted "No Trucks 24 Hours a Day, Deliveries Only." o Gary Steele, 12645 SW 135th Avenue, agreed with the previous speakers' omm-eats regarding the Murray Boulevard extension. He expressed his appreciation of the appointed and elected officials working with the citizens to maintain liveability in Tigard. He reported that the traffic congestion on Murray Boulevard near Scholls Ferry Road has caused some of the Murray Hill Apartment residents to move out; and he suggested that commercial property is best suited to the location next to a major collector. He pointed out that already part of the proposed Murray Boulevard extension just south of Scholls Ferry Road is zoned commercial. He predicted that most of the residents along the corridor will sell their homes and that businesses and ca mercial concerns will take the area over. He requested that the council consider the wishes of the majority of people in the community and defeat the Murray . Boulevard extension. He further requested that Council propose a motion to remove the Murray Boulevard extension from the Comprehensive Plan. He suggested that funds be spent instead on schools and a park in this area. He recommended that Council send a message to Washington County and Metro that this extension project will not be built in the city of Tigard and that construction of a western by-pass project should be undertaken as soon as possible. o Bill Lamb, 11925 SW Gaarde, stated his desire to maintain his neighborhood character as it is and not as a traffic thoroughfare. o Lavelle Helm, 13280 SW Walnut, recalled that the community has rejected the idea of the Murray Boulevard extension for 14 years. She reminded Council that Pacific Highway is used by an unusual number of older drivers from King City, Surmierfield, E1 Dorado and Royal Mobile Estates as well as Tigard residents. She commented that the proposed extension would not benefit the cxmum pity in any way; and she would like to see more small roads to circulate traffic in Tigard. She pointed out that if it was necessary to build a route, there are acres of undeveloped property across from Walnut Street where a route could be built instead of taking part of the front yard away from four residents on Walnut Street. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARX.26, 1990 - PAGE 8 o Ina Rae Overby, 13300 SW Walnut, expressed her objection to ~the Murray Boulevard extension, pointing out that the selection of the needed corridor for this arterial has not been based on the needs of people but rather on the most economical route for the City of Tigard. She was concerned that the extension will be a convenient route for the Beaverton traffic to flaw to Tualatin and the beach, but will not enhance Tigard's liveability. o Paul Kohler, 12060 S.W. Rose Vista, sees the issue as a choice to vote for commercialism or a family residential atmosphere and community. He stated his intention to move out of the neighborhood if the extension is approved and built. o John Setniker, 11830 SW Gaarde Street, recommended leaving the established neighborhoods as they are and considering the soon-to-be developed areas as the proper locations for new routes and highway construction. o Don Starbuck, 9988 SW Walnut Street, agreed with the previous speakers about protecting the neighborhood quality in the established areas of Tigard. He reported that Nancy Smith has obtained 499 signatures on a petition to reject the extension of Murray. He requested clarification of the relationship between Washington County, the City of Beaverton, and the City of Tigard with respect to the proposed extension of Murray Boulevard; and he was interested in knowing how the communications between these entities will be accomplished to prevent this extension from being considered further. o Beverly Froude, 12200 SW Bull Mountain Road, thanked the staff and Council for providing the opportunity for the citizens to look at the transportation plan, attend meetings, and give input. She expressed positive feelings about the Comprehensive Plan Amendment except for the Murray Boulevard extension. She indicated her desire to see the recommendations of the. NPO incorporated into the plan and to have the plan passed. f. City Engineer clarified the existing comprehensive plan adopted in 1983, which calls for a road connection in the area of the proposed Murray Boulevard extension. He stated that the City of Tigard and Washington County adopted an Urban Planning Agreement in 1986. The County and the City of Beaverton have a similar agreement. The agreement further defines the alignment of that connection between SchOlls Ferry Road and - 135th and establishes some design standards, such as road width, number of lanes and curves. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 9 g. Councilor Johnson read a letter dated February 16, 1990, from Bruce Warner, Director of the Department of Land Use and Transportation for Washington County. The Washington County Transportation Plan and the both the Bull Mountain and Reedville-Cooper Mountain Community Plans (adopted in June 1983) include a proposed connection between Murray Boulevard at old Scholls Ferry and Gaarde Street at 99 W. At the same time the Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) between the County and Tigard noted the connection as an unresolved issue, but agrees to take no action to preclude a solution to the issue. In April 1984 the UPAA was extended and interim guidelines for the Murray connection were included. In 1986 and 1988 the UPAA was extended again with refinements to the extension proposal. h. City Attorney explained the process of periodic review by the State, which occurs approximately every five years. The State requires a plan to be in coordination with the plans in surrounding jurisdictions. He stated that the consequences of acting unilaterally are serious for the City. An enforcement order can be issued by the State whereby the City is ordered to follow the UPAA or some other solution imposed by the State, or be cut off from State shared revenues. i. City Engineer responded to several issues raised during public testimony. He stated that the Staff's reccmmiendation report was not a major change to the existing Comprehensive Plan but was an expansion and clarification of the plan. He expressed his opinion that the traffic projections were updated from the earlier ones which had been too low. The projections did take into account the expected population growth in the Bull Mountain area. He clarified that the southwest corridor study re=mw-nded that the Beef Bend extension be completed along with some major improvements on 217 before the Murray extension between Walnut and Gaarde are completed. He emphasized that improvements on many of the streets were needed. He reported that it was not the intention to make Murray a five-lane street, merely to reserve additional right-of- way in some areas to allow for those lanes to be built in the future if they're needed. . He stated that he is not optimistic about the idea of a road system that serves only local traffic; this tact has not been successful in other areas since through traffic still occurs. j. Council questions and comments: o Councilor Eadon advised that growth could be managed if planned for ahead of time. She suggested that the most critical planning area is transportation and that reserving street corridors is necessary. she requested advice from City Attorney about the legality of adopting part of the plan after separating out the Murray extension portion of the plan. o Councilor Kasten reviewed the comments heard from the CITY COUNCIL MEETING D[ngMM - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 10 citizens. He noted that the transportation problem on Bull Mountain is increasing due to developrent which continues to \ occur. He agreed with Councilor Eadon that the interlinking of Murray Boulevard with 135th and Walnut should be removed frcan the plan at this time, and that Council should work toward a resolution with the adjacent camm mties and the County to find a resolution of the issue. o Councilor Jobnson expressed appreciation of the work done by the staff on their study and report. She expressed concern about haw the Murray extension developed from an unresolved issue in 1983 to a specifically-detailed alignueint in 1988. She agreed that a need exists to resolve the issue of Murray extension with adjacent comwnities. She urged staff to look at the cxmiparison of the most recent models and to report back to council at the next date this matter is being heard. She suggested that the concerned citizens choose several spokespeople who will be willing to follow the west side by- pass that the City can notify when public hearings are being held and when testimony is needed. o Councilor Schwartz complimented the staff for their work on the Study. He reviewed the reasons for the study and noted the need for pre-planning a road system before housing developments are built up. He recanmiended holding a workshop with staff and council to discuss the alternatives, especially the Murray Boulevard extension, and how to approach the issue C with neighboring jurisdictions. o Mayor Edwards summarized the testimony and agreed there is a need for a Council workshop to devise a workable transportation plan for the Tigard area. He urged the audience to be interested and vocal in regional and state issues because of their great impact which affect how local decisions can be made. He expressed his desire to review the Urban Planning Agreement between Washington County and Tigard to determine how it evolved. He stated his belief that holding public hearings at this time with a larger notification group on the issue would be unproductive. o City Administrator and Council discussed the next steps in the process. Public hearings which would include 135th Avenue residents would be delayed until there was further study of options on Murray Road (i.e. determination of Urban Planning Area Agreement conclusions for Murray Road extension). Staff will be prepared to report to Council on March 26 the following information: o Murray Road/UPAA history o Report on discussion with NPO CITY COUNCIL MMI-ING MRR ITS - FE6RUARY 26, 1990 - PAGE 11 t o Mayor Edwards requested that notification be sent to the NPOS to let them know this topic will be discussed at the March 26 meeting. People who signed in to testify will also be noticed. k. Public hearing was continued to March 26, 1990. 8. EXECUrM SESSION• Cancelled 9. ADJOURPIl+~Fi'• 10:59 p.m. Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder A 7(a -t& Valerie A. Johnson Council President -Ma-a al Date ef/CC22690.60 i f CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 26, 1990 -PAGE 12 i E t f I TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notice 7-6482 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertisin =a 9 TUeyfollowwuu~~ io, WE C ity of Tigard 1:1 ty ~6„1990, at 7 3,Qtan; a < vrc'CettD~r;''i I1a11 R~txn, ; PO Box 23397 " Tearsheet Notice r 13125 S W Naii Boulevard; Tgtd, Oregon Ftuther mfftnnatiao~trt be s obtsuded from the En ity Recordcrattha same oc ' 11W C , Tigard, OR 97223y > • , by calling 639=4171. You am invited to 13 Duplicate subaut ~vnttattesny `'st>~•` Affidavit Pub1tC , wntfen andd al tesanjony will at the The public he' will be a~ttducted m • the apphcabie Chapoer X8. 30 of the Tigard Mueucipat Coale and any of procedum udbpiod by the Counciland 10i"1 at City Ball. t COMPRE1S10rE .;PLAN AMENDMENT'.CPA 90 02 N T8 EAST ;BULL MOUNPA N TRANSPORTATION STdJDY REPORT, AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION #3? Constdi of the reoomnteatdaddns of the Northeast Butt Mo>~etn,; STATE OF OREGON, ) Transportatiat Study Report. ,M Repast necommer s that COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss' Conprehensrvc Map be ameride<l gas u` 1, Linda L. Maria donee tor sireetsyem m;die northeast area of BcaMountam. The furthea destgie considerations for the Ib' way'.3 teas being first duly sworn, depose and sa,.that I ara,the Advertising ut the p Director, or his principal clerk, of the_ lgar Imes " 's ` A by'Bu64 a newspaper of general circulate q as efined in ORS 193.010 lY bounded dd tam R 141st veh S and 193.020; published at ~1gand r, to t,12lstAvenWv, S and d in the y' 4 i # r afor $u~i Pact6chWaY r iCOa~~t late; that the C°p hof the N Ism Study.R and. recontmenda ~t►ons are ava file no at the E ineern Air yutoa office:or by t a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the Celhng 639 4 ; : ;Cppteg elso'svatlable for review at x entire issue of said newspaper for -L successive and j Tr1K1) 7 f` ` ' . , consecutive in the following issues: L TT 6ij~9(1 ` ` ' r Mfr ` February 15# 1990 F ~'Ylgit~t~s • ; Subscribed and swor to before me this February 19, 1990 Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires 6/3/93 AFFIDAVIT r. TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legale 7-6494 P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684.0360 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertising RECEIVED * • ❑ Tearsheet Notice MAR I 1990 City of Tigard ° El Duplicate Affidavit CITY OFTIGN • PO Box 23397 Tigard, OR 97223 ° • PO # E05692 _ PO # E05991 CITiY`O1F RIGA x AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OREGON .41 STATE OF OREGON, )ss The following selected agenda itIemsaaie published for your information. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON,) Further,informauon and full agendas may be obtained frou►I City Linda L. Maris Recorder, 13125 S.W. Hall Bouleva4.Tigard, Oregon 97223, or by can. being first duly sworn, depose and say tha+l am gvq,Advertising ing639-4171. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING - FjEBRUARY 26,99Ux Director, or his principal clerk, of the 1Qar itnes a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 30ASTUD7CSESSION;7:30P BUS S and 193.020; published atTigard in the•_,TIGAILDCMC,CENTER, O state; that the `r aforesaid county and ; i~ ~I3125~S.W:HALL BOtILBVARD, TIGAR O1tEG0 Cit. ing a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the • TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COM I1TTEE WORKSROP . entire issue of said newspaper for 1 successive and consecutive in the following issues: PUBLIC HEARING COMkEHENSWE PLAN AMENDMENT, CPA 90-02 NORTHEAST. BULL MOUNTAIN, TRANSPORTATION STUDY REPORT, NPO #3 AND 7 Febiwary 92, -19'90 • LOCAL CONTRACTRV, BOARD MEETING 4 : . *EXECUTIVE N , Ci Councii`wi go nto ~/Jrt/~ " tive S 5~1vistonsof0, '6b0~,,~ r r February 27, 1990 Subscribed and swor to before me this r: bush Febrtituy 22;1990 ~ ~ •3 Notary Public for Oregon My Commis n Expir s: AFFIDAVIT MW . > ;$m... 'r~s1 ..yc '~'1V~',~:yvL. tl ",.v Cf~ '~r ,.e ,a }~J ` i PROCLAMATION ~Vy^Y GOOD TURN DAY Hy March 3, 1990 UlM'f~ WHEREAS, as part of one of the largest community service projects in the area, Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, Explorers, parents, and unit leaders j are e volunteering to collect donations of clothing and household items; - WHEREAS, these donated items will provide training and employment programs to the employees with disabilities of Goodwill Industries of the Columbia Willamette who sort, process and price the donated, , resusable items; and > WHEREAS, thanks to the hard work and generosity of our community and ; - neighbors, 300 Goodwill employees with disabilities are able to receive f Goodwill services; and lyl - c WHEREAS, many of Goodwill's employees are now earning wages and paying I va taxes for the first time. NOW THEREFORE, I, Jerry Edwards, Mayor of the City of Tigard, do hereby proclaim the day of March 3, 1990 as GOOD TURN DAY T and encourage all cities of Tigard to support the efforts to the Good Turn Day volunteers, and to donate generously by filling the collection bags, distributed door-to-door, with many reusable items. j Jerry Edwards, Mayor '~tllf~ ATTEST: i. j Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder ti v r~. M1 - 1 ~4 ~~li _ ilz `w...A'.r j ~ s `w ~ f; r n f AGENDA LTEM N 2 , - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE 2/26/90 (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. i' r NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED ►n 104 l (~2 - f t, r I f e i' v' DATE 2/26/90 I wish to testify before the Tigard City Council on the following item: (Please print the information) PERSONS WILL BE ALLOWED 10 MINUTES FOR PRESENTATIONS. Item Description: AGENDA ITEM N0. 5 - PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE,PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-02 NORTHEAST BULL MOUNTAIN SPORTATION--STUDY REPORT T-R NFU #-5 a Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation T1 ease Pe i n-~ .r 97223 tj ~e Tpv V f~FU L4envt'r 12hd /4 -F-A/DA cram 5 W 100,1 Vl-wr, For resT 11 N P h_j P- , re M 89 k,4'-'5 W M`UGn2~N G S NC y ~M 7'/ /a6 30 s. W ALNUT Sr 46,6M JTFM #S je 11340 i r . c~n ~~Ikft~u ~J 13~ 0 S~ n ~Qv J 170 v S -r161M /7 P F / j .•-1 F c~ If ~E. f TI tl ,2 4. 0c, S, C✓. CJ o I~ 41l G t/~ / 3 2 S u S c,J • W d L ►1 w 9 222 1;KL- 4 ll o c v ~?~i4 rZ c G! ~8' S,G~ C.~ c NuT S ? / z 0 i~ Oregonians, it's being said, are anti- growth. UU Cl- It's time then - once again - to O remind ourselves that McCall never did. ~cte h-~ say "Visit, but please don't stay." U That McCall said was visit but please don't stay unless you are prepared to stick to the rules of MARTS & ENTERTAINMENT, CI the game we play here. Those rules are tough because the ■ TELEVISION, C697 game we play here is hardball. Oregon- As for the notion that throwing up ians are down-to-earth about protecting high-rise towers to add to the tax rolls something ethereal - livability. enhances the life of the average citizen, it Again, McCall: is an idea far more often peddled than "Oregon has been wary of smokestacks proved. and suspicious of rattle and bang. Oregon The challenge facing Portland as it has not camped, cup in hand, at anyone's rushes pellmell toward the 21st century, affluent doorstep. Oregon has wanted is not only what kind of growth does it J~ industry only when that industry was "rant, but whether it wants to grow at all. willing to want what Oregon is." Last year, more than 25,000 Californians MCHOL" What Oregon is, aye now there's the ' came north to a new life. Were they rub. And as the debate rages over how drawn by what we have to offer? Or were much, and at what pacil Oregon changes, they fleeing the dreadful legacy they had it's time to pause, to 'renect, to learn. It's wrought on the promised land9 time, then, for a word from the wise. )apyt~~ ■ As if on cue, one of America's most endangered species came to Portland last .V 1 1 ■ week - a thinker. prescro ption fior Brendan Gill is not a pundit, a wag, a commentator, an expert, a consultant or a • growing pains guru. He's athinker, a breed inincreas- ingly short supply. In a remarkable,%year career with The cry rings from every corner of The New Yorker, Gill has penned profiles, our citadel. poetry, essays and criticism. In recent The Californians are coming! years, under the title "The Skyline," he has revived the column once penned by The Californians are coming! his mentor, Lewis Mumford. This gives It's uttered with glee by greedy West him the opportunity to write about the Hills mansionites hoping to hawk their relationship between man and the urban family estates. environment. It's proclaimed with delight by tasteless When he visited Portland last housing contractors littering Washington week to deliver the fourth in this County with faux French chateaux. year's Portland Arts & Lectures declaimed with terror b series, Gill reminded us that cities, as And it's by "complex mysteries," are much more everyone else. than the sum of they parts. Contrary to popular opinion, however, And the core quality of those that func- it is not Californians per se Oregonians do tion as healthy organisms, Gill cautioned, not like. is "a human scale." And that is the quali. The Beaver brigade has no fear of ty obliterated in so many cities by the sprout-nibbling, crystal-healed, equity- arch disease of the 1980s, what Gill calls bloated, tummy-tucked hot tubbers with "feverish urban bloat." year-round tans. In places such as Seattle and Dallas, The trouble with Californians is simply Gill's words can serve only an epitaphs to that they are people. livability's grave. Portland is far more for- And the problem with people is that tunate. The disease threatens, but is not there are too many of them for their own terminal. Yet. good. The decisions we face in the 1990s will And so, as Portland begins to debate be tough ones, because it has become com- monplace in anew the question of just how big it wants growth is our culture to think that to be in the 21st century, the accusations growth is good, that more is better, that again are flying thick and fast. most is best of all. Time and time again we are peddled the notion that real estate Those urging caution, those appalled development is the lifeblood of our urban by the horror wrought upon Seattle, those economies. well taught by the lesson of Dallas - the This, Gill reminds us, is poppycock. quintessence of a user-unfriendly city - Real estate development, he says, is the are being accused of Tom McCallitis. lifeblood of real estate developers intent on becoming very very rich. I 24 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LCRB AGENDA OF: February 26, 1990 DATE SUBA'a`I'TED: February 7, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Authorization To OUS ACTION: Go To Bid on Senior Center PREPARED BY: Greg N. Berry DEPT EiFP,D OK ITY ADNNRN OK REQUESTED BY: i. CY ISSUE PP 04 Shall the City staff be authorized to advertise for bids for remodeling of the Senior Center? t INFORMATION SUMrMRY s Previous bids for remodeling the Senior Center have been rejected. As the result of a council meeting with the Senior Center Board on January 29, 1990, f the scope of the project was revised. Improvements to be included in the revised primary construction contract are shown on the attached cost estimate prepared by the architect. Staff is requesting authorization to advertise for bids on the primary construction contract. Approval of the requested authorization would permit construction to begin in mid-May with completion mid-October. The bid opening will be scheduled so as to enable the City to apply for additional Block Grant Funding in April. A. NOTE: The remodeling project will also include the following improvements that will be bid as separate contracts within the same general time frame as the primary contract: 1. Mini-blinds $ 800 i 2. Cabinets, shelving, and coffee bars $ 17,095 3. Smoke detectors $ 6,831 ; 4. Shade trees $ 2,000 TO'T'AL COST $ 26,726 In addition, the Council directed that the installation of Casablanca fans, the refinishing of the hardwood floors, and the installation of awnings may be considered in future years. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Authorize the City staff to advertise for bids. 2. Withhold approval to advertise. 4 S FISCAL IMPACT Project Cost: - Primary construction contract $ 283,968 - Additional improvements, as shown above to be be awarded by separate contracts $ 26,726 - Architect's fees (redrafting and inspection services) $ 13,380 TOTAL $ 324,074 Funds for this project are included in the current budget. Additional funds will be proposed in the supplemental budget for this fiscal year and in the j regular budget for the next fiscal year, as necessary. Additional H.U.D. Block Grant Rands may also be available. i SUGGESTED ACTION i That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, authorize the City staff to advertise for bids for the remodeling of the Senior Center. br/SS-SC.GB I J i c c 1 I i i I r r TIGARD SENIOR CENTER SCOPE OF WORK COST ANALYSIS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL 1/29/90 Februa.-y 13, 1990 The following is a summary of remodel elements which comprises a final scope of work . These figures include a 10% contingency, General Conditions and Contractor's overhead and profit. 1. Add elevator, revise main entry, add new stair to basement. Add platform at south basement door. Includes related electrical power/lighting, finishes, etc. Also includes covered walkway at exterior an.t concrete slabs. $114,217.00 2. Add HVAC (heating and air conditioning) to first floor. Includes related concrete pad and screen fence. $29,030.00 3. Add Heating/Ventilation to basement(HVAC if in budget) $20,000.00 4. Extend first floor to south window wall for sound separation. Enclose new stair with window wall. $15,096.00 5. Add retail storeloffice at area under east canopy. Includes new wall at office to create 2 rooms, and related carpeting, electrical, finishes, etc. $18,793.00 6. Add new storage cabinets at first floor and basement. $14,345.00 7. Replace 2 pair of doors at north side of basement. $1,093.00 8. Add Pantry at west end and ramp at exterior. Includes electrical power/lighting, finishes. Reframe roof over existing Stores at new Pantry roof. $38,479.00 9. Extend HVAC (heating and air conditioning) to kitchen. $1,750.00 10. Add concrete walk at parking area island. $275.00 11. Fire Sprinkler System. $16,234.00 12. Add planter/benches at entry. $3,142.00 13. Enlarge basement north wall windows. Add window at Classroom 17 at east end of basement. $5,475.00 OTH_>~"t? INIPROVF1Vi, EM ADDED AT COUNCIL MEETING 14. Add walking deck surface at existing loading dock. $400.00 15. Add janitor closet at basement, utility sink $1,639.00 16. Paint entire exterior-of building $4.000.00 T MAL $283,968.00 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 2-26-90 DATE SUBMITTED: 2-15-90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: CPA 90-02 PREVIOUS ACTION: Proposed amendment to the Com rehe iv Plan Trans ation May Northe Bull Hounta PREPARED BY: City Engineer DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OX REQUESTED BY. POL CY ISSUE -47 Shall the City's Comprehensive Plan ~ransportation Map and text be amended to adopt a revised transportation plan for the northeast area of Bull Mountain? INFORMATION SUMMARY Study of the transportation plan for the northeast area of Bull Mountain has been under way for over a year. The study was a joint effort of the City and the county, with substantial public involvement. The Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study Report and Recommendations (the final report with the blue cover) has been available to the public since January 9, 1990. Copies were previously provided to the Council. On January 11, 1990, the Transportation Advisory Committee voted to support the recommendations of the Study Report. On January 30, 1990, the Planning Commission held a hearing to consider the recommendations. Attached are copies of the draft minutes of the Planning Commission meeting and copies of correspondence received by the Commission. Recommendations of the Planning Commission, NPO #3, and CPO #4B are all reflected in the attached minutes and correspondence. The Commission did not recommend any specific plan. Instead, the Commission has recommended some guidelines for a plan. Based on these guidelines, staff are preparing an additional alternative for consideration. Traffic projections will be run for the new alternative on the same basis as the alternatives considered in the Study Report. It is expected that this information will be available for the February 26 Council meeting. The Planning Commission recommendations reference Policy 11.3 of the existing Comprehensive Plan. A copy of Policy 11.3 is attached for information. Also attached is some procedural background for consideration in any discussion of deletion of Murray Boulevard extension currently shown on the City's maps. asasmaaasaataaaaxaaaxssxaxxxxaxxaaaxaaaaxax=xxa=axxxsxxxaxxaxxaxa=xac=xaacsxxxxsx ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Direct that an ordinance be prepared to adopt the recommendation shown on pages 41 - 43 of the Study Report. 2. Direct that an ordinance be prepared to adopt an alternative recommendation. 3. Continue the hearing to March 19 or 26 and direct that the hearing be readvertised to include consideration of deletion of the Murray Boulevard extension from the adopted Comprehensive plan. 4. Take no action, leaving the existing Comprehensive Plan unchanged. FISCAL IMPACT No immediate fiscal impacts, as only a plan change is under consideration. The Study Report discusses potential future costs on pages 28 and 38. SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommendation is contained in the Study Report on pages 41 - 43. dj/es-nebm.RW k r k r i i ATTACHMENT # 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES i i , r I i is +y_ DRAFT TIC-AM PLANNING C)HKISSION REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 30, 1990 1. President Moen called the meeting to order at 7:34 PM. The meeting was held at the Tigard Civic Center - TOWN HALL - 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: President Moen; Commissioners Barber, Fessler, Pyre, and Rosborough. Absent: Commissioners Castile, Leverett, Peterson, and Saporta. Staff: Senior Planner Keith Liden; City Engineer Randall Wooley, Planning Secretary Diane M. Jelderks. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Barber moved and Commissioner Fessler seconded to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried. Commissioner Moen, Fyre, and Rosborough abstained. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION COl4IUNICATION o Joy Henkle announced the upcoming meeting for the Fanno Creek Conference that is open to anyone who would like to attend. The cost is $7.50, which includes morning coffee and rolls, lunch, afternoon beverages, and conference materials. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 Consideration of the recommendations of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study Report. The Report recommends that the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map be amended as it pertains to the collector street system in the northeast area of Bull Mountain. The Report further recommends certain design considerations for the roadway system in the northeast area of Bull Mountain. The area considered by the report is generally bounded by Bull Mountain Road, 141st Avenue, Walnut Street, 121st Avenue, Gaarde Street and Pacific Highway. Senior Planner Liden explained that the recommendation is on pages 41 - 43 of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study - Report and Recommendation document dated January 1990. The report is tentatively schedule to go before City Council on February 26. City Engineer Randy Wooley will be making staff's presentation and recommendation and Traffic Engineer Gary Alfson is attendance in the audience. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 1 City Engineer Randy Wooley reviewed the study area, the City's existing Comprehensive Plan, and the County's Plan. He explained that the planning is long term. Staff is recommending composite number three. The recommendation retains the Murray Boulevard extension and proposes corridors where new road would be constructed. He reviewed difficulties if no new roads were proposed, why they are not proposing that 121st be connected to Bull Mountain, extending 135th to Bull Mountain at approximately 139th, and realignment of Gaarde and McDonald at Pacific Highway. He reviewed the proposed Comprehensive Plan text changes recommended on page 41 and 42 of the report. He stated that the Transportation Advisory Committee supported staff's recommendation. PUBLIC TESTIMONY o Herman Porter, 11875 SW Gaarde, Tigard, NPO # 3 Chairperson. NPO # 3 opposed extending Boulevard Murray past Scholls Ferry Road. They favored two-lane minor collectors in the area of Bull Mountain. He read policy 11.3.2 for the record. The NPO felt this policy should be maintained. They felt staff's recommendation would, because of development, be constructed before a by-pass would and this would create an arterial street which would be used as an alternative to Highway 217. The NPO objects to constructing an arterial through a neighborhood. He reviewed the alternatives and stated that the maps make assumptions that are not gospel. He requested that the Commission take a vote of citizen who are in attendance who oppose this recommendation. o Cal Woolery, CPO # 4B Chairperson, stated that they had reviewed the study and recommendation at a meeting on January 24th. The CPO recommended that a through connection not be made from SW Gaarde Street to SW Murray Boulevard; that SW Murray Boulevard not be extended south of its present termination at SW Old Scholls Ferry road; and that a system of two-lane minor collectors be constructed to serve the traffic needs of the northeast Bull Mountain neighborhoods. o Edward Egging, 11828 SW Morning Hill Drive, favored staff's recommendation. He felt that volumes of traffic would be increasing especially on 135th, 121st, and North Dakota. Whether or not the by-pass is built he did not see this recommendation as an alternative for the by-pass. o Bud Hillman, Director of Operations, Tigard School District, encouraged routes between Bull Mountain and Walnut. Currently, children living on Bull Mountain need to be bused on Pacific Highway to reach their schools. He requested that future plans include design criteria for the safety of children, such as walkways, crosswalks, and pull off areas for the buses. o Paul Heavirland, 8685 SW McDonald, was concerned that McDonald and Hall Street were not considered in this study. He felt these streets would be greatly impacted if the recommendation was approved. He was also concerned about the increase in water runoff into the Tualatin River. C PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 2 t o Wallace Sweeney, 11455 SW Walnut opposed the recommendation because of increased traffic. o Dave Klingele, 12900 SW 132nd, supported NPO 3's recommendation. He requested that a vote be taken as early as possible so that citizens who wanted to leave could, especially since there was not enough seating for everyone. o President Moen asked for a show of hands who opposed the extension of Murray Boulevard and Gaarde Street. It was estimated that approximately 150 people opposed. One was in favor. o Robert Root, 12045 SW Rose Vista, opposed the extension of Murray Boulevard. He submitted a letter regarding his concerns. o Nancy Smith, 12630 SW Walnut, opposed the Murray Boulevard extension. She is working on a petition asking that no Murray Boulevard extension be allowed. She agreed with Herman Porter's testimony. She felt a new school would be needed if development occurred as proposed and it would need to be constructed in the Bull Mountain area. o President Moen asked, since everyone seems to be opposed to staff's recommendation, that suggestions be given on what they would like to see. o Cathy Leary, 10020 SW Johnson, is opposed to an arterial. Her main concern is for the trees. She did not want to see what happened at the Albertsons' site happen to this area. o Larry Westerman, 13665 SW Fern, distributed and reviewed a letter and map suggesting an alternative realignment for 135th and Walnut. o Cal Woolery, 12356 SW 132nd Court, was concern with the corridors. He opposed the recommendation. o Gary Steele, 12645 SW 135th, agreed with the other speakers. He felt the proposal would create an arterial from Murray Boulevard to Gaarde then to I-5. He supported routing traffic around the City of Tigard and removing the through connection to Murray Boulevard from all Comprehensive Plans and maps. He suggested postponing the hearing until March to allow the NPO and neighborhood to recommend an alternative route through the neighborhood. He suggested using the vacant field to widen the corner of 135th and Walnut. Also, he recommended a turn out area for a school bus pick up and an area for utilities companies to do their repair work. He suggested that Gaarde Street be extended straight out instead of connection to Walnut Street and 135th. o M. G. Jenovich, 11525 SW Walnut, opposed staff's recommendation and favored the NPO's recommendation. RECESSED 9:20 RECONVENED 9:35 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 3 o InaRae Overby, 13300 SW Walnut, submitted a letter opposing the Murray Boulevard extension. She did not feel the proposal was based on the needs of the people. o Lavelle Helm, 13280 SW Walnut, read and submitted a letter opposing the extension of Murray Boulevard, including comments on the recommended plan. o Ed Deemaree, 10105 SW McDonald Street, main objection to the plan is that is would make it easier and faster to get from Beaverton to Lake Oswego. He felt the roads should be constructed to make it easy to get in and out of the neighborhood but not through the neighborhood. o Brian Lewis, 12902 SW Walnut, would like to see a way to service the area without the Murray Boulevard extension going through. He felt that the issue regarding routing traffic around Bull Mountain should be resolved first. Also, Walnut Street has many sight distance problems which need to be considered. o Donald Starbuck, 9988 SW Walnut, concurred with Herman Porter to keep Tigard as much of a community as possible. He has an apartment complex on Walnut street and the tenant already have a difficult time getting onto Walnut. He supported stopping Murray where it is and developing a by-pass. o Edward Duffield, 8895 SW Edgewood, felt traffic will only be increased on Gaarde and would defeat the need for a western by-pass. o Lyle Laverty, 13169 SW Chimney Ridge, opposed extending Murray and supported improvements on internal routes. He felt cost needed to be considered as well and the human element (quality of life). o Don Dyer, 12532 SW 123rd, off walnut, was concerned for the safety of the children since there are three schools in the neighborhood. o Larry Lewis, 12415 SW 122nd Ave., President of Lake Terrace Homeowners Association, representing approximately 20 homes, unanimously objection to the proposed plans. He questioned why the study area had been isolated to the Bull Mountain area when it will impact the area to the west. They were concerned about safety for the children, impact on the lake, and increased noise. o Dan Simmons, 12522 SW 123rd, opposed staff's recommendation and favored Herman Porter's recommendation. Besides cost, safety, and livability; fairness should be taken into consideration. No one single route should carry the burden. o Gary Gray, 22685 SW Johnson, Hillsboro, owner of 13230 SW Walnut opposed the extension of Murray Boulevard. o Barbara Martin, 12600 SW Walnut, read and submitted her letter opposing the extension of Murray Boulevard. ` PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 4 o Other letters were received from: Rein & Mai-Lill Magi, 12905 SW 135th, favoring the proposal; Herman Porter, NPO # 3 Chairperson, requesting a postponement; Larry Westerman, CP04B Secretary Treasurer, requesting a postponement; Ron Kvistad, 13535 SW Fern, opposing the extension of Murray Boulevard; Rosemary & Harold Shrauger, 13030 SW Walnut, opposing the extension of Murray Boulevard; Gregory S. Hathaway on behalf of BenjFran Development, Inc. supporting staff's recommnendation. REBUTTAL o City Engineer Randy Wooley, addressed concerns regarding growth that is occurring and the impacts that will result. He explained that development will occur and we need a road plan to go along with the land use plan. The proposed plan is in compliance with the existing Comprehensive Plan. It is a refinement and clarification of the existing plan which calls for a roadway system between Walnut and Gaarde, an extension between Scholls Ferry Road and 135th, and indirect connections rather than a direct connection of the Murray extension. The arterial route to the west of Bull Mountain is in the County and Regional plans which call for the extension of the Beef Bend Road and potentially for the western by-pass. The City has supported the construction of these roads. All of the system needs to be built and all of the improvements need to be made to have a complete system. A legitimate concern and an existing problem in other parts of the City is where parts of the system have been built and others have not. The Commission and Council may want to add conditions that dictate phasing or sequence of improvements. If we do not have a plan then we cannot reserve the necessary rights of way or have the improvements made as development occurs. If the rest of comprehensive plan system is not put in place then these roads will carry more traffic than projected at build out. Staff does not believe that the Murray extension would ever become the western by-pass or 217 because the proposed system is designed to discourage long distance through travel. With regard to the NPO and CPO suggestion for a series of two lane connectors, he commented that the existing Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map calls for major collector street in the study area and those are typically three lane streets. He added that the proposal calls for changing a portion of 121st, south of Walnut street, from a major collector to a minor collector. Through trucks can be prohibited on collector streets by a separate process. If the Murray Boulevard extension is not built then the traffic volume in the study area would be less, but then the traffic would move to other areas where increasing traffic is a concern, such as 135th and North Dakota Street. i PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 5 He pointed out that the alternatives that provide a Gaarde extension do lead to lower projected volumes on portions of Walnut Street and 121st Avenue south of Walnut Street. Traffic volumes being projected between 135th and Scholls at build out would be similar to those of Durham Road; other areas would have lower volumes. He explained that Washington County definition are different than the City of Tigard; Durham Road may be shown as a minor arterial rather than a major collector, but would still have the same traffic volumes and improvements. Cost was not considered a major factor in most of the comparisons because the improvements needs have not changed from what is in the existing Comprehensive Plan. Study area is the area that we are looking at potentially modifying the Comprehensive Plan. Study and review of traffic impacts went outside the study area boundaries. The Murray Boulevard extension is dashed in on the study area maps because it is on the existing Comprehensive Plan Map and the existing Urban Planning Area Agreement. The alignment of that street is specified and is planned to go in unless that Comprehensive Plan is changed. If a development were to come in today, staff would be recommending those improvements in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan for that part of the street. o Discussion followed regarding extension of Murray Boulevard around Bull Mountain, impact to McDonald and I-5, the western by-pass, what portion of Murray extension could be deleted, and the definition of the Murray extension. PUBLIC BSPMNG CLOSED o Commissioner Rosborough had concerns about connecting Murray Boulevard to 135th. He felt engineering designs needed to be resolved for Walnut Street. That the road layout proposed by staff provides an efficient movement of traffic. o Commissioner Barber stated that the roads will need to be improved, residential areas can't remain stagnate. Staff states that the proposed alignment complies to the policy. The proposal does look efficient, but she is undecided about the recommendation. o Commissioner Pyre stated he had been a member on NPO # 3 at the time the policy was written. He was concerned that staff's recommendation would be solving transportation problems by using through streets which may create a mini by-pass. o Commission Fessler stated she had been a member on CPO # 4 in 1974 when the dotted line was put on the map from Murray Boulevard to Gaarde then to Naeve Road over to Carmen Drive. This was prior to the construction of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 6 Summerfield. The CPO had recommended that the road go around Beef Bend. She felt the western by-pass needed to be built. She suggested extending Gaarde as far west as Beachview. o President Moen had mixed emotions. He was unsure whether it is a good idea or not to allow access outside the community. He shared the citizens concerns. His preference would be to see roads similar to the ones proposed, but not until other roads were put in. He also preferred composite number one to staff's recommendation. o Discussion followed on how to proceed, their options, and alternatives available. Consensus was that Murray Boulevard extension should not be connected at this time. * Commissioner Pyre moved and Commissioner Rosborough seconded to deny staff's recommendation based on the opposition from NPO 3, CPO 4B, 99 percent of the citizens in attendance, and Policy 11.3; area of special concerns for NPO 3. The commission proposes a circuitous route from Gaarde to 135th that would serve the neighborhood but not through traffic. The major concern citizens have to staff's recommendation is that the plan would promote through traffic. This would solve the inter-regional transportation plan at the resident's expense. It is further recommended that any major or minor collector streets be designed to serve the community as collector streets without promoting through traffic. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commission Moen voted no. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1990 PAGE 7 ATTACHMENT # 2 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION k CITY PLANNING COMISSION ROBERT ROOT WASH COUNT. UN-INC. References used: WASH. COUNTY TRANS. PLAN COMP. PLAN VOL. X1 & : BULL MNT. TRANS. STUDY & TIGARD CITY CENTER DEV. REPORT 89 METRO in Its 1988 statistical input in Wash. Co. Trans. Plan. Comp. plan vol. XV, provided the ststistic of 65% growth to 217 from the dates 1982 to 1986. Where are we now 65%-80%-100% As part of the problem identificaton METRO recognized four- sites needing greater capacity I-5, 217, SUNSET, and the WESTERN BYPASS. Which comes to no suprise to anyone in this area; except those trying to locate the WEST BYPASS. Quote " There is no major facility serving the Tualatin, Hillsboro Corridor- between I-5 and Sunset Highway north of Hillsboro. The WESTERN BYPASS is proposed to accommodate travel between these two major- radial corridors. METROS S.W. Corridor Study concluded: In addition to providing capacity, the project <:W.B.:> would provide greater- traffic relief on arterial and collect. streets in S. Beaverton, S. Tigard neighborhoods and on the T.V. Highway between Murry and 219th Ave.. Primary engineering was to take place " beginning with I-5 to highway'99". Yet nowhere in this study is highway 99W addressed for- impact for at least 6 to 8 years. <stop refer- to Tigard study, TIGARD CITY CENTER' ' Focusing on the WESTERN BYPASS it is at best a lame duck:, more appr-operately an ALBATROSS around Wash. Countys neck:. It is then fair to ask: , what is the projected growth for the next five years for the Murry Extension? 65%--B0%--100% The point here is one of pragmatic traffic flow. As the story unfolds the Murry extension soon becomes the WESTERN BYPASS. Are we prepared for this impact?? Do we as a community feel well enough informed?? Although Tigard Engineers may question me, I have been informed by an engineer from the Oregon Dept. of Trans. that if the street of Hall becomes gr-idlocked it may be necessary to alleviate the pr-easure via a I-5 extension. This plan may not materal i ze for 6 to iii years, yet how many of us:have lived here that long? How could this happen? Its inside the Urban Growth boundr-y... ' Under- the General Policies of thes study 1.0 page 12, "It is the policy of the Wash. County to provide a transportation system that maximizes the mobility of Wash, County residents and businesses. Sub. 1 on Strategies : Reduce traffic congestion on all Arterials and Collecter-s by designing and managing the transportation system to meet the regional standard for service as adopted in the "REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN". I submitt to you by this very statement, the W.C.T.P. is diametrically and statistically in logical opposition with the BULL MNT. STUDY. The BULL MNT. STUDY seeks clarity of analysis via the WESTERN ....BYPASS--deleted-as--a--st-a -iveTr-p-ruiect- `pagE L~ttLt-- MNT. STUDY NOV, 89>. I suggest the impact to the given neighborhoods , businesses, and Highway 99 have been grossly overlooked in view of the high potential for the WESTERN BYPASS never- becoming a reality. Although, I could go on for another- hour-, there are two more points I would like you to consider: The Murry Extension is to be considered a Major- Collector-. For clarity, the definition of a Major- Collector- from the W.C.T.P.> is: " M.C.s are intended to serve traffic from local streets or Minor- collectors to Arterials and are public thoughfar-es with a lessor- degree of present or future traffic than Arterials". Are we building and or are ready to accept a major- Arterial on the Murry extension? Futher-, "Land use considerations" <::W.CT.P.> Developments lik:ly to generate significant volumes of traffic should be discouraged from locating on major- collectors that also serve residential districts . Residential developments will be carefully buffer- ed from the right of way. I Would again Suggest review of this BULL MNT. PLAN in the liaht of past, present, and future developments. Specifically Ben Frank!! The BULL_ MNT. STUDY simply does not clearly address these= subjects. The Murry Extension classified as a major- collector qualifies as a Truck: Route, cutting approx. 12 to 14 miles off existing truck: routes from Murry to the Southern Tigard area. W.C.T.S. P22. Fig e Again I submit under- 1.0 W.C..T.S. if It is the policy of the Wash. County to provide opportunities for the safe and efficient use of pedestrian and bicycle facilities as an allter-native to motorized travel and for recreational purpose." The Bull MNT. Study suggests that 70% to eO% of the traffic in the area affected in the study is local . It would seem that given the safest and most expiditious routes , transit, bicycle, and walking could temper- the need for major highway construction. If indeed the statistic is true. In closing, do we wish to mingle commercial vehicles whom for the most are on time schedules with the bicycle, recreational, school and mass influx of thr-oughfare traffic? When you purchased your home were you informed or pr-epar-red for- a potential major arterial from Sunset to 99W.? Obviously, this will go through your neighborhoods and affect your street, property value, and your tai; base. Thank you for-your time I r-espectifully submitt a request for a review under- realistic, updated, and per=tinent statistics, more community input into the process and if anyone knows the location of the WESTERN BYPASS please let me know! 4 t 1 } S ~ k 1 f }i } f S 1 t I 31 January 1990 13665 SW Fern Street Tigard OR 97223 Planning Commission City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 To the members of the Planning Commission, I am writing to expand on the ideas I briefly expressed at the Planning Commission Meeting yesterday in City Hall. I have included two drawing to help illustrate the points I am trying to make. The first drawing (figure 1) shows the area in the immediate vicinity of the intersection of SW 135th and SW Walnut. A few of the houses and driveways in this area are shown schematically, the houses in solid black and the driveways as cross- hatched rectangles. The section of SW 135th south of Walnut is presently a narrow, blacktopped neighborhood street with several driveways entering onto it. Several of the houses are set quite close to the right-of-way, which is 40 feet wide. There are steep sections in the street just south of Walnut, and at the south end of the street. The Northeast Bull Mountain Traffic Study Report and Recommendation calls for the improvement of 135th south of Walnut, to provide access to two major developments planned for the area immediately south of Fern Street extending up Bull Mountain to SW Bull Mountain Road. As the developers have agreed to provide the necessary improvements as a condition of their plan approval, it appears quite likely that this road will be rebuilt in some fashion. The suggestion I would like to make in this letter will, in my opinion, provide a better solution for traffic in and through this area, while also serving the goals which you state in your Report. My suggestion is shown in a general form in figure 2. The bold lines suggest a realignment •of 135th, east of the present right-of-way. There are presently four empty lots on the east side of 135th south of the Fern' Street intersection. The property immediately to the east of these is a deep lot with the house sited in the northeast corner. Therefore, there is a large section of empty land to the east of the current 135th right-of-way. My proposal is to reroute 135th, north of the current southern end of the street, to redirect the right-of-way to the east of the existing street, to join with Walnut to the east of the current intersection. Among the advantages I perceive for this rerouting are the following: 1. The report states that the current intersection of 135th and Walnut is steep and dangerous and would have to be rebuilt, and recommends that the house on the southeast corner of SW 135th and Walnut be removed. Given that the intersection needs to be rebuild, this proposed realignment will move the entire intersection to a location in which it can be built as a standard, right-angle intersection with adequate site distance. I would envision that the existing intersection of 135th and Walnut could then be closed, blockaded, or removed as appropriate. I am quite sure that the residents in the immediate vicinity of the existing intersection would view this as a very positive choice. 2. Because the existing right-of-way on 135th south of Walnut is 40 feet, land will have to be acquired on one or both sides of the current street. Some of the existing homes are built quite close to the edge of the street. It is likely that condemnation will be required to acquire at least some of this necessary right-of-way expansion. To reroute the street would require more right-of-way acquisition, but the land to be acquired is currently vacant land, or at least unbuilt. Only one structure lies within the proposed path, namely a garage on the lot near Walnut. I have no way of guessing the relative cost of acquisition, but my belief is that the process would be much simpler in the easterly realignment. 3. SW 135th Street currently has a very steep section at its southern end. Because of the presence of several driveways in this section, it would be very difficult to regrade the roadway to improve this situation. By rerouting the street to the 'east, I believe that these driveways could be left intact, serviced by the present street, with the new pavement east of, and higher than, the old road surface. The long downhill run, through vacant land, would permit a significant regrading to occur. Furthermore, the empty lots contain fill material removed during the construction of the water tanks at the south end of 135th, so that some fill material would already be available for the regrading. By the same token, the intersection of the realigned street at Walnut would be on fiat ground, which would improve the quality and safety of that intersection. 4. The report recommends that driveway access to all the improved streets be restricted. There are currently nine driveways which exit onto 135th south of Walnut, as shown on the drawing. If the street is realigned, six or seven of these driveways would continue to exit onto what would become a stub, a neighborhood street. Vehicles from these houses would travel south to an intersection with the new 135th, turn north to get to Walnut, and then proceed on Walnut as usual. This would greatly reduce the congestion and safety problems on this (existing) stretch of 135th. 5. Another recommendation of the report is that the impact of the street improvements on existing neighborhoods be minimized. Widening and increasing the traffic flow on the existing section of 135th south of Walnut will definitely have a major impact on this neighborhood. The Fern Street/135th/Walnut Court neighborhood is an area which contains only about 50 homes. The traffic on all of these local streets is very light. We have a friendly, active, and close-knit neighborhood, and none of us want to sacrifice that quality. If 135th is rerouted as I am proposing, the existing neighborhood streets would retain their present character, although a minor redirection of traffic would occur at the Fern Street/135th intersection. Even this change would be an improvement, as visibility south from this intersection is currently better than visibility to the north. So the impact of the road improvement on this local neighborhood would be greatly reduced. I should point out, least the point be raised in the future as a criticism of this plan, that I own one of the presently-vacant lots east of 135th and south of Fern Street (more specifically, the southern-most lot, through the middle of which the proposed realignment will run). Obviously my lot would have to be purchased in order for the street to be realigned. However, I can honestly say that this fact does not enter into my considerations regarding this proposal. In fact, I would expect that my property would be more valuable if the alignment of 135th is not changed than if it is, as I would be free to hold the property for now and sell it as a house lot at some future date. Thank you very much for- your time in considering this suggestion. Yours truly, Larry Westerman 1 Walnut Avenue U (0 cr L co J r~ Fern Street Walnut Avenue U CD C'7 m Mom a~ L Fern Street I F January 30, 1990 Tigard City Council Tigard City Hall 13125 S.W. Hall Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Council Members: We would like to go on record as being strongly opposed to the Murray Blvd. Extension. Our main objection is that the selection of the needed corridor for this arterial has not been based on the needs of people but rather upon the most economical route for the city of Tigard. Mr. and Mrs. John Overby, Sr. built their home in Tigard 40 years ago as did many of the citizens impacted by this arterial. John Overby certainly contri- buted to this community by teaching at Tigard High School during those years. Now his widow faces the trauma of Murray Blvd. Extension cutting through her front yard. Why should Tigard citizens have to provide a thorough- - fare for Beaverton citizens to get to Tualatin or to the beach? Once the connection is made between Beaverton and Pacific Highway, traffic studies have shown, the numbers of cars on Murray Blvd. will increase. Walnut Avenue is presently a collector, and that is all we need through our area--a collector to collect local traffic. We trust Tigard City Council will do what the city engineers have not done. We trust you to think about the people in this area and not just the city budget. If this arterial must go through, send it through the Benjamin Franklin property where there are no homes and people can choose whether they want to live next to an arterial. If you condemn part of Clara Overby's front yard to accomodate Murray Blvd., her home of 40 years will be devalued as well as unsafe. Please consider whether or not you would like to live along Murray Blvd. and base your decision on the needs of people. Sincerely, / C_/ ~~~LiL i~-r16~CGL ~lL'/Gtt t S 13360 S. G~. LG l u~ 0 G . ~ T~ ,tea ~ w-~~- L u, avers «~L~ Zao(a t4L ti I i t Q cv, • '~7-,,tom-~ .v,- ~O.r-p b ; Y~ -PM ,F-p ~ Lk~ 4Mr/ '7'17 a ~C yi2Yi-r~,~ty V~-~-i. J1kLt1~.2s,u>;icc~ct, I J • ~ ~ l yam, 7 cq< iYLr~~ mil, tel. ..2~~~••c~ C(~r~-Ck,, VL~ ~ ~ .~v-7-~- .,Cam ~ , I { i E i T j C` j!1! ffr!t • 1 To Whom It May Concern: Plans to extend Murray Blvd., a soon to be 5-lane arterial, on to res- idential streets of Tigard spells disaster for those areas. I am con- cerned about what I've seen and heard regarding my street,Walnut, and others in Tigard. Things have already gotten out of hand and I see no relief with future plans. We are a residential area with all the needs of a residential area. Our children need to walk or ride along and cross the streets safely. We have mail, garbage, and delivery trucks stopping, backing, etc. We need to be able to back out of our driveways, get our mail and news- papers and work in our yards without fear of being run down. I have been working to get the seed limit on Walnut reduced to 25 mph, the residential speed limit., I feel this is necessary not only for the obvious reason that it is residential, but for the additional reason that it has blind dips and curves. We also have three schools on or just off Walnut. A new law regarding citations for violators exceeding the 25mph speed limit as opposed to those exceeding a 30 mph or more designation makes this all the more necessary. Present postings are not working. i Residential streets should not be used as throughways and certainly should not be made convenient for use as such. We want to keep our streets livable and our houses marketable. I feel it is the city's job to see that these residential streets and residents thereof are protected as such. C It is the job of the county and state to maintain arterials, Scholls, 217 and 99W, adequately so that traffic is not forced on tb these streets. If Murray Blvd is to be extended, I suggest that a route around the residential areas of Tigard be found. It is important to find that route soon, before further development renders this impossible. If this costs a little more, so be it. Better that than to run over or=:n ruin even one person. That is progress! I'm tired of hearing "Well there will be an impact on some people". I could use a word other than impact here. I think people are tired of being impacted. Prejudiced or not, I think Walnut is one of the most beautiful streets in the metropolitan area. Majestic trees, beautiful spring, summer; and fall foliage in the yards of residents who care about their homes r-cj<e and street Isn't that what we like about, and should preserver for i~ ur city and our home? S c The question is not whether there is a fair solution. The question is can we find it? We can have it all. l i i :g i I Brant to add that I will be receiving some information regarding the order in which the different road projects in this area will take place. i I was led to believe that Murray Extension would happen only after the Westside Bypass and all other roads were taken care of, thereby protecting us from becoming the mini Westside Bypass in the interim. I have since learned that this may be yet another half-truth that we must deal with. We get far too many half-truths and evasive answers. t } 4 i S i f (i s F P . F: F. f } t `t R 670 r of -t-l' ta-v-j I P. 0. 7 ~ 1 A N z ~ ipso `.nmmuatEp Qs~elanmeR, Dew mv-. (,L ~4" 1" 1 r BP S 77ycc,`lti ~-P 44-Q MF~ ` rnc`J~~~ VGLI~S~Ur~a.s'1 S► ~tGCt%j C.v~C Lj res r o-f (3 5 ~v~e n~~ Few~ S-f-. ou-\ of J area w W e w• l( h o+- 6t ojolt to a44 e J J ( i q +n re s~e~- our Cato) of r) 12- R, I -Lrtvl i 2~! 05 S~ i35~'' ~A /91 _ Tj",y- A, 01R. 617223 (503 "-00'79 Memorandum to The Tigard Planning Commission from NPO 3 Jan. 13, 1989 The Tigard Planning Commission 13125 S,W, Hall Blvd. Tigard, Or 97223 Dear Members of the Commission: This is a request from NPO 3 for the Commission to postpone considering the "Northeast Dull Mountain Transportation Study Report and Recommendation" for at least two weeks from its scheduled Jan. 30 date. r NPO 3 has strong disagreements with the recommendations of the study, but has not had time to discuss and agree upon an alternative proposal. A postponement till the middle of March would be best for us, if that is feasible. Sincerely, Herman Porter, Chairman NPO 3 C:is'iYcD PtAllgl[!6 JAN 16 1990 9 January 1990 CP04B Bull Mountain - King City - Tigard c/o Larry Westerman, Secretary Treasurer 13665 SW Fern Street Tigard OR 97223 Tigard City Planning Commission 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard OR 97223 To the Planning Commission: The members of the steering committee of CP04 Bull )'Mountain - King City - Tigard request that consideration of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study be extended at least through the second Planning Commission meeting in February, to provide the CPO with sufficient time to discuss this matter in our January general meeting, and draft a formal statement of our group's feelings and opinions on this study. We will be hearing a presentation from Mr. Randy Wooley of the city staff regarding this report during our regular monthly meeting on 24 January. This will not allow our group sufficient time to prepare our response prior to the Planning Commission meeting on 30 January. I am sure that all of us wish to ensure that adequate time is taken to acquire and consider public opinion on this critical and controversial subject. Yours truly, 3 Larry A. Westerman PUNNING A N 121990 i r~~:~ ~za~tai~c JAN 291990 °T~yd (Muo Qr `7YlL %~Lf~ Gn, Cp4rl i?ic.C /~`.✓Ot/~.Sf. cf~ :SC ~ 17~.e~T~ ic7 GAO iy> lN.G~G%~`!~ 1c/~L/v.C. ` "~i~-~ -f-,'`='l'7,~-°UGr.~'.c~.r~,•~ T ~%-F- G~-%AC T G"~ti,QFt, ~ cS O-✓ /jJ.~,,C= -7~d• /-(J.-r/i[r't.t ~-sQ -t~' f7/ 7~°~Vi C. !"i i=/rQ~U N !'t7 <~c cr_ 7`f~~ f=~U~~' !'%~',E?~~ •~O QG f2i" •~'L OC'~ ~ /~4=J~ r-U-7'j !_!~h G^ Y Ui~ ~c _r r"rte ~!l ss-sHr.S".,~/~J . January 30, 1990 City Planning Conimission Tigard, Oregon Gentlemen : As a concerned citizen of the Tigard area, I am presenting this letter to convey my opposition to the extension of ;.ur;^ay Blvd. throu:,h our neighborhood. although S choose not to do so, I could at this point become very emotional, bitter and angry since cry house is one of those that would be destroyed by this road. I did not know that this matter was being so seriously considered until I received a Christmas card from Bandon, Oregon from the people from whom we bought our property over 28 years ago. They made it clear in their remarks that ray home was in jeopardy. Consequently, I demanded that I be sent notices of meetings and that I receive a copy of the November 1989 Transpor- tation Study. In view of Uis situation, experienced people i.-Ath city govern;aent have told me that 1 could force you to start all over. I co not belie%re that thhis would be in the best interest of all concerned. 1 era certain that those of us at this r..eeting toniht want this r::atter settled. Therefore, I .ill sir:-ply state here my reasons for feeling that' the k:urray extension should not go through this ne_ghbor•hood and I sh~:11 try- to keep them on an impersonal basis. 1. The I-.urray extension route now baing recoi.-2L,ended would totally change the character of the entire area. This routb would iripaet the lives of those along its path in an enorit.ous waf. in some cases, it ;,oulu even aestroy their small piece of t'-Le _a:.erican iireau, in w• ys that -you the planers cannot conceive. 2. It will bring in aaditional noise and air pcMution by di.rectin` and ever. encouraging heavier traffic through the area. 3. :iccess to I-5 from the general area already exists through Scholl s Ferry road ~,t ProFress rear Square. 4. If ou insist on this route, ;,ou surely ist realise what :ou ..:ill :.ave done to the nropert-r of those in the path of t?..is ,:array. e;ter_sion. :e cs.^.ot in clea_ conscience sell our ^.•uperty- to unsi:scecting buyers in ~n effort to unloaa _nu relocate. in effect, 7ou .gill have corrdeuned our property already. Value of these properties=. 1.-:ill no doubt be affected. it is also clear to some of ue that we i•..oulc be pair: for our property ;•;oulu not be auf_icient at present day- real estate prices to buy anything cer.._ar.:ble to replace it in teri..s of convenience of loc-tior., si..e -;-na :anal ity. Plcaee rdconsider your _ : cr...c nc_ ~on _:;out the ..urr^ay ::Ivu. e__ttrision. 14e uo not want this 3-5 lane through our neighbobhood. It tiriil auver=.ely L.,pact too ;LE:ny lives. 1 gilt. not progre::s. 1t is nece::_aurv 'out prorress without for the lives it il..;_cts i~ not the r.inc of progress :.e rived. ~incereiy ;ours, ..rs. cos i..ary Shrsuae p~ :;arolu :hr4uger ~ t 13030 S. vo. i;alnut :street l T; gnu u, Oregon 97223 CARVEY, SCHUBERT 8 BARER A PARTNERSHIP OF PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS SEATTLE WASHINGTON, D.C. 1 TENTH FLOOR ELEVENTH FLOOR FIFTH FLOOR 1011 WESTERN AVENUE 121 S. W. MORRISON STREET 1000 POTOMAC STREET N.W. SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104-1023 PORTLAND, OREGON 97204 WASHINGTON, O.C. 20007 (206) 464-3939 (503) 228.3939 (202) 965.7880 TELEX: 32.1037 (LEX SEA) CABLE: LEX-SEATTLE FAX: (503) 226.0259 PLEASE REPLY TO PORTLAND OFFICE January 30, 1990 HAND DELIVERED Don Moen, Chairman Tigard Planning Commission City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Re: Planning Commission Consideration of Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study--BenjFran Development Company/Morning Hill Subdivision Dear Chairman Moen and Members of the Planning Commission: We have received a copy of the City's Final Report and Recommendations for the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study. It is our understanding the Planning Commission will consider these recommendations at its January 30, 1990 public hearing, and will take testimony for purposes of determining whether to recommend to the City Council that the Report's recommendations be adopted. BenjFran has been carefully following the Bull Mountain study to ensure that the Morning Hill Subdivision and the remaining 19 acres of single family residences are not adversely affected by the extension of Murray Road. One alternative under consideration by City Staff would have extended Murray Road through the undeveloped remainder of the Morning Hill Subdivision, north of Walnut Street. This alternative would have caused substantial damage and harm to BenjFran and future owners of the single family residences in the remaining approved Morning Hill Subdivision. It has been our position that this alternative would have the greatest impact on single family homes in the area, and would significantly increase the cost of the project in the purchase of right-of-way for the extension of Murray Road. Don Moen, Chairman Tigard Planning Commission January 30, 1990 Page 2 The City Staff recommendation would not extend Murray Road through the Morning Hill Subdivision, but- i stead route Murray Road along the existing 135th alignment and Walnut Street. We believe that this alternative is the preferred alternative and will have the least amount of impact on single family residences and cost in the acquisition of road right-of-way. It is also our understanding from your City Staff that additional traffic analysis demonstrates that the Staff recommendation is the preferred alternative. We would respectfully request the Planning Commission to adopt the Staff recommendation and forward it to the City Council. We would also kindly request the Planning Commission to enter this correspondence into the record representing BenjFran's objection to any alternative that would damage or harm the Morning Hill Subdivision. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, GARVEY, SCHUBERT & BARER S4, Gregory S. Hathaway On Behalf of BenjFran Development, Inc. GSH/lkt 5/GSH/AJ7/1 cc: Mr. David Ramberg Vice President and Portland Manager BenjFran Development, Inc. Mr. Randall R. Wooley City Engineer City of Tigard ATTACHMENT # 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 11.3 i E a g. INSTALLATION OF TRA17FIC INHIBITORS TO 'THE RESIDENTIAL- PORTION OF ASH IF AND WHEN TRAFFIC VOLUMES EXCEED THE MIDDLE RANGE FOR A E' MINOR COLLECTOR. TRAFFIC INHIBITORS INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO PLANTING ISLANDS, SPEED BUMPS, BUTTONS, TURNING RESTRICTIONS, LOAD LIMITS AND ENFORCEMENT. •11.3 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ORGANIZATION #3 Many of the older residential neighborhoods in NPO #3 were developed along country roads that were lightly traveled, but which are now more heavily traveled.. Some of this increased traffic results from local development, and some of it is through traffic which must use these roads since no arterial route has been built. Further increases in traffic, and consequent widening of these roads, may adversely impact the quality of the residences along these roads. This is particularly the case with 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street, which have right-of-ways of 40 to 50 feet that are offset in some places. The comprehensive plan for NPO 03, adopted by the City of Tigard in 1975, supported and implemented the conclusions of Carl Buttke, the consulting engineer who performed the traffic studies for the various NPOs. These conclusions were that 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street should be developed as two lane roads limited to a total of 30 feet "to avoid motorists from forming a third lane, but providing sufficient roadway width for turning vehicles." The 1975 plan included provisions for these roads to have pedestrian-bicycle paths, and to have restrictions on parking. Also, low densities were planned for the' neighborhoods serviced by these streets; one reason was to avoid further overloading of these streets with additional traffic resulting from higher densities. The City of Tigard, in the 1975 plan for NPO #3, opposed a proposed Murray Boulevard Extension through NPO 03. It has been the opinion of both the City and the local residents that the Murray Boulevard Extension to Pacific Highway should be located to the west of Bull Mountain. Completion of this arterial linkage could remove much of the through traffic from what should be neighborhood collector streets. FINDINGS o The development along most of the collector streets in NPO #3 is predominantly low density residences which are in good condition. o The present right-of-way along much of S.W. 121st Avenue and S.W. Gaarde street is 40 to 45 feet wide, with offsets in some places. Widening these streets to major collector standards would impact some of the existing homes on. these streets. o Some of the traffic now using S.W. 121st Avenue and Gaarde Street is not local, but rather through traffic, which could be better provided for by a properly located arterial connection between Murray Boulevard and Pacific Highway. o Future development on the land along 121st and Gaarde will add to the traffic volumes on those streets. II - 73 o S.W. Gaarde Street and S.W. 121st: Avenues south of Walnut: both have many uncontrolled access points; this condition will. r•enlt.iir•e :;pvcial dv-;i9n attention.when street improvements are made. o A direct connection between Murray Boulevard, or Scholls Ferry Road, and Gaarde Street and/or 121st Avenue has been proposed many times in the past. A direct arterial connection proposal was considered in detail in the 1975:NPO #3 Plan and was emphatically rejected by the City of Tigard. It has also been rejected by the current NPO #3. POLICY 11.3.1 THE CITY SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING WHEN PREPARING STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS THAT AFFECT S.W. 121ST AVENUE OR GAARDE STREET. a. THE IMPACT ON THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AND THE ALTERNATIVES WHICH HAVE THE MINIMUM ADVERSE EFFECT IN TERMS OF: 1. REDUCING THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE DWELLING AND THE STREET; AND 2. NOISE IMPACTS. b. 'THE EFFECT THE IMPROVEMENT WILL HAVE ON THE TRAFFIC FLOW AND THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE'.EFFECTS ON OTHER STREET INTERSECTIONS. z c. MINIMIZING THE USE OF THESE STREETS AS PART OF THE ARTERIAL SYSTEM FOR THROUGH TRAFFIC. t 11.3.2 THE CITY OF TIGARD SHALL WORK WITH OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ARTERIAL ROUTE CONNECTION FROM MURRAY BOULEVARD OR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO PACIFIC HIGHWAY. THIS ARTERIAL ROUTE SHOULD BE LOCATED WEST OF BULL MOUNTAIN, AND SHOULD NOT UTILIZE ROADS WHICH PASS THROUGH EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITHIN TIGARD. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. S.W. Gaarde Street and S.W. 121st Avenue (between Gaarde and Walnut) shall be developed as two-lane roads with pedestrian-bicycle paths, restricted parking and left turning lanes as needed at congested intersections. 2. The undeveloped land along S.W. 121st Avenue (south of Walnut) shall be planned for development in accordance with the locational criteria policies that apply to locating. medium and higher densities close to arterials and in accordance with the policies for "Established" and "Developing" areas. 3. The Tigard Community Development Code shall require site design review for any development other than a single or two family structure. The site design review shall include review of street right-of-way and pavement location. a 11 -74 ATTACHMENT # 4 INFORMATION REGARDING MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION i t 1 5 INFORMATION REGARDING MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION During both the formal commission hearing and the earlier informal neighborhood meetings, requests were heard to amend the existing Comprehensive Plan Transportation Map to delete the proposed extension of Murray Boulevard between old Scholls Ferry Road and 135th Avenue. In considering this request, the following should be considered: 1. The existing Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA) between Tigard and Washington County requires that the Murray extension be a part of the Comprehensive Plan. The UPAA would need to be amended. The UPAA provides for review of the document on a two-year cycle which would normally occur next between December of 1990 and February of 1991. The review process may occur earlier if both parties agree. 2. State regulations require that each city's plan be consistent with that of adjoining jurisdictions. In order to delete the Murray extension from the plan, Tigard would be expected to persuade Washington County, Beaverton, and Metro to make similar changes to adopted plans. 3. The formal hearing notices described the study area defined in the Report. The Murray extension between old Scholls and 135th is outside the study area. It could be argued that proper notice was not given for consideration of deletion of the Murray extension. Therefore, if the Council wishes to consider revision of the Comprehensive Plan outside of the Study area, staff would advise that the hearing be continued and that staff be directed to advertise an expanded area to be considered at the hearing. To meet the hearing notice requirements, March 19 would be the earliest regular Council meeting date when the hearing could be continued. (Currently, March 19 is scheduled as a workshop meeting). dj/ss-nebm.RW ATTACHMENT #5 PUBLIC TESTIMONY i i s WASHINGTON RECEIVED 0^0= COUNTY. OREGON FEB Z 0 1990 February 16, 1990 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Tigard P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study As you know, the Washington County Planning Division has been assisting the Tigard Engineering Department staff in the analysis and development of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study. The County supports the recommendation developed by City staff. At the Tigard Planning Commission meeting on January 30, 1990 the Planning Commission did not support the study recom- mendations, particularly the proposed "Murray Extension". Several comments were made that "the City's comprehensive plan opposes it". That statement is incorrect. To clarify that issue, I would like to provide some background information for the Council to consider (also summarized on page 3 of the North- east Bull Mountain Study Report). The Washington County Transportation Plan, and both the Bull Mountain and Aloha-Reedville-Cooper Mountain Community Plans, adopted in June, 1983 all include a proposed connection between Murray Boulevard at Old Scholls Ferry and Gaarde Street at 99W. At the same time, the Urban Planning Area Agreement between the County and Tigard noted the connection as an unresolved issue, but agreed to take no actions to preclude a solution to the issue. In April, 1984 the UPAA was extended, and interim guide- lines for the Murray Connection were included. In September 1986, and December 1988, new UPAAs were negotiated and signed by the County and Tigard which included a map of the Murray extension alignment between Old Scholls Ferry Road and 135th Avenue, along with design standards for the entire facility from Old Scholls Ferry to 99W. The alignment and standards were developed through the mutual cooperation of Washington County, Beaverton, and Tigard. The UPAA further stipulated that these three parties would amend their comprehensive plans to reflect this agreement. In addition, Tigard has already begun condi- tioning development, and has dedicated right-of-way for portions of this alignment. A portion in Beaverton has also been dedicated and constructed. One outstanding provision of the UPAA was for the County and Tigard to develop an alignment from 135th/Walnut to 121st/ Gaarde. That is the focus of the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study. The Tigard Comprehensive Plan adopted in Department of Land Use And Transportation, Administration 150 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Phone: 503/648-8761 i N. E. Bull Mountain Study February 16, 1990 Page Two 1983 indicates proposed connections between Walnut Street and Gaarde Street as noted in figure 3-1 of the Northeast Bull Mountain Study (attached). The City has conducted a thorough analysis of the issues and developed a recommendation that, on the whole, provides for necessary circulation on Bull Mountain as it develops. The recommendation also maintains the intent of the City and County Plans and the Urban Planning Area Agreements, while at the same time reducing potential impacts to existing residential neighborhoods. Washington County recommends adoption of the Staff recommendation for the Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study. Please do not hesitiate to call me if you have any questions or need any additional information from the County on this matter. Sincerely, Bruce A. Warner, P.E. Director, Department of Land Use and Transportation BAW/FE:pf c: Linda Davis, CIty of Beaverton - R~~O o 7T:~ - ' - ! FOWLER i Q ! r. \ JR. SCHOOVC), ZN- ' •.L. ~ ? ~ 650, ~ _ y _ T-T t-: 50 ' , -180 -L~- r 25 ti _ I NOTE: :The City of TiKard Ras 30 aukyesk[d + aer ipr Di ind'r[•et \ - r:~ ~ i aioor lol lector cuneart io a ~ ...t between Murray blvd. and cdc L. - 1 i~y~yy- - 6 I 3...40 ; it- , 30: lift i 7L' _j 200iit~ r~ 7-- 150 ~l I Li i I 1 TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE ' .tt"tt« t•. Da as rt""' •a.D • " "•a«.. .tR[tr PLAN 2 •R[• K►•.r°°wo< lzo 04 ..0", sKrz 6 w a: i30. A tE wts~"`•at , MAP s co"«tCTM" acT«tc« sc«oaas rtRRT Mab AM I&,, #a TRANSPORTATION 4 eD«.ReTw14 "'-A"'.`""'Tn"`a " a.•aDe aTRttt •«D aant• ROAD. ORD. 83-24 G Ma , A L"no T-°:< <t~ A;T of "wT~:.~ -MCC MAY. 9 , 1983 7 comArno+ toR«t.u.a :,RCtr etTwte« .vr«°rs. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS YEAR 2000 (00 9 .0-11= Lout. "RCCT M.¢r'D'o acyam 't"r an Qn PROJECTIONS (00 10 •°cst+ M.8 arrows "wit AS A VUSSW t u.< to w•tR•T aaYO. EXISTING STREETS YEAR 1990 (00 ARTERIAL PROJECTIONS MAJOR COLLECTOR ARTMENT OF PLANNING B DEVELOPMENT MINOR COLLECTOR OF TIGARD. OREGON & VICINITY s 7Fr LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT CORRIDORS (LRT) 4E Bull Mountain "Transportation Study Figure 3-1 . e c~ a l a cv 12~ PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD'CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE ~ ~ / , / ~ GcJ • ~c.~~-s j ~.~c~~? l fir, ~ p~lL G -"t l i , r~ tz y~ .l ~ln.d l 2 01 C- < . GAA CO IS U tG~(•. , r-5- tJ cr~r - /-c. < act. /~30o s.tv.~ i~ uv S-1 /4/o5- 5i.) 117~4- I.3 R 5 5~ ~-Fi-nl sir r PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE L -T hi'an,e- 1Ah&ar-yg /-3 G~- 3n SL/tt Fero '~-A. rel 97LL3 t,4'6-Yy~p~p _e%4~- /yeGu ray 6o~~ ..cJ / 36 0 ~G('Z- SC'-l `C'`t 0 7 -v d kA rn. L& 4 to 1Z 3 5 3- 2, Clm~Lyzq7 G~ ~-13 5-3 5-51--- lt, ~ A-, u7 rr or-D 4q 6SA~- dv SO S-(,~ ! 3s /i vC . 6413 -:318Y cc z , u~ / rs~ ~3_ (LS v ~yv { t t r is PETITION JANUARY.28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS. FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. f' THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PEP*R.P:*JENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. i NAME ADDRESS PHONE -221 Ilr,cz sz 3SAO s w 39 - QUA _ rl.c..ne o ~ 1 U J w l i j JG t~ j #F AM S-1-5 ~~~tr- 1390o ~SW 1 )11F~ 6,, Z (3 -06-4 's 11, 1 t (2~U 5 5') rj ~ bfixcrA oo r rod - g~ 706 -22-6 V E Xs- t 9 -7 ~ 03 `t U i/,'ew h1 c fA ~ t Gtr 63 3 2Y f 7,20 S7-,5 1 • f~ F; F PETITION JANUARY-28, 1990 t WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS. FERRY ROAD'TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD'CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TOPERMP;NENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. SNAME ADDRESS PHONE; 13 ~O s 1% 6 o~o-o'4$!57 ~ • o - 693 in.) 5.w . sc.*3 t.; r. F PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS. FERRY ROAD'TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLRNNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 17 -qaq~q' ~N V b44 6 l - !;Ep~e v'' ~~fx2d /3a3 W In S 6 '3a i PETITION JANUARY.28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS. FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE A Z- 4<3,9- Sw i/C ~wM o,~..^ V i } C f-)A~ c.) ti 1'7 2-'7 113 va 1*&,om A 3Q- ~'3-2,r CA-6 13 LSUJ0&, r 102( 13 4~-~ v s; w, s cv~ hri ~ ~ 1 ~ G~3~19 l ~~,ec► -/f e7 a,~ 3 U S l/✓, S c a ~h~n'o(~ e 1~~^ I'S'c~fof C~ S~3 1/19/ Lam/ 39 6.c; ic \ w 1 4 G (J farz~ ` 43 Z 6776 i f. r~ n PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH-AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE-TIGARD* CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME!! ADDRESS PHONE 11573 S,~J W,,xX (Y~ Ti3a4 ~~y-IH79 IL ~t C t n / r,/ i zi/ c~ - ` .n ~t .l 'U ± 1(1_V✓.^ ~l 1 ~ jq-r Z ~I I J bc) PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE m o 5w ci !O Aim, Ti artt, ~ D -g 1.z5 / v; ?J svl l~~16LFS7 ?27Z. TbllRn r} . Qom,.-}C / t~~c~u s w. ~8 r/ t B'' 3S" Z --ZFA) F-AlU-w ILIUS SW 2-2-IlAik T-lc4Afij\ t.0 )"o -b laq ef~ 1CS =~en~ /'yo y.5- S -w w 41Y [x'041.4 9 y7 a l Sys ~~v 9 3 21-56 r, 1-Yr6o s gel/l CV, r ~,rr1 6-~ > y/ f,4 PETITION JANU4RY.28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE `:"IGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COYNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE L'- / -q . ac-- 5- (-j 15 'k ct o•~o Scv 98 62o- G 9 IL v 9 IZv sw qty (za -~54G _ ' c~ g,/ k3f 1qZ ~ li 9 7 q- 6d 4.3 S~ - rok 5 5L) C(ro Se 0 15 -7 -7 77 S,k i 0-IS 7 Q 20 is o 3 9-~~~ PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD-CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. N ADDRESS PHONE ,1 "4 ~s~~ S z3 39- cy/ Nun ~zc)-4~~ S00(4-LL, 12- c~ zo OAK ? K y~% PETITION JANUARY 28, 1990 WE THE UNDERSIGNED OPPOSE THE PLANNED EXTENSION OF MURRAY BOULEVARD FROM ITS CURRENT TERMINATION POINT NEAR SCHOLLS FERRY ROAD TO SOUTHWEST 135TH AND/OR SOUTHWEST WALNUT STREET. THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED AS A MANDATE TO THE TIGARD:CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION, AND WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICIALS TO PERMANENTLY ABANDON ALL PLANS AND CONSIDERATIONS OF THIS MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION. NAME ADDRESS PHONE izoaG skiQ~sY~s1~~r ~ 5-s~ 33 C . (zoos 5.~..~, G.ArEi2,'~L 6$4-ICot4 S 43 ft -325-20 3!t 25a S."ItZ 2;5~ Cf X39-76(S C,) s56✓1 7 t 1 c 1.6 &,W 3 ji, I/ 'A O G . W~ -4 XT-TI S. o a S/ 7-2 ~Zzo v ec)~1a ~G/~2D ~Sw sly ` ~»a o Szy3 igu ~2 ~ - /f x.39 ' L/v`~t7~ 5T 3 9 5 5 A `(koo ~C'jYt iT~ / 5 35 ~ y l 121 /Y AA)e /r►OO J? c i~v SW LA! `71i s~ V a 7 12- y -S e ct 0 too s y yam'-> ~ ~ ~3z-< 2 Z tly ~ - 133-) 7%of 5"' ~ 2~-yo ,;Ah l 0000 - ,~.~,y~,,~f'_.p.M-~ ✓~?,v~i-cc 1 g ifs . cam, d. cz44--~ cL L+,~- cl, fib.. Y~..~ c~u -'~.e.. `-.(•Qiv~"~.v~ c+~.,c oL titrr G a-c.~: /,.s c~ CL411 CL, ~o rair ~l cv d t, , w-aM , Ott------- U J-u 1Y1~ t7ft~t z.o1~L~ w.~. ~i" .eat Lc`triLj i-tlL i s> l J Q ply t ~(v~a.-~ ) 2 - -E`i c9me 13 s' cx,r.~ cu a,~n . c t_ 3 a st~. 4- - d"- CIL. Ja~ 44, Gib 9 ~ r Nr- cul ~,~~,.,z.~.a.lt. i i f E R d Cc •-yv~ cu s-r ,~v+~` ce„'~- _~~~«e(~L2~a~i+.t. . ~ Ct.i..~-LJ .~ih.~, .~n~.,t, v~ur~,t~•ro~S °.~J-o ~ GzAt ~ /"J K~i1~000 .CLfi►~4,~" ~ctn,~.. )v1 Cd„~-trv~ .C c l/ ~L~ c,~ . i January 30, 1990 Tigard City Council Tigard City Hall 13125 S.W. Hall Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Council Members: We would like to go on record as being strongly opposed to the Murray Blvd. Extension. Our main objection is that the selection of the needed corridor for this arterial has not been based on the needs of people but rather upon the most economical route for the city of Tigard. Mr. and Mrs. John Overby, Sr. built their home in Tigard 40 years ago as did many of the citizens impacted by this arterial. John Overby certainly contri- buted to this community by teaching at Tigard High School during those years. Now his widow faces the trauma of Murray Blvd. Extension cutting through her front yard. Why should Tigard citizens have to provide a thorough- fare for Beaverton citizens to get to Tualatin or to the E' beach? Once the connection is made between Beaverton and Pacific Highway, traffic studies have shown, the numbers of cars on Murray Blvd. will increase. Walnut Avenue is presently a collector, and that is all we need through our area--a collector to collect local traffic. We trust Tigard City Council will do what the city engineers have not done. We trust you to think about the people in this area and not just the city budget. If this arterial must go through, send it through the Benjamin Franklin property where there are no homes and people can choose whether they want to live next to an arterial. If you condemn part of Clara Overby's front yard to accomodate Murray Blvd., her home of 40 years will be devalued as well as unsafe. Please consider whether or not you would like to live along Murray Blvd. and base your decision on the needs of people. Sincerely, '72 -3 ttj"' S Movement of hazardous materials through the county on Through BACKGROUND Truck Routes has not been found to be a significant problem, and highway systems. The Federal Interstate Highway System pro- no Through Truck Routes are closed to such movement. Figure 8 The concept of a road system hierarchy based on jurisdiction and vides major links between states, and the State Highway System - illustrates the Through Truck Route System. Certain interim classification is well established in terms of the federal and state connects the various major regions within the state. e - routes are shown, but will be removed upon completion of _ proposed new facilities or realignment of existing facilities. • Truck traffic moving resources including timber and agricultural e products and mineral and aggregate resources in the rural area of the county also must be accommodated. Such travel will be aided ! ' _ - - - ,L _ ' by the identification of Rural Resource Roads which will receive a higher maintenance priority than other rural local roads, THROUGH t 11.0 ROAD JURISDICPIONPOLICY ' TRUCK e IT Is THE POLICY OF WASHINGTON COUNTY TORETAIN ROUTES e JURISDICTION OF A COUNTYWIDE ROAD SYSTEM THAT ' - - - - - - - - - - ' SERVES MAJOR 1NTRA- AND INTER-COUNTY TRAVEL ; MOVEMENTS. l" ~,'r( a `I t i - Implementing Strategies: 11.1 Retain or assume jurisdiction of Arterials and Major Collec- tors that exhibit the following characteristics: A) Routes that serve through-county movements (primarily - _ Major Arterials) . • ~"<< je f I r - ~*J i• f~ t I _ _ - ' e B) Routes that serve intra-county movements (primarily e Minor Arterials) .-._._.:i\ C) Routes that serve inter-city or inter-community move- i • f d t Ps ments (primarily Major Collectors)` [ D) Routes that serve as connecting links between major - - e traffic origination and destination centers. i 'y, r f J =I j 1 E) Routes that complement the Federal or State system _y s t i f G \ 11.2 Pursue the transfer of jurisdiction of Minor Collectors and - - - ' ° = Luca! Streets in unincorporated areas to city jurisdiction as i t -11 • r those unincorporated areas are annexed to cities. THROUGH TRUCK ROUTE ; I I ' 113 Pursue the transfer of County-Local Streets and Minor Col- INTERIM TRUCK ROUTE lectors to city jurisdiction when those roads are within a city's ,mss PROPOSED TRUCK ROUTE limits. ~~f'}i- • + _,.i.• it .r STUDY AREA _ ~.'y.,•,,,,.. v \ 11.4 Work jointly with ODOT to identify and resolve State/ o ~ Y ® . ! \ County jurisdiction issues. ElL• Muss IL10 \ ?Ial .(,N.In,,.d,>,e...i..I.W+n.ill be de+e<mnrd .l.om,le„nn ~l.~mda•,~~die,. FIGURES 1 x \()ff-. Gnrv m,,~M»e dvnld,edA.dtrutk.u-tha~.emn-d-d,uunnwide th rough u,xY-m xW ttwome n-h-w tNs ap. 22 f 1 I T;,.~1 ~tuN• Cade. D~ 10.16.050 I D• /G • k ?r c IP~e#G ZeI"_Ac Doffs '~~is'®v9 i, Trv~ (1) Eastbound traffic on S.W. Center Street shall stop at or prior to the intersection of the west line of S.W. 87th Avenue with the south line of S.W. Center Street. (2) All traffic on S.W. 87th Avenue shall stop at or prior to intersection of the south line of S.W. Center Street with the west line of S.W. 87th Avenue. (3) Southbound traffic on S.W. Burlcrest Drive shall stop before entering its intersection with S.W. Summercrest Drive. (4) Westbound traffic on S.W. Lomita Avenue shall stop before entering its intersection with S.W. 90th Avenue. (5) Westbound traffic on S.W. Murdock Street shall stop before its intersection with S.W. 96th Street. (6) All traffic on S.W. Grant at its intersection with S.W. Johnson Avenue shall stop before entering the inter- section. (b) All traffic entering a collector street or an arte- rial from a residential street (other than a collector or arterial) shall come to a stop before entering the collector or arterial in obedience to a duly erected stop sign or signal, except at those entry points where traffic is required only to yield, pursuant to a "yield right-of-way" sign. (c) All traffic entering an arterial from a collector street shall come to a stop before entering the arterial in obedience to a duly erected stop sign or signal, except at those entry points where traffic is required only to yield, pursuant to a "yield right-of-way" sign. (d) The designations of the streets within the city as "arterial," "collector," and "residential" shall be the designation assigned to each of the streets and portions of streets by the Tigard comprehensive plan. (Ord. 78-3 §4(c), 1978: Ord. 73-33 §7,.1973; Ord. 70-41 Ch. 4(part), 1970). 10.16.050 Through truck traffic restricted. (1) "Truck," as referred to in this section means a vehicle or a motor truck, truck tractor, or truck trailer as defined under Chapter 481, ORS, except that it shall be defined as all trucks licensed for twenty thousand pounds or more gross vehicle weight (G.V.W.). • (2) The following streets or portions thereof within the city of Tigard are restricted by use during the hours designated: (A) Through truck traffic shall be prohibited at specified times of day or night seven days per week: (i) iW V _4 am (B) Through truck traffic is prohibited twenty-four hours, seven days per week: (i) Within the right-of-way of S.W. Gaarde Street, from S.W. Pacific Highway to S.W. 121st Avenue; • 113-1 (Tigard 4/85) 10.16.085 (ii ) Within the right-of-way of S.W. 121st Avenue from S.W. Gaarde Street to S.W. Scholls Ferry Road; (iii) Within the right-of-way of S.W. 135th Avenue from S.W. Scholls Ferry Road to S.W. Walnut Street; (iv ) Within the right-of-way of S.W. Walnut Street from S.W. 135th Avenue to S.W. Pacific Highway; (v ) Within the right-of-way of S.W. Tiedeman Avenue from S.W. Greenburg Road to S.W. Walnut Street; (vi ) Within the right-of-way of S.W. 78th Avenue from S.W. Pfaffle Street to S.W. Spruce Street. ( Trucks that can reach t es inati bX,~gavpIjnV an o r ro are a ine as rough truck traffic". (Ord. 84-59 §1, 1984). 10.16.085 Blocking street and hindering traffic prohibited. No person shall, without proper authority, block any street or place anything in or upon any street which will hinder traffic and travel thereon. (Ord. 77-97 Sl, 1977). Chapter 10.28 PARKING Sections:- 10.28.010 Definitions. 10.28.020 Purposes for which parking is prohibited. 10.28.0'30 Truck, trailer and bus restrictions. 10.28.040 Removal of parked vehicle from fire area. 10.28.050 Required precautions. u 10.28.060 Parallel parking requirements. 10.28.070 Space markings. 114 (Tigard 4/85) dA/-& '-t CL -k' wt 4 • ~ y.. - ab C-le , G o u.v►,~ ~ ) i i 5 --`"C~' V~ w u.vti ~ ~'~cm ~ S e. ~cY-AeS . o P'rob le wi ' + r c~, n o '~-r 6,p Lt-'mO lWlamIC o p1e At) G,,,,,,.~. 'bc.c~..~..,.-$-i ~.►-~2. v..a_~. ~.9~or 4..se~ 0 9..d . ~ a.,~. Cl Cl "-eex.gA Y1.o rSLS.~ o vVC, bh l M_~ Vr. C.~`~L O~ -[cam 6-• - } PC, GL.v~ L,-. L.3 W ©v~-c4. W G-u~ \j~ ,rve-o v~e. L Sl, ,..s? Lz 1 w - `t ~t .re 5-~» ; a r. G, r•e r.`. s~.~ I.~.e w •~~+~irvt.S~ S men -%A be. Y' U-^ o V car .t r. `c~.~vt rye r $ ~.J LLa cc•n, Sty 1 v, c~1..i. s Griw~.~Yt T w c~~n ~-r ~b o P d~ l i I" Z- MO it-4L Or, inn c~ p s iv1~ 1r~.~ a►.s1c. ~o..~ ~c VJ4`e_,~. ~ ~ ~ 20 P (e l ~ v-~ . GCv~'e- C O W LrYwWs,%A, YES h e c cc mc~ E l . V4L L o Yr..e. CN v ss~. r> m v r YL. o`~- 2'~ ti rn P~wr' S Comm 4 't~►sn-~ ~ ~ a ,~YI.~J GNt~. r '6-4. pe ap 1e 4m. l.~ 1,1 a J a i c.` S , S1~ a.~ k~c., w e• y l,.] t r Q 5 Again, McCall: "Oregon has been wary of smokestacks and suspicious of rattle and bang: Oregon i has not camped, cup in hand, at anyone's affluent doorstep. Oregon has wanted JONATHAN industry only when that industry was O~®~~ willing to want what Oregon is." What Oregon is, aye now there's the I rub. And as the debate rages over how °1- much, and at what pace, Oregon changes, it's time to pause, to reflect, to learn. It's time, then, for a word from the wise. As if on cue, one of America's most Wanted: endangered species came to Portland last . prescription for week-anGill i. Brendan Gill s not a pundit, a wag, a commentator, an expert, a consultant or a growing pains guru. He's a thinker, a breed in increas ingly short supply. The cry rings from every corner of The New YorkeblGill has career with our citadel. penned profiles, poetry, essays and criticism. In recent The Californians are coming! years, under the title "The Skyline; "he has revived the column once penned by The Californians are coining! his mentor, Lewis Mumford. This gives It's uttered with glee by greedy West him the opportunity to write about the Hills mansionites hoping to hawk their relationship between man and the urban family estates. I environment. It's proclaimed with delight by tasteless I hen he visited Portland last housing contractors littering Washington I week to deliver the fourth in this i County with faux French chateaux. year's Portland Arts & Lectures + And it's declaimed with terror by series, Gill reminded us that cities, as everyone else. "complex mysteries," are much more q Contrary to popular opinion, however, than the sum of their parts. t it is not Californians per se Oregonians do And the core quality of those that func- J not like. lion as healthy organisms, Gill cautioned, The Beaver brigade has no fear of is "a human scale." And that is the quali- ty obliterated in so many cities by the sprout-nibbling, crystal-healed, equity- arch disease of the 1980s, what Gill calls i bloated, tummy-tucked hot tubbers with "feverish urban bloat." year-round tans. In places such as Seattle and Dallas, The trouble with Californians is simply Gill's words can serve only as epitaphs to that they are people. livability's grave. Portland is far more for- And the problem with people is that tunate. The disease threatens, but is not there are too many of them for their own terminal. Yet. good. The decisions we face in the 1990s will And so, as Portland begins to debate be tough ones, because it has become com- anew the question of just how big it wants monplace in our culture to think that to be in the 21st century, the accusations growth is good, that more is better, that again are flying thick and fast. most is best of all. Time and time again we Those urging caution, those appalled are peddled the notion that real estate `f • development is the lifeblood of our urban by the horror wrought upon Seattle, those economies. well taught by the lesson of Dallas - the r quintessence of a user-unfriendly city - This, Gill reminds us, is poppycock. are being accused of Tom McCallitis. Real estate development, he says, is the Oregonians, it's being said, are anti- lifeblood of real estate developers intent growth. on becoming very very rich. It's time then - once again - to ( As for the notion that throwing up remind ourselves that McCall never did high-rise towers to add to the tax rolls say "Visit, but please don't stay." is an idea far more often peddled than ' it What McCall said was visit but j proved. please don't stay unless you are I The challenge facing Portland as it prepared to stick to the rules of J rushes pellmell toward the 21st century, ` the game we play here, is not only what kind of growth does it Those rules are tough because the want, but whether it wants to grow at all. game we play here is hardball. Oregon- Last year, more than 25,000 Californians ians are down-to-earth about protecting ' came north to a new life. Were they something ethereal - livability. drawn by what we have to offer? Or were they fleeing the dreadful legacy they had wrought on the promised land? IC, 1 1) February 1990 C1104B Bull Mountain - King City - Tigard c/o Larry Westerman, Secretary Treasurer 13665 SW Fern Street 'rgard OR 97223 City Council City of Tigard To The Council: At our regular monthly meeting on 24th January 1990, we heard a prescmation from Mr. Randy Wooley of the Engineering Department of the City of Tigard, -regarding the Final Report of the Northeast Bull Mountain 't'raffic Study. A motion was made to forward a recommendation to the Planning Commission to express the consensus opinion of the those present at the mceting. The motion carried by majority vote. The following is the text of that recommendation: CP04B recommends to the Planning Commission and to the City of Tigard, that a through connection not be made from SW Gaarde Street to SW Murray Boulevard; that SW Murray Boulevard not be extended south of its present termination at SW Old Scholls Ferry Road; and that a system of two-lane minor collectors be constructed to serve the traffic needs of the northeast Bull Mountain neighborhoods. Tliank you very much for your attention in this matter. Yours truly, Larry !Westerman ~ Ir'P mil r ` Y FE8 2 2 1890 lit t f - r~o 6 TO: Mayor Edwards and members of the City Council FROM: Ed Murphy, Director of Community Develo:n RE: NE Bull Mountain Study--Public Hearing DATE: February 26, 1990 Tonight there may be many people who will want to testify concerning the NE Bull Mountain study. As a process, I would suggest the following: 1. Mayor.... Opening remarks. Purpose of hearing. (to consider changing the city's comprehensive transportation map as it pertains to the collector street system in the northest portion of Bull Mountain, as presented to the Council in a report entitled "Northeast Bull Mountain Transportation Study Report and Recommendations". Council received copies of the report a few weeks ago. Council has not had a hearing or any workshops on the issue. Council has had forwarded to them the NPO 3, CPO 4B and Planning Commission recommendations. Council has also had presented to them the Planning Commission minutes, and any written correspondence presented to the City at the Planning Commission meeting, or submitted since the Planning Commission meeting. Council just received word in the workshop that the NPO has made a alternative recommendation, which will be reviewed tonight. Go over the procedure for tonight's hearing. Staff report, NPO comments, CPU comments, and then everyone else. Not "proponents" or "opponents", just asking for comments and suggestions. Remind them to be concise and to the point. note that the final change to the comprehensive transportation plan will not be done tonight, since no ordinance has been prepared, but that the council may decide to give staff direction to bring back an ordinance, or complete some additional analysis. 2. Randy ...staff report. 20 minutes. 3. Council... questions to staff on the staff report itself. (clarification, or points the council wants to make sure the public hears). 4. Mayor ...open hearing. ask for NPO first then CPO 4 then others 5. Mayor. Don't close hearing, but allow Randy a chance to clarify any points that were made by the public testimony. And allow council a chance to ask Qandy or other staff questions. 6. Mayor ...close the public hearing. 7. Mayor. ask for final recommendation. Yjave staff review the options, and make a recommendation. 8. Take a break. 9. Council deliberation. 10 Council decision. 11. Mayor ...have staff review their understanding of the council's decision, and outline the next steps in the process, for clarification to the audience and to the council. s r Wool • du,1 - Page - 1 ~CC!C`Gr 2 `G7-C(i~ ~y do ~f~e rn W-J Minutes NPO #3 meeting of Feb. 2, 1990 1. Meeting called to order at 7:08 p.m. 2. Present: Porter, Froude, Mortensen (had to leave at 8 P.M.) Absent: Hansen,Klingele. Also present were applicants for membership: Bishop, Root, Smith. 3. Minutes of last meeting approved. 4. Subdivision SUB 90-0001, Burton/Kouzai. No decision taken due to lack of input from the developer. 5. Sign code exception, Kim/Kolve. Motion to restrict sign to the size of boards already placed on the roof. Passed unanimously. 6. Bull Mountain Transportation Study. The following motion was passed unanimously by those present and by all absent members, who were polled after the meeting. The NPO generally supports the recommendations of this study with the follwing exceptions: 1. 6aarde St. should be extended, as a minor collector, in a westerly direction to connect to the 129/132 St. minor collector, instead of going to Walnut. 2. Murray Boulevard should end at Old Scholls Ferry Road. 3. The timing of all connections is important and should be coordinated to prevent a predominant impact on any one street. 4. We recommend that all collectors be built to fit the terrain, that is, allow a tighter- turning radius than is standard for minor collectors. This will slow traffic, discourage through traffic, minimize cuts and fills, and improve the quality of the neigborhoods. Speed limits should be enforced through .the design of the roads. '5. Maintaining the quality and safety of the neighborhoods should carry as much weight as providing for traffic in this plan. 7. Other business. Report from Martha Bishop: City Council directed staff to redraw and clarify the language of the ordinance regarding manufactured homes. 8. Meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. Summerfield. The CPO had recommended that the road go around Beef Bend. She felt the western by-pass needed to be built. She suggested extending Gaarde as far west as Benchview. o President Moen had mixed emotions. file Wets t2natire Whether +t i&--ft--good idea- or net assess outside the -gun r-] He shared the citizens concerns regarding the extension being a possible bypass alternative. His preference would be to see roads similar to the ones proposed, but not until other by-pass roads were put in. He also preferred composite number one to staff's recommendation. o Discussion followed on how to proceed, their options, and alternatives available. Consensus was that Murray Boulevard extension should not be connected at this time. * Commissioner Fyre moved and Commissioner Rosborough seconded to deny staff's recommendation based on the opposition from NPO 3, CPO 4B, 99 percent of the citizens in attendance, and Policy (-ice-.-3j 11.3.2; area of special concerns for NPO 3. The Commission proposes a circuitous route from Gaarde to 135th that would serve the neighborhood but not through traffic. The major concern citizens have to staff's recommendation is that the plan would promote through traffic. This would solve the inter- regional transportation plan at the resident's expense. It is further recommended that any major or minor collector streets be designed to serve the community as collector streets without promoting through traffic. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commission Moen voted no. PLANNING COMMISSION MINOT$S - JANUARY 30, 1990 PEGS 7