Loading...
City Council Packet - 07/09/1990 i ::r.,!•-~/. s'~:`%r;: :`:f%rF,`ty v::•::}i'`.:}.c a~~3r:<;fkir.':!: £:.}:if •i'::}:`:y%-j%:: ~'::;r /5.;.'~f~>:?;'>f.~2~.;:!c:~:'.rt;l;:.}z{y:c«.`a%:i'f`•i•:: }:r::!.;.!yi~:;i: }?fi ~~r`.aJ.p,'fr. .Y3:Ji.=";,=;.s}~'•;..:~<r:Ir:'.'.>,:•rr<:i'•.::i.'cr `.!;,xf< •::::'P,.i,r ,yur!;:.:.. :af .i`s5rcr:~1. fr . r-: o:•:•@: ;.3i NMI Ca~`~":~C.'`.~`1:<. ~]:~`,~xL.:}' }}:x<•.:.<>r.-«:; ?;s}s ~'rn.y,;q y:!y .r: f„ rr ,•,r~;'ff'+xi'•ff.} ~~f~~~ ~F: yaar `.::•a' x•:;}v LA'i4 g-44L A. f.+ri ;f%' .fs•-i-rocu y::~.ju ?•,'.,a,'ti o: i`:.: F~ w 0, :6~ rrrin}Wr'ryY.:y .:Y.vJlp;}.vr: 'r.}q'~.:'-~!'-,:. OWN T'Y•;~'''li{l Vii:.,.,.;. . r4yFvr!~:^b:.ti:~}w:r,i}~ l'~: ~~GA13~~=~'~}l[~C7'N`-`'.r,~...?~s,~ s•<s<<i:i>:;«:>; '°Y-f 'Y%:S~:iJ%.~ ~.~..:Yf`aG}Y:<3:?d~lr::"Y,~ 5•••i~'::;;%:tz:r:'<~~'%,:'•%ic'..3'%~:y~:'<i:; If.•,k... k},y ?'.:h::-Y"f~ssrfy!f7.~:n.:~rr ~'Gir::fiP.:1x::~%i..y2":1,>•:'-!:v:: s:; r::{j4. _ %%f.:i: `^':~•f;i.:Y,:.ff~~?t:::f.:3:r:f%££':£.xrr~•tf'•':>~7:~0'%':''~>~.,'&:%v~r'.'%%r ~:,y: _ r~,."c+: f!..:o'r :;k!~• ..y.:v:.'.z%iny:}i::-!,;:.~:.ti!.:.w!:::.!. r.,.,;i,./%:y;.% -nf.y?.;r ~~ar:Y2`p.f {f.'7.:Rf~:%x r:i:. r}:+.vr'.:.:4.'%.:!r'.h•~"-;f`.: i ,!:ci.y•r';Q:/:?~c~!'rC!i'F'j""fc}y~:'::''.,;~}.`l ;f•:,~3'~#~r i hm:.✓:i-!~»::o;:......... r#:.r::/..tr:.:..•: - 1 i t; 1- l ~#t t 1. WASHINGTON COUNTY UPDATE: F County Wide Traffic Impact Fee f MST1P I and 11 2. - MURRAY ROAD EXTENSION DISCUSSION 3. 125TH/121ST STREET ALIGNMENT 4. HIGHWAY 217 IMPROVEMENTS STATUS 5. WATER AUTHORITY DISCUSSION 6. ADJOURNMENT t Cca79 i f { t 1 COUNCIL AGENDA -JULY 9, 1990 -PAGE 1 i i E_ JOINT TIGARD/BEAVERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING JULY 9, 1990 - 6:30 P.M. 4000 WASHINGTON SQUARE ROAD TIGARD, OREGON 1. PRESENT: City of Tigard Council: Mayor: Jerry Edwards; Councilors: Carolyn Eadon, Valerie Johnson, Joe Kasten, and John Schwartz. City of Tigard Staff: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Liz Newton, s Community Relations Coordinator; Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder; Randy Wooley, City Engineer. City of Beaverton Council: Mayor: Larry Cole; Councilors: Robert Drake, Carole Schick, and Forrest Soth. City of Beaverton Staff: Rick Root, Senior Planner. Washington County - Department of Land Use and Transportation: Fred Eberle, Project Manager I; Bob Haas, Senior Planner; John Rosenberger, Deputy Director. 2. AGENDA OVERVIEW: (7:34 p.m.) a. Mayor Edwards noted items would be discussed in a different order than as outlined on the agenda. He advised the City of Beaverton would consider a consent agenda business item before the discussion meeting. r 3. CITY OF BEAVERTON - RESOLUTION NO. 90-208 - INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT - WEST SLOPE WATER DISTRICT f t i a. Motion by Council President Soth, seconded by Councilor Drake, to approve City of Beaverton Resolution No. 90- 208 approving an intergovernmental agreement with the West Slope Water District. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of the City of Beaverton Council present. b. Council President Soth explained this Council action allowed Beaverton to determine which water district would serve territory within city limits. For the most part, this agreement will be utilized as areas are annexed. JOINT TIGARD BEAVERTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9, 1990 - PAGE 1 4. MURRAY BOULEVARD EXTENSION DISCUSSION a. Rick Root, Beaverton Planning Department, reviewed the history of this discussion item. Mr. Root distributed City of Beaverton's Functional Classification Plan - Street Standard Map (adopted 11/28/88). Beaverton, Tigard, and Washington County have agreed on an overall transportation plan as set forth in the Urban Planning Area Agreement (UPAA). The Murray Boulevard Extension was a component of the UPAA. The Murray Boulevard project was divided into two phases: 1) the northern section (through Beaverton to old Scholls Ferry Road) and 2) the section which would travel from 135th Street to Highway 99 (Pacific Highway). Mr. Root noted Beaverton's progress with road improvements operating under the assumption that the Murray Road extension was imminent (i.e., Davies Road and Murray Boulevard projects). He advised other road improvements which factor into the overall transportation planning include upgrade projects on Scholls Ferry Road, Highway 217, and Beef Bend Road. Timing for completion of the Murray Boulevard extension has become an issue. Mr. Root explained that residents in the Walnut neighborhood are concerned about a five- lane Murray Boulevard emptying onto a neighborhood street before other transportation improvements are completed elsewhere in the region. b. Randy Wooley, Tigard City Engineer, reviewed the 1988 UPAA agreement which shows a detailed alignment of the 'Murray extension' (from Murray - 135th - Walnut - 121st - Gaarde and intersecting at Hwy. 99). Mr. Wooley referenced studies prepared for the region's transportation needs which included the N.E. Bull Mountain and S.W. Corridor transportation studies. There is concern that the Murray Road extension through the Tigard neighborhood will develop into the 'western bypass' because of its completion before other scheduled road improvements. He advised that development was recently approved on Walnut Street which means another portion of the 'Walnut extension' will be completed with,.n the next few months. A connection between Old and f New Scholls Ferry would be all that is necessary to make s the Murray Road extension a reality. 3 s } JOINT BEAVERTON/TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9, 1990 - PAGE 2 C. Mayor Cole advised that a route from Murray Road - Old Scholls Ferry Road - Beef Bend Road - Elsner Road - Six Corners (intersecting at Pacific Highway) was identified in the studies. He suggested it might be a better alternative to postpone the Murray Road Extension until after this route is constructed. d. Lengthy discussion followed. Below are representative comments on issues: • Development activity in Sherwood may make TIF dollars available for a portion of the Murray to Six Corners Extension. Negotiations for right of way and intersection improvements at Beef Bend and Old Scholls Ferry Road would need to be completed. In addition, a portion of the route travels outside the urban growth boundary. Rules governing MSTIP expenditures need review if the cities agreed to and requested reallocation of MSTIP funds for this route. (Wash. Co. Deputy Director Rosenberger) • Fast action is needed on alternative routes; modification of the UPAA would be necessary. (Council President Soth) • Concerns were expressed for Beaverton neighborhoods, especially with Davies Road improvements. Work on transportation issues should be quickly implemented among the cities of Tigard and Beaverton as well as with Washington County and the State of Oregon. (Councilor Schick) • Walnut Street is a far different class of street than Murray Road: Walnut is a narrow, residential street, while Murray is a five-lane arterial. (Councilor Schwartz) • Three schools exist along the route on Walnut Street which is already heavily travelled when considering its design. Highway 99 is also at a point of overcapacity; what purpose would be served by depositing more traffic on this road? (Councilor Eadon) • Problems are now evident which were not identified at the time the UPAA agreement was modified in 1988. Other transportation routes should be pursued and/or reprioritized. (Mayor Edwards) x. - - JOINT BEAVERTON/TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 9, 1990 PAGE 3 f o More study is needed before committing to reprioritization of Murray Road extension. Concern was expressed that traffic increases on Davies and surrounding neighborhood would result. A composite solution for both cities is needed. (Councilor Drake) • Concerns were expressed about sequence of completion of scheduled projects. It was suggested that the Murray extension be deferred until after improvements were made consistent with the S.W. Corridor Study. (Mayor Cole) • Purpose objectives of the Murray extension may have been perceived differently by Beaverton and Tigard. Walnut Street residents have communicated that they thought they had successfully minimized the impact of the proposed extension by requesting the route be completed via a series of indirect connections. (Council President Johnson). e. After discussion, consensus of the Councils was to work together on these transportation issues to mitigate problems to residents in Tigard, Beaverton, and Washington County. There was general support for delay of the construction of the Murray extension. 5. 121ST/125TH STREET ALIGNMENT a. Mr. Rick Root described City of Beaverton's current proposal for alignment of 121st and 125th Streets. Earlier plans called for a direct route through what is Beaverton School District property. However, subsequent, revised plans by the District make this route an unlikely option. The new proposal was for a less direct route around the edge of the property. The School District has concerns about: 1) losing property to road right of way and 2) location of a busy road between two school sites. Consideration of natural resource area at this locale would be another issue to appraise. b. Mr. Randy Wooley noted the problems with S.W. 125th Avenue currently intersecting with S.W. North Dakota Street at Scholls Ferry Road. Despite numerous mitigation efforts, traffic speed and volume continues to be a problem for the Anton Park Neighborhood. Vehicles cut through North Dakota Street instead of travelling to the light at S.W. 121st Avenue. Improvements to Scholls Ferry Road and the 121st intersection should alleviate the problems somewhat. t JOINT BEAVERTON/TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9, 1990 - PAGE 4 C. After discussion, Mayor Edwards summarized that the consensus was for City of Beaverton/Tigard Staff to work together on the 125th/121st alignment. d. Mayor Edwards noted with regard to the Murray Road Extension and the 125th/121st alignment, all jurisdictions must move rapidly because of current and pending development. 6. WASHINGTON COUNTY UPDATE a. MSTIP I and II: Mr. Rosenberger reviewed the status of several MSTIP I and II projects in the area. Projects were named on the following: Scholls Ferry Road, Murray Road, Beef Bend Road, Pacif is Highway, Durham Road, Hall Boulevard, 72nd Avenue, and Bull Mountain Road. b. Traffic Impact Fee (TIF): Mr. Rosenberger updated on the wnrk of a study group (consisting of representatives from the County and cities) with regard to a County-wide TIF. The concept will be presented to the voters on the September ballot. The proposed fee would charge developers $1,250 for each new home built. Individual city systems development charges (SDCs) would be replaced by the TIF. The manner in which the TIF program is structured will assure compliance with newly legislated statutes regarding SDCs. Bob Haas and Fred Eberle presented additional information to the Councils which included: 1. Underlying philosophy. • Program should collect fees from new development based on the development's impact on the transportation system. • Proceeds should be used to fund off-site improvements which provide additional capacity to the major transportation system. • Fees should be based on a uniform rate structure assessed by all jurisdictions in an identical manner. JOINT BEAVERTON/TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9, 1990 - PAGE 5 i • Fees should be reasonable and affordable so as not to prohibit future development from occurring. • Proceeds should pay for a portion of the revenue requirements for future transportation improvements. 2. Countywide traffic impact fee major financial objectives: e To raise additional revenues from new development to support future highway and transit improvement needs. • To prioritize the arterial system versus collectors and local roads. • To raise adequate TIF revenues in order to also support a portion of future major collector improvement needs. • To spend funds on future projects within areas in which revenues are collected. 3. Countywide traffic impact fee proposed financial E program components: • Collection of a uniform TIF throughout the county by each jurisdiction. • Establishment of a system of TIF zones in which revenues are collected and funds expended without regard to ownership. • Dedication within each TIF zone of 50% of collected revenues for future arterial improvements until all arterial needs are met within the zone. • Once future arterial needs are met within a zone, all revenues within the zone may be expended on the collector system. • Continued reliance on other funding sources to help meet future funding requirements. JOINT BEAVERTON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9 1990 - PAGE 6 is Officials of Tigard and Beaverton registered concern and disagreement over figures presented by the County with regard to construction costs of the road projects they identified. While not prepared to discuss this in full detail at this meeting, this would be an issue for future study and discussion between the cities and the County. 7. HIGHWAY 217 IMPROVEMENTS: k a. Mr. Wooley advised that the Oregon Department of Transportation would be meeting next week in Burns to review the State's Six-Year Transportation Plan. Projects of interest to this region include plans to place meters on approach ramps; auxiliary lanes (preliminary work) on several corridors including TV R Highway and Pacific Highway) ; and the I-5/217 Interchange (option selection next year). 8. WATER AUTHORITY: a. There was discussion on the proposal by the Metzger and Wolf Creek Water Districts to form a water authority. ! Before the Boundary Commission will grant permission in c the next step of formation of a water authority all cities affected must not be in opposition. Affected cities include Beaverton, Tigard, Portland, and Hillsboro. b. The City of Tigard has met separately with the Metzger Water District/Wolf Creek and Tigard Water District representatives. The Tigard Council has not taken a position on the water authority proposal. C. Beaverton Mayor and Council noted their concerns on this issue as a regional topic which should, perhaps, be discussed along a broader scope. Council President Soth advised the need for a water authority was at least ten years away and would serve to create yet another bureaucracy. d. Mayor Edwards questioned whether the issue could wait for ten years noting that rapid growth and resultant problems have exceeded predictions. In addition, he projected that ever-increasing environmentally driven constraints may limit options to be considered or make certain alternatives cost prohibitive. e. Consensus of the Councils was to continue to study the issue. Mayor Cole emphasized he would like to see the two cities jointly announce their support or non-support of the water authority. is JOINT BEAVERTON/TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9, 1990 - PAGE 7 9. ADJOURNMENT: 10:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted: / Catherine Wheatley, City Record City of Tigard ATTE eral wards, Mayor City of Tigard Dat JOINT TIGARD/BEAVERTON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - JULY 9, 1990 - PAGE 8 TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal TT 7634 s P.Q. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 8840380Notice BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 t\ 1\j Legal Notice Advertising J ° City of Tigard ° ❑ Tearsheet Notice r PO Box 23397 AE~~1VED ° Ti gard , Or 97224 ° E3 Duplicate Affidavit rr { : t f JUL 191990 . t l AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION t S? 4~ Y `~Rk K 0010 STATE OF OREGON, )ss. ? ?i 666 COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, I, Judith Koehler being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising E a.R=Aty s Director, or his principal clerk, of the. Ti Bard Times i~z;o n Y E i M . r a newspaper of general circulaiiQnaasd defined in ORS 193.010~Y tia; 3~,1 § and 193.020; published at l rl in the aforesaid count and state; that the Joint City and Meeting/Tigard & Beaverton a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for One successive and ;,kO ' s•-R X= consecutive in the following issues: July 5, 1990~~ C"f a t. 5th day of dil.] V. 1 Q O Subscribed and sworn t before me this d 55> i { Notary Public for. Oregon i My Commissio Tres: 6 / 93 t t AFFIDAVIT' a ;s . is 1 e D Ln . . r..., _ _ _ _ _ _ ~!IIIItIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiI~I'.III!ILI!I!ILI!III~IIIIIlI111IIhIITrIi~LII~IIII~i.ll~l ITI ~71IIIlIII,IIII~IIIIIIIInIIIIIIIII.hIllllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII11111 ~ ~ I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 II 12' ' NDTE; IF THIS MICROFILMED - ,I _ DRAWING !S LESS CLEAR THAN i. ' THIS NOTICE; IT IS DUE~TO THE QNALITY OF Tlf ORfGINAL I _ DRAWING. _ . i OE 6Z BZ LZ 9Z SZ. bt EZ 2Z IZ OZ 6t BI LI 91 51' bl EI ZI II OI 6 B L 9 S b E Z IiYP' j • ~tllluuhmluullwluullNlluRImIIDIIIIIIlI111111wlludmllmllw~IwllliNlllllllllllllWIIIIIIlUI119I0pIIIIIIIq~I;iIIIIIIIUI IIII I~IIJIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU~IIIIIpIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IllII9llWlllnnlnnluulnnlllllllWwuuuulllllllulluiuW~IWIWllWIIIH ~ y _ A: u U RY. _ _ _ i FUNC TIONAL CLASSIFICATION PLAN~- a- pK~_ \ I I°q fit ~ u_..I-.. - P°9p °L._ ~ STREET STANDARD MAP . rya i-. - m r'- - r r ~ .1, I, O x i^ ~ I ~ ,1 t~ 1 ~nl I T - • u: . , m ~ - - ~ t': I _ I I i : ' i" b Lu, w4~pf , ~ ' '9KK'Y _ ~i. ~~~~..I 4 _ pp '7 f49 q0` _ _ _ ~ '~I_ \2 _-'I:.. f. :Ii~i~F~ ...A.l'_. E.. III. a° A'I z 9 i:'_`., _ ~I _ ItT__,..~.~; - n ~ i 1-~ ~ , ~-f _ - ti^ "Y~ III I~~' :q 4-I~ 6 x~ % r~-1 " fig 1, I-, r r` 7`~ ..4 I ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ l'.. 'rc 4 1 a _ ~ + I~ e~.~ of ~ I -i A a ..~'~1, 1 ~ sr, - t J : ~ ~ 1,. ~ I.1K ~ ~ 9 Ac.,.,~. g,~ • Pmpoaed~lJajerphangeSilb ~df~~:'' : 1 9 I..To- PP,tovl~l By. m ~ ' F i m ~ / il'-'fir Bori.. Tra`~poiptiun Com a i „ i p uy ~ x~P 1 v i 1 A~~r r- ndQA,IuI_ f - x war ~ : r'4" = ~i I i r I 1 ~ ° Iv •~0'wa g'. 1 rl a~~ r _ i., p r~ II PV M 4WP r~I~ i06T I I ) r S' .i' _ Q II ' I'. _r.v. a17^1. Aq ?'V AAI AA a+ m1~ noao ~o yob. - xwr A2 Qj n3 °ya ~ 1 AA-' ( <s :c,f~~~ygrs+~ V ~ i ~ Ci L~. .,..:A2, o u--y- Q~~a. AI _I ~ ail ~ 7 s-. ,j. - ~ 1 I ~ QI ..ul P4 . .r ;sG i AS _ I~rJ' A3 r. t r, ~ r . .I.,.. pDPO: fr,.~,~,~ 1 I '.;i ~ f _ NI' h ~r r i;n-.. IFAkING~° 1.~!•'• s1 --_I, 1 i t~,•, A ~ i s( ~ Ir U 1 C.Ll3sr: sT. t _ t ~ I r~ - r~. , Ild r-, r. U nlwsloN I' Q I N .'U r~ 7 U ~ 't f:~ Y,. } s - o- I J" J a ( 4 l uJ t2 ' 1 _,1- ~~:.1 x € 1' I _ u~. x' 7N a r A't t,f 1 {r . 1 r A6 t a r :i?" t I I I' ~a}~- - 1,2,,,'~ b...:a.v I ' 6 LEEn' J-ac o `.,A6 ~ AB y x:IL~ 'o, L ~ t. f,A ~~~r:e.p•: act6 ._~f 1 L r t. fl~ _ ,IIy a I .,A ' D1 ~ Ih ~ r A},. ~ lNl C(• 96i 7~7 1- G . _ ~ y I4y'Hhr y.~1 C12,.~j :P d 1r r9 ~4 :Lyf ° G , 1 f 3KU 1.~ U I. ~:~al T .~~I ABy ;;'~~'i, 'l-°ke■Y~~fin- ~ - r I 1 • al~+~ ~y;" ~ U I ..,41 s ~ . Y< ~ R.:,.:Kf < ~3, ~ i.q"'~. 0 ~C~'f_' ~'l l F:., C3 xanT SOeo d Ib....~i•~-r ~ ~'17 `'I:. fr h•.5d1 :1r'i.E ~ II , ` II 9:F,'~' "~-,'37 1 - S r-~8ue.r>IP^o:l; - E j ~G~C72 ~ UE ~r_N ~ ~.iIIU ~ S''4' il~~'A q~~$.U dSC 'IA~ rJ G r j'.. , ' _x._11 1~, --~~q..U . A.. ♦ -n. .J fi~V I 'v':~ f i~~ 1 a . r _ pOPO 1 ° - yy ~ ^t . L~'~ ~4 o v es { 1 0 • I A4 U ~j... 0 m~ r1~1 7 Q 1 r s ~ t f,. li ? Oxo ~ ~ rIS12 I { e~ `u rP I .Ci/?L~.~I BERG P ! 1 1i., a. 3(_4p,;: 'i_ _ `Y'~. _ r - \ - -eJ N. .,...,l,.. ~~J a 1 ~ 1 h` U , ei.,• 6't >°R4F^'MxAB:w -4;~t ! ~ •xdd '9 - ' .r: , JNOBP C7 BEP00 S i l ~ .C rte. L~ 1714 ~l~ ~~f-a,- •:,L~d f ~ c yl 'I ~ ~ y'r `~n~~~ ~ I`I''~" W ~i l I ~ ~ D7 EIB 0040 1•-n :':;1.' a :J1.~C i. Q hfiV ~ l a s.: ~ ACA Cda,o- y, i NS : ~?eT PLATE 5 N j iS -.fii", A ' - Q ~ ~ ' 1OlZ..•% AA t FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION fu TEAL e'EV~°''''~~ ' Freew I I ~ ~ ~ ay ' ~ ~li:~ Principal Arterial ' _ !;i;j ~ .__1 Majar Arterial L_ L~ 1„> ly y P°' v^J _ Minor Arterial Jrt~ r ~ for Collealor -1 ~I~ I i~r 9 I Minor folleclor N y P°`~ M- ~ ~ E ' ~ .4 ~ Study Area 0 ~ PPa e°~ ~ 0 Road Closure ~ i~`.1 _ `l~• NEw 5`" Scale I":1200' ~..•'w-~~ - ~ CITY OIL B>JAVEI~TON, OREGON ADOPTED 11/28/88 Exhibit D r ~ 1:~; W ~ - li~,..: - zu.,. - . ~..r, _ _ , .,,~W_.. . I III III III 111 I l l l l l l l l l ~ I I I I I I I ll 1Tf I I I I I II 11T'1~1111 I~ 'ICI IIII fjl III IJr it I I I I Ill 111 III lh 111 I I I I ~ I I I I I I I III t i ryl 111 W ~'~"'~4~ ~j~~'- ~'a I ~ i . ( i I I I.i 1,~1I1 ~ 1 I I_~ 1_It ~ TI . ~.7_i_~I I_f.~ ~ .-L. ~ L.~~_. I..~ 1~1 I I ~ LI 1 I I I ► _.L..I . L! I i I I I ~ ~ I 1 III ~ _ , _ , I I 2 3 4 _ 5 6 7 8 9 IIO _ I I -..__12 1 ' NDTE: IF THIS MICRDFILMED ,i DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN r : I' - IHIS NDTICE,"IT IS DU&TO , ~ WALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL I i OE fit 8Z LZ 9Z sz:' bi: Ei; ZZ-IZ OZ 61 @I U 91 SI' bl EI ZI II 01 6 B L 9 S b E Z tans. - - _ I L.. 1.. ~ y, ~ ••I 'I...I y d - '1!IIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIII.IIIIIIIII~IIIIiI111lUII~I111I11NIIIII~IIIlII111IBItIIN7IYIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~NI~IIIIIIIy..III~IIlll1.~~ IIIIIIII III OI-ID,IIIfhIIIIIIWIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUI~WIWWUI~~IIIIINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlI1llWIWIIWI111IIluBBUWIIIWIIU)11UIIIIII`{. A -a - , . r DEB A , . I I _ _ JI, L V.; 11f bore L T' J tra - t - r<t /•J fi f. ~~`j" j a ^fr-ake• Oswaq $gar oty: s` w. ..r Dutham .Fb gro.e - Tuatatrn wZ Sher ood l .fvr.cra.. [o , i .fu« t cc - r _ a moo.." Y l r ®w ® New construction Ramp metering 4 I L J✓ L - - - - - uttntnurnu Widening t \ oooo" T5M Improvements S Interchange/intetsectlon - - T _J _ z r. i improvements Urban growth boundary i METRO Southwest Corridor Study Recommended Projects (Part 2) & Figure 3-4b Adopted RTP + STREET STANDARDS "a'L 0R MAJOR A MINOR ARTERIAL ROAD SECTION INracIY A VRac. t I r... ..r Ir...• r.wr Y V • ' OESION SPEED • 46 Y.P.N. Read Rt9ht• reved Curb curb 1 Clusl- sf-Wy Yldtb [ of elkt Trntl Turd GaNr Tfsrsl) Travel I,,* hrkin9 ftutloa (/act) (Feet) Vacs Ua. Lan tud4 iura t(s Una Lau Allsued Wtlpatlon au A e 0 E f 6 F E D 111 9G 7 0 11 12112 14 12!12 14 0 Moac A-1 122 9e 7 6 12.12 12 11 it 12.12 6 Nona A-2 9o 66 S 0 la 12 14 12 11 0 Rent A-2 Artaddi 9e 74 S 6 12 12 14 12 it 6 RaN MI (velar 6 YI•er1 90 60•.. 1 6 12 12 0 12 12 6 eons A-6 f0 60'.• S 0 U l1 12 11 17 0 Ron. A-6 9o 52• t 0 la 12 -0 12 11 0 Yens A-7 Artnrtels >0 SO• 2 6 0 12 II 12 0 6 lan A-a (Ntur 0.I Y) f0 !2 ) D 0 le 11 I! 0 . 0 YON A-9 9o 12• I 0 0 la 11 14 f -1 0 0 Yene A-10 ".AL OR INr[RIY MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD SECTION URBAN Sala. ~ o. S' r.. w a - w - 1 - . is .ta..•3t Y•lf • DESIGN SPEED • 73 M.P.N. Roed Right- Paved ' C1At.1- *(Feet Width F of et►e Travel Center Travel tike Parking County fic.tlon (Feet! (Feet) Unes Lane Len Tura Uns Lu• Alla.ed otslgnation Lane A a 0 F 6 F D 66 12 I 0 14 11 11 0 Yon. C-1 42• I 0 11 31 II 0 Yon C-I Collectors (helor Only) 11 s0 1 6 12 14 12 6 Yone C-1 36'• 2 6 12 0 12 6 Nunn C-4 2e• 2 0 11• 0 II 0 Yo_ C-s AURAL ON INi[RIY MINOR COLLECTOR OR MINIMUM TRANSIT ROAD SECTION URBAN j r I` 7 [NdILe[n ~ i I . I" a- SLA I ae stn[ 715~ s"'•• DESIGN SPEED • EO At P.Ni Read Rl9ht• Beacd i Clsut- 0RU. Yldth F of tike Travel Travel Ike 111.101 flutio. (Feet) (Fact) lanas Lane Lane Lan ~ne At~OrO 0e519nltlem A e 0 F f 0 Colic-tor. 60 26'.. 2 0 ]I 11 0 Men C-10 (NlnOr Only) 60 32'.. 2 0 16 11 0 One Side C-11 t Transit 60 36 2 0 le Is 0 Beth Sins C•12 Me.d: 60 U 2 6 12 12 6 Not C•17 so.. M 2 0 14 11 ' 0 Yen C-14 ' so.. 72 : 0 11 11 O One Side C-IS • 6rard shealders 6 ditches "I"Id for these widths eOlyi rublie Y1111tY Gsetrets (M's) required eutrldt e/ Rlgbt-ef•WY (R/V) If shoulder. 6 ditches used. Stanard1Obrlm $action. 1 For the setllans. 60' of RJY for 200' from the Intersections will ell Itslor Collector or Arterials toll be 4Nlutad and a 26' section built the subject Ingrsaetlga6. 6 Parking ettoeptionl permitted Onlr when approved by the CitY of Dearerton Traffic Control Board (T.C.S.). • o ~n a . _ . ~ _ _ _ . , ~ . . II II`4 III III I I I i I I I I I I I I I I r I I I I I r r I I I III I I T~1 11 1 1 V I I I :•..!~""r ~ ~ n .I ~ I_~III~L.I~.~~.I~IIII~i.ll~l~~T ~rri~ll~!~I LJIII!,~I~ILI,:In~lllllll[~III11111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~IIIII r„ . _ .I 2 3 4 - 5 6 7 8 9 'p I I -12 ~ NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMEO~ r . . DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE,"`IT ISWE~TO P 1HE QUALITY OF TF# ORIGINAL DRAWING. ~ ~ , • OE 6Z ~ @Z 1Z 9Z SZ 4Z EZ ZZ IZ OZ 61 81 (i 91 SI' bl EI ZIP II 01 6 8 L 9 S b E Z I~~~ is ~ _ ~nl llNlun~uulNll~ludnu~uullul(IIUIIpI~tlNlnn~uuJrol~IwluN~uRIIli1~1111111O~11~1111~111)IIU~II III~iIt~~~{ II ~IIIIIAI III U ~ IfI~II I~IIII~IIU~IlU~~111~WI~lUI~UI~WIuuWIII~INIIIIII~t11111111~IIII~u11WWIUWllUll~~llvlWuU1~1111', .R, ARY _ ~~a t:U-, , r;'i _ r c, i 4 ' i \ I i ; •;'~•i~,'F td`s F,. 1.. \jt ~Y •~,K • . YI:1 !.i ~ .~ir.E •r : y~~•.K!c1 ~ x ¢ ti 1• • ~ r' ':Ja - .)S.. ~ tf~ ~ ~+'7 114'x Y y `7{'sf~i ~ vy`{b`•, '~,r . t ~ ~:~k• ~ ~ ~ is ~ V , ~~1 qf~' ~+r S ~ ` ~~py~ W O 1 Fyw+~. •,g,~` yCt~4~r=• ~"!'ts~f(~ :~y }.C ~`w r~~k+fi - a.,~.r•' s J 1•y~ ,v:~. ~ _ ~ 'r{.~ .~ai4 '~f f.• 9+ _ ~1,f~„ 'C~ ~ + ~ ~yY~.'~. 1! t+"+ ~i rr ~ - - .N I 6 k ~y ~ k~a f ~ '•Na, -~'r,' ;f; .~...r •i / _y 't1~ . iY I - + " t' k i 1. 13 J _ 1t: sr c-soh • 4 t •r. .Y'J j . 'Y ~i'Z: •i ~~M'/. `_4~~.y~i~"~f:• . '''`H•"'..1•:0 ~ r A ~j .+Y . ro _Q N 't.+.a o J.I tiry~,~a•'•,•''~' 'sl`'°:~• 'i. 1~;}, ~ •r~ ~ 5'~r.~Y • ~ • v ~ ,•:~..%jk(~ ^~••~y+'ra• ; !I - ~ • ~J.., •~iNN •Y.~` iii.>.":: v?;ti••• ~~'1(1 . : ~ ~",~f••':q + ,tr •It. 7: j _ ~ b'dr'~~; }t~x~;•, w : h~~t~',~: :;~l;~I , b,~p, 3 •~t~7°~n;«, ~ • 'ikYi, V,~ j , k _ m? p 'T'~}! mss, rL • if ,4.. 'y Y.''•4 , U. ~ ~'"r •k • ` ~ w ~t _ i • + rA• t :•i ~1 y i'' i5 h , re ~ C~.` . ~ SY~„ `r1~~1 ~~I ~ ^ ~ lO •i6,"~i+~ ~v. J muff '•N. .,~j'~jr ;~y;.r. ~ ~C5_'• r.` _ ~C';•l:w w•i~ s. F.. ~'t,..~ c~.3~.;uc'C•'. .~~a~ l 3i~'••`N'~1:~ 1- ~ G 7~~;.~" t~ i••~''+°': ~•4 :r~t¢v~~~+v~^tiy','rf;`~}°i 'kM1. ' P _ .N~1:j JuY y=F:•W. y .~J vA~ tZ•Y~ yrs. ~ - ''1.,j ~ ~ .fir I,~ ~ N r: ..i:ih rL.i~+~•i'>: # ~ K P ~Qp ~i~~ ~~71~'~:~, ~i • r, ~~4,''.'r~ r ryw . t, ~wyr~,... 5 f r r. Gt) • ~ ~ ~ \;J1;,'•:(" ~ ~ N e r, ~ r \ \ _ Via. O 1 ,~j yam{' .,4 ~L I ~7 a 7b'A+ Jl~~r•• .rte^f• 5..,{•f' 1 ~•N ~h`.e~ w~, ~"r 1 ~ ~ ~ ' '1•• ` ''rir!•~1'~'~~<~:x• r"r~~•::.. ' '`'•I' ~ _ 'kNO . K ` ' 1~ \ 1 L'j p 'Z 'cj A'{:':'.. oz . [ . S ~l t~ MNI~•i .L Z0~~0 1 1 1 1 j } 3 , ' i qiq1 i } t i i 4 t ,S i ,:f ~ COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM BEAVERTON & TIGARD CITY COUNCILS BRIEFING PACKET JULY 9, 1990 WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION GotA TA PR's - 1Y ►P~~jT RAf Vic ~ ~ T To PROGRxt` QDUGTIG~ PHI~~S~PH GTI~ES ' i1~T UN~RRLYING OSJE 1 FI~A~C1A~- FIG MAJOR RE GRD V4TH FIG ST Of FUTU ®WTN F'~REGA ULAT►~~ GR RpVVT~ HUES FIG 3 P f,~P L®YMEIOIT G NEEDS ~ REV ~ G 4 EMP RTATIQN FI E TRAASPG Ust)ARIES GUNppRIRs FUTUR I~G GITY 130 CITY 5 EXIS P pF EXISTI~t~ICa EME~T COS-Ts FIG MATURE IMPRf REVENUE S To COSTS FIB ~u oaEGTE® TIOF RE~ENUS FIG ? PR MPARIS~~ RTES DARIRS FIG $ CO TEM ~3GUS®A zp~E RGUN F ZGSE SYS QPGSEC TIF GGSTS TI MAP GF PR RQVEM00 TS UES TG COS FIG 9 FUTURE IMPTIF REVENUES FIG 1U PRGjEc,-fv) GF FIG 1i CpMPARISG FIG t2 COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM UNDERLYING PHILOSOPHY , SHOULD COLLECT. FEES FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT • PROGRAM BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACT ON THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. • PROCEEDS SHOULD BE USED TO FUND OFF-SITE , IMPROVEMENTS WHICH PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY TO THE MAJOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. • FEES SHOULD BE BASED ON A UNIFORM RATE STRUCTURE ASSESSED BY ALL JURISDICTIONS IN AN IDENTICAL MANNER. SHOULD BE REASONABLE AND AFORDABLE SO AS NOT FEES TO PROHIBIT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FROM OCCURRING. PAY FOR A PORTION OF THE REVENUE • PROCEEDS SHOULD REQUIREMENTS FOR FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS. (71FP1i1L) Figure 1 fee COkjptAG`AL 10M IREVENUES F RIGRWpY T1~Np1" FUTURE' AI D AU~1 o SUPPORT D a. DE, JfL T IMPROV TRpN~I Y~T~~ A RTERINL ADS. THE N~ Locp lL O ~R~~R1T ~T0RS A *TO . -TO IN ORp~,R VER ReVeNUes MA~pR QU ge TIF OF FUTURE Rpl~ p®E p ~pC~RTe®N ~E~~,. . To SUPPORT vF T N P,.Ls I ToR impf to ~ITt-IIN CO PR jecjs N FUTURE O~-TED. FUVADS pR~ -To A ItA HiMOHD 38nln.A Jo iSVO380J WA,%s "HINGTON COUNTY POPULATION GROWTH (BASED ON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION P LAN) 450,000 400,000 417,0 0 350,000 300,000 ..........2.9.5,.0. . 263,6 250,000 200,000 1986 to 2005 7985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Figure 3 i WASHINGTON COUNTY EMPLOYMENT GROWTH VWW (BASED ON COUNTY TRANSPORTATION PLAN) 250,000 227, 00 200.000 150,000 121,2 07,60 100,000 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Figure 4 i i 4 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS EXISTING CITY BOUNDARIES i i r i I E f i i 4 i f i n. WASHINGTON - - COUNTY --1 i 1 J i = I EXISTING CITY BOUNDARIES 1 ~ I 1--, c 1 ~ i y na w. w can.m rwr omo. wrrw.a INCORPORATED AREA I L_ d / owree[.r tcnu. row won ur.ee nua Kn• oiriir.r a i~ wi .w .i•:io+r::,wo•,cou.r. ■Onr11 I - URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY ( WASHINGTON COUNTY SAND USE :ND TRANSPORTATION DtPAR7MENT PLANNING DIVIION OCTOBER, 19P Figure 5 FUTURE IMPROVEMENT COSTS EXISTING CITE( BOUNDARIES (COUNTY & 'CITY ROADS) BEAVERTON. $42.9 CORNELIUS $6.7 { FOREST GROVE $16 HILLSBORO $58.7 ® COLLECTORS SHERWOOD $9.6 ARTERIALS TIGARD $24.4 TUALATIN $14.5 URBAN UNINCORP. $224.2 $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 MILLIONS SOURCE: TPU, 1990 (TIFFACEZ) Figure 6 • r. 1 FUTURE MOVEMENT COSTS EXISTING CITY BOUNDARIES ' (COUNTY & CITY ROADS) BANKS * - G DURHAM $0.1 GASTON i KING CITY $1.5 i GG COLLECTORS LAKE OSWE ARTERIALS NORTH PLAINS $1 PORTLAND $1.4 RIVERGROVE * - $2T.8 RURAL VVILSONVILLI: 0 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 $0 $5 $1 MILLIONS * NO IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED SOURCE: TPU. +490 (-rl2FACEZ) Figure 6 (con t) s ' i PROJECTED TIF REVENUES (1990 - 2005) EXISTING CITY BOUNDARIES (1990 ASSUMES, EXISTING TIF RATE) BEAVERTON $16.1 CORNELIUS $1,5 FOREST GROVE $4,9 HILLSBORO $26. SHERWOOD $1.8 TIGARD $10,2 TUALATIN $7 URBAN UNINCORP. $26. $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 MILLIONS SOURCE: VASH. CO. 3/90 (TIFREVEZ) Figure 7 f t PROJECTED TIF REVENUES (1990 - 2005) EXISTING CITY BOUNDARIES (1990 $p ASSUMES EXISTING TIF RATE) BANKS $ - DURHAM $0.3 GASTON * - ' KING CITY $0,08 LAKE OSWEGO * - NORTH PLAINS $0.07 PORTLAND $ - RIVERGROVE • - RURAL $4.9 WILSONVILLE • $0.08 $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 MILLIONS * NO ESTIMATE AVAILABLE 1A11SH CO. 8/80; (712REVEZ) i Figure 7 (con't) i i r~ ~ t f COMPARISON OF TIF REVENUES TO FUTURE IMPROVEMENT COSTS 1000 - 2005; ASSUM15S EXISTING 71F DATES ©,6 OF FUTURE NEEDS. MET BEAVERTON 38% CORNELIUS 23% t i i 4 FOREST GROVE 31% 45% HILLSBORO I SHERWOOD 19% 42% , TIGARD TUALATIN 48% URBAN UNINCORP.* 26% 50g6 60% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% EXISTING CITY BOUNDARIES;- UNINCORP ADJ ITIFEZAC3 Figure 8 i jetAuto woo Of ° ~O ~t~ o$-TS AOTIES G t X~ ~f IVA 2p 5; EOS j990 NE 7Q 0F F 100% i GP,ST014 KiNO * LP+KE OSWEOO 7°k ~OR~N pLpIN~ pORTLANp VE * ~ivER~~° 18~ 100 120% ~vRAL .l ~oNViLLE * - % roo% Book ~9L 20% 0°10 Fi "I t) `i p,VAtL pgl. icon t4 cl -Y 1300 ~,~CaS~ 110 logo i i I 4 i FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ~ PROPOSED TI ZONE SYSTEM UPAA BASED i i i ttt WASHINGTON COUNTY e t f Y i L v1 f ~I I t ~ de ~ 1 1 f ~1 1 _ r t. Plt®POSED f 1 ,J us _ r t. o t Hut= TIF zoNE SYSTEM j" (uPAA Based) , f r'- 1 4 I , M ~ •O^~ iiw r C I ! ✓ i TueWiR 1' fl 8 I _ 1 ♦ 1 ~i J 1 ' $h01W ~ . nrcr•~II•rcwu•* orrellcar ccuca IIU*t Mr•aa nt•N K t• I r to tit ~„r~. wr. . a .:.R>M~•.: ~`°"'r. FIGURE I wASHR'GTON =,',y INCORPORATED AREA' U PLANNVJG OIVIOf AND OE :NO AOCT BER 1984 URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY 1 f iNl• I =yam Figure 9 -try ~a~-~>+~.~... . vkj ZONE 129.5 EEA,qEll -tot Llu~' $C .7 GORt4~ $19.5 $84.3 OVIEST GROV E. O HILL-SEOR 7w $14.9 woo' SHf Ry1O0D $34.1 TIOAR~ $-,72 3.4 TIj PLpTIN go vet's $140 $180 MILLS/EEA $27 $1Q© $12Q ~POftT $8Q $80 SEWER $20 $4® $Q NIILLi®NE AREA EXPAND~~ ~pAA Exls TiNa CITY A~~A gure 10 TPU- 19 OWNEoT fACF~"~ IEg sou TY ! CITY WOW& V. N~ s - IT IF PANO~D UPO AR~~ E~ EA R MKS ~ EXiST1Nd CITY A BA Q1 GASTOtA K114G CITY LAKE OSWE H P~,A1N5 ~OR1 $1,4 $27.8 PDR~~'AND RG °VE • $35 w~AL $30 S®NV1LL~ $15 $20 VVtI. $5 $1® M'LLeON~' $a F -~S tDE~TIls D F lion 0 tMP~OVf Q~NED FACtl.1T1E i 14 COUNTY CtTY i99o $ (TtFUPA2) Isola { PROJECTED TIF REVENUES (1990 ° 2005) TIF UPAA EASED ZONE SYSTEM (EXISTING TIF RATE) BEAVERTON $2.5•0' CORNELIUS $1.5 FOREST GROVE $4.9 ffr5h HILLSBORO $27 SHERWOOD $10 TIGARD $10.9: TUALATIN $7 HILLS/BEAVER $11.6 BEAVER/PORT $3.7 $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 MILLIONS EXISTING CITY AREA ® EXPANDED UPAA AREA SOURCE: WASH. CO. 5/90 - 1990 $ (TIFREVDZ) Figure 11 t PROJECTED TIF REVENUES (1990 - 2005) TIF UPAA EASED ZONE SYSTEM (EXISTING TIF RATE) BANKS - ® EXPANDED UPAA AREA DURHAM $0.3 EXISTING CITY AREA GASTON - KING CITY $0.19 LAKE OSWEGO - NORTH PLAINS $0.07 PORTLAND - RIVERGROVE - RURAL '$4.9 WILSONVILLE - I $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $5 MILLIONS SOURCE: WASH. CO. 6/90 -1990 $ 1 1 (714REVOZ) Figure 11 (con't) { i t I i COiY1(SAM]R[ ON OF 11F REVENUES TO I A FUTURE IMPROVEMENT COSTS (ASSUMES EXISTING TIF RATES) % OF FUTURE NEEDS MET BEAVERTON 20% CORNELIUS 23% FOREST GROVE 250 HILLSBORO 32°!0 SHERWOOD 12% low\ TIGARD 32% TUALATIN 41% HILLS/BEAVER 18% BEAVER/PORT 14% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0°l0 10% EASED TIF ZONE SYSTEM (TIFFDZ) UPAA Figure 12 TIF REVENUES TO COMPARISON OF FUTURE IMPROVEMENT COSTS (ASSUMES EXISTING TIF RATES) % OF FUTURE NEEDS MET BANKS * - 10096 DURHAM GASTON - KING CITY 10% ' LAKE OSWEGO * - NORTH PLAINS 7% - PORTLAND* RIVERGROVE ° - RURAL 18% WILSONVILLE • - 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% NO ESTIMATE AVAILABLE UPAA BASED TIF ZONE Figure 12 (con't) I l • COUNTYWIDE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROPOSED FINANCIAL PROGRAM COMPONENTS ® COLLECTION OF A UNIFORM TIF THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY BY EACH JURISDICTION. • ESTABLISHMENT OF A SYSTEM OF TIF ZONES IN WHICH REVENUES ARE COLLECTED AND FUNDS EXPENDED W!THOUT REGARD TO OWNERSHIP. ® DEDICATION WITHIN EACH TIF ZONE OF 50 % OF COLLECTED REVENUES FOR FUTURE ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS UNTIL ALL ARTERIAL NEEDS ARE MET WITHIN THE ZONE. • ONCE FUTURE ARTERIAL NEEDS ARE MET WITHIN A ZONE, ALL REVENUES WITHIN THE ZONE MAY BE EXPENDED ON THE COLLECTOR SYSTEM. ® CONTINUED RELIANCE ON OTHER FUNDING SOURCES TO HELP MEET FUTURE FUNDING REQUIREMENTS. Figure 13 i t t