Loading...
City Council Packet - 08/13/1990 CITY OF TIGARD i`IQAID CtT GOUNCtL AGENDA OREGON BU61WSS;:MEETING AU01ST 13, 199(7 5;30 PM PUBLIC NOTICE: Anyone wishing to '1`1CaARC) CItiIG'CENYER speak on an agenda item should sign on the appropriate sign-up ~'3'f25 S HAL L BLVD sheet(s). If no sheet is available, ask to be recognized by the Mayor at the beginning of that agenda item. Visltor's Agenda TGARQ, (3RECaON 97223 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. • STUDY SESSION (5:30 p.m.) 1. BUSINESS MEETING (7:30 p.m.) 1.1 Call to Order - City Council & Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call z r~ 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance t 1.4 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 3. 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: 3.1 Approve City Council Minutes: July 2, and 23, 1990 3.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: Award Bids for: a. Greenburg Road Storm Drainage Improvements b. Greenburg Road and Locust Street Traffic Signal c. Lincoln Street and Locust Street Local Improvement District d. 1990 Major Maintenance Program 3.4 Call for Public Hearing - Sanitary Sewer Easement Vacation on Lot 7 of Aum Downs Subdivision - Resolution No. 90- 3.5 Approve Appointments to Various Neighborhood Planning Organizations - Resolution No. 90- 3.6 Authorize City Administrator to Sign Agreement for Government Access Production Services with Metropolitan Area Cable Communications (MACC) COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 1 C 4. PUBLIC HEARING: A HEARING TO RECEIVE PUBLIC INPUT AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY (NPO #8) The City Council will hold a public hearing to determine the course of action regarding land use within the area previously proposed as "President's Parkway Urban Renewal District." This public hearing is required by Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 11.8.5 which states, "if for any reason the President's Parkway Development Plan is not adopted or approved within 90 days of such a decision (June 11, 1990), the Tigard City Council shall hold a public hearing in order to reevaluate the policies noted above (the implementing policies) and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (which changed land use designations in the area from Residential to Commercial Professional). • Public Hearing Opened • Declarations or Challenges • Summation by Community Development Staff • Public Testimony • Recommendation by Community Development Staff r • Council Questions or Comments • Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council: Resolution No. 90-.L) i 5. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0004; ZONE CHANGE ZON 90-0002 BINGHAM/SPIEKER (NPO #5) A request for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Light Industrial to General Commercial and to change the zoning designation from I-L to C-G. LOCATION: Between SW 72nd Avenue and Interstate 5 and south to the Oregon Business Park (WCTM 2S1 13 AD, Tax Lot 1700) • Public Hearing Opened • Declarations or Challenges • Summation by Community Development Staff • Public Testimony: a. NPO/CPO b. Applicant c. Proponents d. Opponents e. Cross Examination • Recommendation by Community Development Staff • Council Questions or Comments • Public Hearing Closed • Consideration by Council: Direct Staff to Prepare Final Order 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property transactions, current and pending litigation issues. 7. ADJOURNMENT cca813 COUNCIL AGENDA - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 2 ` s COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. T I G A R D C I T Y C O U N C I L MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 o Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Jerry Edwards. 1. ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor Jerry Edwards; Councilors Carolyn Eadon and Valerie Johnson. Staff Present: Patrick Reilly, City Administrator; Chuck Corrigan, Legal Counsel; Keith Liden, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Ron Goodpaster, Police Chief; Ron Bunch, Senior Planner; and Liz Newton, Deputy City Recorder. 2. STUDY SESSION: a. Chief Goodpaster briefed the Council on the staffing requirements and cost to continue 24 records at the Police Department when the transition is made to consolidated dispatch. Consensus of Council to retain 24 hour service at the Police Department using records staff. b. City Administrator advised Council that a representative needs to be appointed to the WCCA Board. Mayor will serve as representative with the City Administrator as the alternate. C. Chief Goodpaster briefed the Council on his discussions with the Tigard School Superintendent Dr. Russ Joki on the School Resource Officer (SRO) program. Dr. Joki proposes that the school district pay 50% of the cost of each SRO Officer. Consensus of Council was to proceed with that agreement. One of the SRO's will serve the High School. The other SRO will serve in the grade schools under the D.A.R.E. (Drug Awareness Resistance Education) program. d. Councilor Johnson questioned staff about the Noise Ordinance. Senior Planner Liden responded that revisions to the ordinance are in progress. e. Councilor Johnson suggested that Dave Foglio be presented with a key to the City for his work on CRUISINI TIGARD. The Mayor concurred and suggested that all of the CRUISIN' committee volunteers receive keys. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 1 i f. Councilor Eadon informed Council that the current CLAB Cooperative Library Advisory Board member's term is up. Discussion fllowed about issues facing CLAB. Council consensus was to appoint Councior Eadon as the CLAB Reprsentative and Yvonne Burgess, current CLAB representative, as the alternate. g. Communtiy Development Director Ed Murphy explained the procedure to be followed for the Presidents Parkway public hearing. Legal Counsel will clarify and frame issue prior to public testimony. h. Senior Planner Liden reviewed the issues for consideration on the Bingham/Spieker Comprehensive Plan amendment. The three main criteria for considering a change in the plan and zone designation are: traffic `s impacts, Policy 5.1.1. of the Comprehensive Plan, and whether or not there has been a change in circumstance. Senior Planner Liden outlined the reasons for the staff recommendation of denial and commented that since ODOT had no traffic concerns, staff did not cite traffic as a reason for recommending denial of the request. I i. Bruce Warner, Washington County Director of Land Use and s Transportation made a presentation on the Traffic Impact Fee ballot request. Discussion followed on who determines what safety improvements will be mandated, and the fee and if it can vary from city to city. Bruce Warner explained that the fee would be applied countywide. The t City Administrator asked how the program would be administered. Discussion followed on program administration. Bruce Warner advised that the City of ` Tigard wil administer the program for the Tigard Planning area based on the program guidelines: That 50% of the funds collected be spent on collector street improvements until those needs are met, unless there is a agreement between affected jurisdictions that other projects take priority. Bruce Warner estimates that the program will generate $100 million in the next 15 years. o Business Meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. 3. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: a. Mayor Edwards called for a moment of silence in memory of Wilbur Bishop, former Mayor of Tigard, who passed away recently. 4. VISITOR'S AGENDA: No visitors. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 2 5. CONSENT AGENDA: 5.1 Approve City Council Minutes: July 2, and 23, 1990 5.2 Receive and File: Council Calendar 5.3 Local Contract Review Board: Award Bids for: a. Greenburg Road Storm Drainage Improvements b. Greenburg Road and Locust Street Traffic Signal C. Lincoln Street and Locust Street Local Improvement District d. 1990 Major Maintenance Program 5.4 Call for Public Hearing - Sanitary sewer Easement Vacation on Lot 7 of Aum Downs Subdivision - Resolution No. 90- 5.5 Approve Appointments to Various Neighborhood Planning Organizations - Resolution No. 90- 5.6 Authorize City Administrator to Sign Agreement for Government Access Production Services with Metropolitan Area Cable Communications (MACC) Motion by Councilor Eadon, seconded by Councilor Johnson to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of Council present. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: A HEARING TO RECEIVE PUBLIC INPUT AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PRESIDENT'S PARKWAY (NPO #8) ~ The City Council will hold a public hearing to determine the course of action regarding land use within the area previously proposed as "President's Parkway Urban Renewal District." This public hearing is required by Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 11.8.5 which states, "If for any reason the President's Parkway Development Plan is not adopted or approved within 90 days of such a decision (June 11, 1990), the Tigard City Council shall hold a public hearing in order to re-evaluate the policies noted above (the implementing policies) and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (which changed land use designations in the area from Residential to Commercial Professional). a. Public hearing was opened. b. Declarations or Challenges: Mayor Edwards stated that he does business with Trammell Crowe and he leases space in the Trammell Crowe Lincoln Five Building, which is not a part of the Urban Renewal. However, he said he would be impartial in hearing this matter. C. City Attorney Ramis advised that the issue being decided at this meeting was a narrow one. The issue was: Should the Council initiate the hearing procedure which could lead to the repeal of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning which has previously been placed on the President's Parkway property. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 3 d. Summation by Community Development Staff: Community Development Director Ed Murphy stated that the Planning commission recommended that City Council initiate the procedure to change the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Comprehensive Plan text back to what it was prior to the President's Parkway designation. He displayed a map of the area under consideration. He reported that NPO # 8 and CPO # 4 were in favor of changing the Comprehensive Plan policies and map back to the prior designation of Residential. He said the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning ordinance do not match, which creates a state of uncertainty. In addition, he said it had been recommended by the NPO, CPO and the Planning Commission to incorporate part or all of the Metzger/Progress Community Plan text. f He advised that the staff agreed with the findings of the Planning commission, and suggested scheduling the public hearing for the September City Council Meeting, which ! Planning Commission would attend. e. Public Testimony o Troy Vanderhoof, 10181 S.W. Jefferson, Tigard, read a letter he and his wife had written (see packet). He requested a change back to the original residential designation on the Comprehensive Plan and map. He advised that local banks are not willing to lend money to homeowners for remodeling because of the mis-match between the zoning and the Comprehensive Plan designation. He read a second letter from his neighbors Mike and Bev Mills who requested the change back to residential designation, citing the same reasons. o Cliff Epler, 8845 SW Spruce, Tigard, encouraged Council to move ahead on the change back to residential designation. He referred to the May 18th vote, saying that not one precinct voted in favor of the President's Parkway Development. o John Blomgren, 9460 SW Oak Street, Tigard, said there were two reasons he favored changing the designation back to residential. First, more time is needed to study the possible traffic impact of such a development; and second, current residents need more time to relocate. o Marjorie Hagland, 11075 S.W. Hall Boulevard, said she is a member of NPO #8. She reported many CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 4 P people were originally in favor of the President's Parkway development. However, as it became apparent that it would be a financial hardship on some of the residents of the area, people began to oppose the project. She also addressed the traffic impact on Hall Boulevard. She said that according to the Tigard data report, 10,000 cars per day travel along the section of Hall Boulevard where she lives. She suggested pressuring ODOT to begin solving the problem by installing a middle turn land. o Gary Ott, 9055 SW Edgewood, Tigard, spoke in support of city council initiating a comprehensive Plan map amendment to change the plan designation t of the proposed President's Parkway Development. area from Commercial-Professional back to Low- density Residential and to rescind the policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan text. He testified the change to commercial-professional zoning was arrived at without considerations of the requirements of the City code and without the consideration of the LCDC goals, especially goals directed at traffic, air, and water quality. In addition, he commented that the City did not demonstrate the need for more Commercial zoned land. He said he favored adopting the text from the Metzger/Progress Community Plan into the City's C Comprehensive Plan, and he suggested incorporating i the wetlands and open space designation on the Plan map. o Ken Beck, 8820 SW Thorn, Tigard, said he appreciated the fact that the citizens did get to attend hearings pertaining to the President's Parkway issue. He suggested that the City get more input from the area residents prior to deciding on issues in the future. He urged City Council to proceed with process to re-designate the area as Residential. o Pat Whiting, NPO #4 Chairman, urged Council to reinstate the Residential designation and to adopt the text of the Metzger-Progress Community Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan. o Terry Moore, 8440 SW Godwin Court, spoke on behalf of CPO #3 (Garden Home-Raleigh Hills Citizen Planning Organization). She reported that CPO #3 voted to return the area of the proposed President's Parkway back to Low-density Residential designation, and to adopt the text from the Metzger-Progress Community Plan into Tigard's CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 5 1j T, Comprehensive Plan. o Alice Juvey, testified she has lived 44 years in Tigard. She urged Council to change the Comprehensive Plan back to Residential designation. o Dr. Davis, 10875 SW 89th, supported changing the Comprehensive Plan back to Low-density Residential designation. f. Council Questions or Comments: o Legal Counsel Tim Ramis responded to questions pertaining to the actions covered by the resolution. He advised that the only action before council was to initiate the hearing. g. Public hearing was closed. h. Consideration by Council: Council agreed September 10 would be the date set for a joint meeting with City Council and the Planning commission. i. RESOLUTION NO. 90-51 A RESOLUTION TO INITIATE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE AREA PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED AS THE PRESIDENT,'S PARKWAY URBAN RENEWAL DISTRICT. j. Councilor Johnson moved, and Councilor Eadon seconded to adopt Resolution 90-51. k. Motion carried by a unanimous vote of Council present. 7. PUBLIC HEARING - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0004; ZONE CHANGE ZON 90-0002 BINGHAM/SPIEKER (NPO J5) A request for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Light Industrial to General Commercial and to change the zoning designation from I-L to C-G. LOCATION: Between SW 72nd Avenue and Interstate 5 and south to the Oregon Business Park (WCTX. 2S1 13 AD, Tax Lot 1700) a. Public hearing was opened. b. Declarations or Challenges: There were none. C. Summation by Community Development Staff: Senior Planner Keith Liden displayed maps showing the location of the subject property and the surrounding areas and their Comprehensive Plan designations which CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 6 - f i are zoned Light Industrial. He pointed out some nearby areas in Tualatin which are a combination of Commercial and Industrial land uses. He explained staff's conclusions, which were based on three major issues related to this proposal: (1) Traffic impact (2) Interpretation of policy 5.1.1 (3) Determination of whether a mistake or change in circumstances exists He said staff's original recommendation was partially based on probable adverse impact on traffic; but traffic studies and testimony of a representative from ODOT indicated there would not be an adverse impact if the zoning were changed to Commercial. In discussing policy 5.1.1, Senior Planner stated Tigard's inventory of industrial land is already limited and not expected to increase. Senior Planner reported there did not appear to be a mistake in 1983 when the plan was revised. He said staff did not find a change in circumstances concerning the subject area. He discussed the Planning Commission recommendation, which favors approval of the proposal. He reviewed the information in the packets and advised that staff recommended denial of the proposal. There was discussion about the adjacent property located in Tualatin. Senior Planner also elaborated on the traffic impact issue and the studies which were submitted to the Planning Commission. d. Public Testimony Proponents o Lans Stout, Planning Manager for McKenzie-Saito Asscoiates, P. O. Box 69039, Portland, introduced consultants, legal counsel, developer and the property owner of the subject property. He reviewed the presentation made to the Planning Commission at the July 10, 1990 meeting, beginning with the traffic study. He briefly described the existing traffic problems and the suggested measures to solve those problems. Mr. Stout addressed the land allocation issue. He recapped comments made by Planning Commission President Moen supporting the proposed zoning amendment based on a change in character of the CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 7 subject property. He discussed State Planning Goal 9, and he suggested there would be no net impact on employment in Tigard if the zone change occurs. In summarizing, he remarked on the property's unique characteristics and the change in character of the area surrounding the property. He encouraged the Council to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zone change. o Councilor Eadon requested clarification of the traffic issue; and Mr. Stout showed Councilors a graphic diagram of the Boones Ferry Road intersection in question and described the traffic pattern. There was discussion of the County plans to improve the intersection and extend Durham Road. } o Councilor Johnson expressed concern about the impact on the number of jobs and level of pay that r` would be available if the zoning were changed from Industrial to Commercial. Mr. Stout addressed this issue. He discussed the possibility of building a hotel on the site. He suggested policy 5.1.1 does not specify what type of jobs or salaries are to be generated. John Engle, who was involved in market research study concerning this site, advised that typically Industrial property averages one employee for every 500 square feet of space; whereas with retail property it is about one employee for every 200 to 230 square feet of space; and, consequently, there would be more jobs available if the site were zoned commercial. There was discussion about the amount of Industrial land and Commercial land currently in Tigard. Mr. Engle explained the process involved in the study and market analysis. There was discussion regarding the Comprehensive Plan, and how it addresses Commercial property in competition with Downtown Tigard. e. Recommendation by Community Development Staff: o Community Development Director reviewed the reasons staff recommended denying the applicant's request. He pointed out that although the traffic issue appeared to be no problem, this was not evidence that a zone change was in order. The Policy 5.1.1 issue can be argued either way with regards to CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 8 employment opportunities offered by Commercial land as opposed to Industrial land. He said an important issue involved the inventory of land zoned Industrial, which is in limited supply and should not be rezoned as Commercial. He addressed the question of whether there had been a change in character in the area. He discussed the adjoining property and the nearby property in Tualatin. He advised that, because there is not enough evidence in favor of change, the staff recommended leaving the Comprehensive Plan as it is. o Mayor Edwards expressed concern about the changing character in the nearby property in Tualatin and Durham. He discussed the employment possibilities for the site and the inventory of Commercial and Industrial land in Tigard. He noted there was no input from the NPO or CPO, and the recommendations from staff and the Planning Commission are not in agreement. He indicated a preference to take more time to study the issues before making a decision. f. Public hearing was closed. g. Consideration by Council: o Councilor Johnson compared employment opportunities in commercial and industrial jobs, favoring industrial as more sustainable and higher paying employment. She expressed concern about long-term planning and suggested taking into account the possibility that the economy may take a downward turn in the near future. She said she was in favor of denying the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Zone Change. o Councilor Eadon commented on the need to protect Tigard's Industrial land. She noted the unique qualities of the subject property and discussed the change in circumstances in nearby properties. She suggested an argument could be made that a change in character has occurred. She indicated concern about the quality of the input from the Planning Commission. She said she did not find ample reason to deny the zone change; and she said she would support the zone change as long as a precedent would not be set. o Mayor Edwards advised he was not prepared to vote either way without more information. There was discussion with City's Legal Counsel, Senior Planner Liden, and the applicant's legal counsel CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 9 Greg Hathaway. Mr. Hathaway had no objection to waiving the 120-day limitation, in order to look at more information. He requested copies of any new data which the Council receives. o mayor Edwards specified data with regards to percentages of land left in the City's Industrial base as compared to the percentages of land in the Commercial base; and he asked for information indicating what percentage of adjacent properties is Commercial. There was discussion concerning raw undeveloped land and developed land in these two zone designations. It was agreed that pertinent information would be provided to the Applicant for study prior to the next hearing date. The Mayor continued the hearing to the City Council Meeting of September 17, 1990. 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council went into Executive session at 9:25 p.m. Under the provisions of ORS 192.660 (1) s. (d), (e), & (h) to discuss labor relations, real property f` transactions, current and pending litigation issues. i. 9. ADJOURPHUMT: 9:45 p.m. Elizabeth A. Newton, Deputy City Recorder ATTEST: C Gerald R. rds, Mayor 119 lqo Date Transcription by Ellen Fox CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 13, 1990 - PAGE 10 ` F=. Tv y~F iF TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal TT 1658 P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Not,C@ BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 a Advertising ;1ve followutehii utifomauzon'tsyi ; gli. then itifarmauon attd,tulq agertda`s tiay ` 12 ^5~N" ' ~ Y bye • City of Tigard ❑ Tearsheet NotS d&r`A_ PO Box 23397 SEP 4 51996 .63 1 ❑ Duplicate Affic • Tigard, Or 97023 • ~L '$G~ S G x X W, f a1GGv=.i!- ' Xff a ~ •FV v4 'Y2 ~ ~ a4i~f~~. ~rra~°c~ 6 i ~ Heanpgs•Xet~ ~ PDanntr►g`onls,ecom AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ry mendahon'Regard~ng,President's Parkway anth gerd`tol.ad ¢y f7sa. e~ 2 C4m heas~ve Plan-Amendment CPAt~Q-QOQ4' Zone~~haage . STATE OF OREGON, ) i r> N Wo. 4 {IACBUOii.` COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss Rp ` 'when: ~l( 72nd i~ettt~ and T~terstatek3 and4 . W t"'MS1r1Ab.ix f100,)i Judith Koehler NV being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising • Local C©f~haGt Rete Bpgrd g Btd,ards bt>g Director, or his principal clerk of the Ti nard ~limes r . ~ ~ ~ r Y Stoim Ifni r~Gteenbargltoacl~ a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010• d 1rSt~ c IgnelME- S Ct~anl r; SE~Oe~~ ~s z pow and 193.020; published at Tigard , in the : rproveGlllsn19or aforesaid county and state; that the ;ffi~t " `trfz~` az ('i ty fniinri l MaPti nn/4~~niAugLirt 13 X 990 x • , ~ltt .$eSS10AR, T, ~ COUI d Wi~1.gQ ID00 7[CCl1~1YE ; T--- y ; thiw,l? s nns of ORS,192 b60 (i);¢~~~~~~8)r it ,N) a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the labo P' tranSBCgOns, ct t ands entire issue of said newspaper for One SUCCeSSIVe and 1s 3 E 5~ Y ar` rz cgs j = consecutive in the following issues: ` TT765zPUblishAgt>,1990 August 9 1990 Subscribed and sworn before me this 9th day of August- 1990 4~L a4~1~~Of Notary Public for Oregon My Commisslo xpires: AFFIDAVIT y s TIMES PUBLISHING COMPANY Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503) 684-0360 Notite l T7~ S~ BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal Notice Advertisinge fWlo 11111 ` v,►ill be$conscdeced b~ the fiigard City Council ;30 P M acy .Cr Ce t ; ~`ow • City of Tigard • ❑ Tearsheet N s ~ylv s3rgaid, 4 v 1 PO Box 23397 uMrypDevedogmenc:Du?ec CcRecotait t e Tigard, Or 97023 639;41?1 Youtnvetct► tosielinmt w 13 Duplicate AfT ~~A M r. • 7r~•a ryA r Pt~n►~aYanctf publteannv~tntten # txa EesGm w ip~ n, t' 7 raced b~~ the unl<il~ ° ! q i ~ :NSF •`A 1;5 ~ C~~ _ , t5' t ~ ,'zr , t d t v- w ^k'ti ~~r~ n ~ ~ . j AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION s~ c IRR ';DM STATE OF OREGON, ) "ktbe" ruse " ` ~ L ht dustnaC ::Ge z ? Q sAd Y COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, )ss eta c`ltge r y r > . s~ Judith Koehler ,1t1 72nd AtireaGe,Fnte~5aad °ftl`et .~k.,y being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Advertising ((@~4"M?S1);3l~D~ttlot170t))' a , Director, or his principal clerk, of the Tigard Times I Y.s a r, a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 a; and 193.020; published at Ti~ar in the t,t ~;~ca k~rL~tt, Pu bb d =lipid blfchr i toalA r► afQ ?Paid county ar~~~Stat~~tt MeZOA ic Hearing 90-0002 NPO #8 ~ ~ u text regardm te:wua~"apTea~preYfous a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the ~=`Q~•~'-~ b r b~+fia~Ccnpre4ensIve Plan'bl>cy I1$S pldfotrt entire issue of said newspaper for UP successive and + masonG zs PerY DeVefoprn~n" 5,. consecutive in the following issues: o -.darsCC #a,' August , 1990 l i Subscribed and savor to before m@ this2nd day of August 1990 Notary Public for Oregon 1 •X 4 X i Y h. My Commis Expire . 6/9/93 AIO r, AFFIDAVIT „y, , pe "7.~7'~~ m~efct rra!oyt ~ 1 tt cWtrtAl ~ E ! S t Pia t#' J Y ~ } Fi I: li Ir ! 11 ~1 1 ly r V KYM/ OMM4 4 t+t rtA r.. ~ .;1 mom tr ♦ ,t, ~ Sl - xp t ~ z d ~ i31 AGENDA ITEM N 2 - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE 8/13/90 (Limited to 2 minutes or less, please) Please sign on the appropriate sheet for listed agenda items. The Council i 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 , i i NAME & ADDRESS TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED PLEASE PRINT - i i i { { C DATE 8/13/90 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. AMP AGENDA ICI No. 4 - - PUBLIC HEARING A Hearing to Receive Public Input and the Planning Commission's Recommendation Rbgarding President's Parkway NPO Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation PLEASE PRINT PLEASE PRINT IolSl Sw JEFF=,z 8'g"S/S W Sir P~ 7~ uc~. O 2 9fco w.9A ~~•drn nkn~ > >PL7 pA p S ~ i SfSZO S..c.i • . ~~~i T(~v2rt1 - x/22 Sc.C! ~~/`4'lA . J / ,n C ~x DATE 8/13/90 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: AMM ITEM NO. 5 - PUBLIC HEA►'..W Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 9070004; Zone Change ZON 90-0002 - Bingham/Spieker (NPO #5) Proponent (For Issue) Opponent (Against Issue) Name, Address and Affiliation Name, Address and Affiliation PLEASE PRINT PLEASE PRINT U ~'~r?c~3 4-u. ( 55 i OYA -~-//31Cv EXHIBIT "A" BALLOT TITLE i CAPTION Referral of Countywide Tax on New Development i QUESTION Shall new development be taxed to fund transportation ! improvements designed to handle increased traffic? f PURPOSE Imposes a tax on new development. Generally, the tax amount is based on the traffic increase caused by a development. Revenue is dedicated to building road and transit improvements which increase transportation system capacity. Limited tax credits ! are allowed for certain developer costs, such as fixing traffic safety hazards. Exempts minor development such as home remodeling. Tax may increase no more than 6% per year. Applies countywide, including inside cities. Each city may choose to administer tax within its boundary. taxor/p33 SI U dd City of Tigard Dispatch/Records Oct 1, 1990 - June 30, 1992 1990/91 1991/92 Total 10/1 - 6/30 10/1/90-6/30/92 Current organization (7) Dispatchers 171,000 240,540 411,540 (2) Clerks 41,250 58,000 99,250 Total Personnel-Costs 212,250 298,540 510,790 Materials & Services. 14,250 20,000 •34,50 Total Costs 226,500 318,540 545,040 WCCA Contract ` (6) Clerks 123,750 174,000 297,750 WCCA Contract 86,000 175,000 261,000 Total Costs 209,750 349,000 558,750 Net 16,750 (30,460) (13,710) r COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM No. 3,a. ! MEWPANDUM CITY OF TIGMM, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council DATE: August 3, 1990 FROM: Patrick J. Reilly, City Administrator b SUBJECT: COUNCIL CA AHM, August - October 190 Official Council meetings are marked with an asterisk If generally OK, we can proceed and make specific adjustments in the Monthly council calendars. F August '90 *13 Mon Council Business Agenda (5:30/7:30) 15 Wed Legislative Breakfast (Eggs & Issues, Elmex's, 7:15 a.m.) *20 Mon Council Study Agenda (5:30) *27 Mon Council Business Agenda (5:30/7:30) SeQtembPx '90 3 Mon Labor Day (City Offices Closed) *10 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) *17 Mon Council Study Agenda (6:30) 19 Wed Legislative Breakfast (Eggs & Issues, Elmer's, 7:15 a.m.) *24 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) October '90 8 Mon Council Business Agenda (6:30/7:30) 15 Mon Council Study Agenda (6:30) 17 Wed Legislative Breakfast (Eggs & Issues, Elvers, 7:15 a.m.) 22 Mon Council Bossiness Agenda (6:30/7:30) cw/coral Council Calendar - Page 1 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.~J CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ✓ COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA OF: August 13,1990 DATE SUBMITTED: 8/02/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Bid Award for PREVIOUS ACTION: Greenbura Road Storm Drainage Im rovments PREPARED BY: Gar Alf son DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OR REQUESTED BY: =ao=asaaa=c --=a=xaaxc=aaxxaaaaaxax=aaaax=acaa=x=x=a=xcaaxx=xx====xa=a=caax=ax= POLICY ISSUE Award of construction contract for the Greenburg Road Storm Drainage Improvements. ==a===gag===e==xxaaa=aaaaa=xa==aaxxa=aa=x==c=axx====xx===xx=====xxc=x=a====a=== INFORMATION SUMMARY This project provides for the installation of storm drainage facilities from Greenburg Road to Fanno Creek.This project is the first of three phases for the Greenburg Road Major Street Bond project. Eleven bids were received as follows: Clearwater Construction, Portland $ 332,690.00 NW Earthmovers, Tualatin $ 354,511.95 System Construction Co., Portland $ 370,867.00 Emery & Sons Construction, Stayton $ 427,886.60 Benge Construction, Lake Oswego $ 447,384.00 C C & M Construction, Sherwood $ 460,065.50 Bonstan Construction, Clackamas $ 473,375.00 Coffman Excavating, Oregon City $ 512,303.63 Alliance Corp., Canby $ 564,691.00 Clifford Fullman, Portland $ 577,452.00 Lee Brown, Gresham $ 590,463.00 'The Consultant Engineer (Wilsey & Ham) estimate was $ 364,350.00 =av===aaaaaaa=gageax=ac==avxc=gage===gage=a==a=====a=v==axca=xa=cc===v=o=ac=axa ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. 2. Reject all bids. FISCAL IMPACT This project is funded through the Major Streets Bond approved in November 1988. SUGGESTED ACTION That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, authorize the City Administrator to sign a contract with Clearwater Construction. ga/GA:lcrbgrsd.GA COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 3„jam CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA OF: Aucaust 13, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: 8/02/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLES Bid Award for PREVIOUS ACTION: Greenburg Road and Locust Street Traffic Si na PREPARED BY: Gary Alfson DEPT HEAD O ITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Award of construction contract for the Greenburg Road and Locust Street Traffic Signal. INFORMATION SUMMARY i This project provides for the construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of Greenburg Road and Locust Street as required by the Lincoln Street and Locust Street LID. Four bids were received as follows: Grasle Electric, Portland $ 108,080.00 Frahler Electric, Tigard $ 120,100.00 M & J Electric, Portland $ 128,616.00 Linnco Electric, Albany $ 132,103.00 t The Consultant Engineer (Mackenzie Engineering, Inc.) estimate was $ 136,338.00 maaaaaaaaassaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa=aaaa=aaaaaaoaaaacaa=aaaaacaaaa=aaaaaa=aaaaaaa=aaa ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. 2. Reject all bids. -----aaa=------aaaa_ -----aa---aaaaasaaa==aa------.a=aacca=.a-----=a- FISCAL IMPACT This project is funded by the LID. SUGGESTED ACTION That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, authorize the City Administrator to sign a contract with Grasle Electric. ga/GA:1crbLLTS.GA t: COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. _3-3L CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA OF: August 13. 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: 8/02/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Bid Award for PREVIOUS ACTION: Lincoln Street and Locust Street 7 N-7 LID PREPARED BY: Gary Alfson DEPT HEAD O ITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: ===va=nano=-a=a=a=ca=a==caa=c===cc=ac======a=ca=====v=======cn=ac==c===a===a==- POLICY ISSUE Award of construction contract for the Lincoln Street and Locust Street LID INFORMATION SUMMARY This project provides for the construction of Lincoln Street south of Locust Street and the widening of Locust Street including pavement, curb, sidewalk, storm drainage and underground utilities as required by the LID. Four bids were received as followss Construction Excavating, Inc., Gresham $ 156,331.75 Copenhagen Utilities, Clackamas $ 178,339.00 Eagle-Elsner, Tigard $ 198,090.00 Gelco Construction Co., Salem $ 241,892.00 The Consultant Engineer(RPFF) estimate was $ 217,000.00 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. 2. Reject all bids. FISCAL IMPACT This project is funded by the LID. Based on the bids for street and signal work and existing engineering contracts, the total estimated cost of construction and engineering is now $298,812. The estimate in the preliminary engineer's report was $298,700. SUGGESTED ACTION That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, authorize the City Administrator to sign a contract with Construction Excavating, Inc.. ( ga/GA:lcrbL-LID.GA COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. SCI CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD AGENDA OF: August 13, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: 8/02/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Bid Award for PREVIOUS ACTION: 1990 Pavement Major Maintenance Program PREPARED BY: Gary Alfson TY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: DEPT HEAD Or4ff POLICY ISSUE Award of construction contract for the 1990 Pavement Major Maintenance Program. INFORMATION SUMMARY This project provides for the repair of several streets including pavement overlays and structural patching. Five bids were received as follows: Eagle Elsner, Inc., Tigard $ 301,285.00 K.F. Jacobson, Portland $ 324,270.00 Baker Rock, Beaverton $ 414,201.50 Lakeside, Portland $ 469,275.00 Morse Brothers, Beaverton $ 527,505.00 The engineer's estimate was $ 265,000.00 The work under this contract includes all of the pavement major maintenance work previously approved by the Transportation Advisory Committee and the Council for the 1990-91 CIP budget, except for the reconstruction of a portion of Sattler Street. The Sattler work will be bid as a separate contract. In addition, this contract includes completion of paving work in a subdivision on Garden Park Place, using funds collected under the subdivision's improvement bond. Bid prices for pavement work are higher now than when the budget estimate was prepared in the spring. The higher prices are the result of the large number of projects out to bid this year. Staff recommends that the contract be awarded, even at the higher bid prices, for two reasons. First, it is important to complete the maintenance work before the pavements deteriorate further. If the work is delayed, any cost savings from lower unit prices are likely to be offset by an increase in the amount of pavement work needed. Second, it appears that the volume of work being bid will remain high for the next year or more. There is no assurance that re-bidding would result in lower bid prices. In order to stay within budget, a portion of the intended work will be deleted from the contract. As we mark the precise pavement areas to be overlayed or reconstructed, we will delete those where postponement of the work will result in the least potential problems. The contractor is aware that some work will be deleted. Because payment under the contract is based on unit prices rather t than the total bid, we can manage the work to remain within the CIP budget. ac=acacc===acaaaaaaaaa=acaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaasaaaaaacaaa=a=coo=a==ac=asac=a==acaa ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. 2. Reject all bids. FISCAL IMPACT This project is funded through the 1990-1991 CIP Budget. SUGGESTED ACTION 'r That the Local Contract Review Board, by motion, authorize the City Administrator to sign a contract with Eagle-Elsner,Inc. ga/GA:lcrbPMMP.GA i i COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 3. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: 08/13/90 DATE SUBMITTED: 06/29/90 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Sanitary sewer PREVIOUS ACTION: Minor Land Partition easement vacation on Lot 7 of Aum MLP 90-0002/VAR 90-0006 was approved Downs subdivision and became final 04/24/90 PREPARED BY: Vi Goodwin DEPT HEAD O ITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: M. Bosnar/Carl Jensen POLICY ISSUE Should the city vacate a portion of a sanitary sewer easement to eliminate the incongruence between the actual location of the sanitary sewer and the location of said easement? INFORMATION SUMMARY c Carl Jensen, P.E., acting as agent for Marijan Bosnar, is requesting the i vacation of a portion of the sanitary sewer easement located on Lot 7 of the ffAum Downs subdivision. The purpose of this vacation is to eliminate a portion z'. of the existing easement that does not coincide with the actual location of the sanitary sewer. Another easement which does coincide with the location of the i will be recorded. To make certain this happens, approval should be conditioned r: upon the provision of a sanitary sewer easement consistent with the actual location of the sanitary sewer. s E~ The property owner wishes to place a dwelling within a portion of the area to be vacated. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the attached resolution calling for a public hearing on September 24, 1990. 2. Take no action at this time. FISCAL IMPACT All fees and staff costs will be paid by Mr. Bosnar. SUGGESTED ACTION Approve the attached resolution. i t t W s MINES v nd ut S% D ~g MS M , ~~d utvg M 5 and N and %99 TO PAW g r S W 6gtn e 'c d ~ ~ a u~ Lg a ~ o w ~r+ 3P'4 w s r; y~ 7 Nag r .spy aS g W a v r N .w a~~ a, ,gn y~01 M 1 ~ !1 g ( ,d Z is M w s • W a ~ a W N vs Ms u _ CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES Center Plaza West • Suite 360.12655 S. W. Center St. • baaverton, Oregon 97005-1601 • (503) 646-4509 • FAX (503) 526.8966 VIEMYID Pik June 22, 1990 JUN 25 1990 City of Tigard Community Development Department 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. P.O. Box 23307 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Attention: Viola R. Goodwin Gentlepersons: We hereby request to vacate a portion of a storm sewer easement located on lot 7, Aum Downs. The easement was conveyed to the City by plat in 1989. The portion to be vacated is shown on the enclosed sketch and described by the enclosed legal description. Also enclosed is the $300 fee. The owner of lot 7, Aum Downs, has received City permission to partition lot 7 into two lots. In an effort to save the large trees on the north portion of lot 7, the owner has tried to locate his home on parcel 2 as far south on the lot as possible. That location conflicts with the existing easement. As a condition of partition approval, staff has requested the owner to vacate the conflicting portion of the easement. Please let us know of your approval as soon as possible. Sincerely, CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES Carl B. Je en, P.E. cc: Mar'jan Bosnar bosvac.req w---__-------- x: t t COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. 3,5 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 13, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: August 2_1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Appointments to PREVIOUS ACTION:none various Neighborhood Planning Organizations NPO PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Ann Newton DEPT HEAD OR CITY ADMIN OR REQUESTED BY: Planning Commission =aaxxxxxaxx=xasxm=xxxxxxaaxxxax=xxzxxxxx=xxxxxxxxxxxxxxaxxxxxxxxaxxaxaxxxaxaaax POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION SUMMARY The attached resolution forwards the recommendations of the Mayor's i" Appointments Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission to make appointments to NPO #3, NPO #7 and NPO #8. aaxaxxxxxa=a=aoxoaaxxxaxxxaxxxxxxx=xcvx.cxxx=xvxxxcxxxxx==xx=oaxxxxxxxxxxoccxxx C1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Adopt the proposed resolution. 2. Decline action at this time. t =x=aaxxxax=a~ac=sxaaxxxavxxxaxxxxxxxx==axaxxxxxxxxxxaaxxxxxxxxx-=xx==axaaxxxxxx F FISCAL IMPACT None. E SUGGESTED ACTION Adopt the proposed resolution. Y ~f f ~i Y~ S TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING -.JULY 10, 1990 1. President Donald Moen called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. The meeting was held at the Tigard Civic Center - TOWN HALL - 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. 2. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Barber, Boone, Castile, Fessler, Fyre, Leverett, Moen, Peterson, and Saporta. Staff: Keith Liden, Senior Planner; Ron Bunch, Senior Planner; Ed Murphy, Community Development Director; Ellen Fox, Secretary. 3. WORKSHOP: DISCUSSION OF PRESIDENTS PARKWAY Community Development Director reviewed the history of Presidents Parkway and the change of designation from residential to commercial-professional. There was discussion about why the voters were against this development. Senior Planner Bunch advised that a review of Presidents Parkway had been conducted by Neighborhood Planning ;Organizations (NPOs #1, #2, #4, #5 and #8). The consensus of these ".groups was to recommend to the City Council that the subject property be `redesignated as Low Density Residential and the Comprehensive Plan text amendments associated with this proposal be repealed. t Commissioners discussed the various options available and the information received from the community. A majority of Commissioners favored reverting back to residential designation. (Public Hearing was called to order at 7:40 p.m.) 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Fyre moved and Commissioner Castile seconded to approve the minutes as corrected. Commissioner Barber noted that the minutes indicated President Moen as signer, but Vice President Fyre presided over the meeting of June 19, and should sign off on the minutes. Motion carried by majority of Commissioners present. Commissioner Moen abstained. 5. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNICATION o Senior Planner Liden reviewed a letter received from Lenore A. Schuster addressed to the Planning Department and Tigard City Council relating her concerns about the Triad Development. He also reviewed a memo from Liz Newton, Community Relations Coordinator, concerning recommendations by the Mayor's Appointments Advisory Committee for individuals interested in being appointed to NPOs. The letter and memo are included in the meeting packet. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 1 Commissioner Fessler commented that the memo should show NPO #3 instead of NPO #8 for Robert Root. Senior Planner Liden clarified for Commissioners the requirements for appointment to an NPO, which include being a property owner or business owner, as well as being a resident. Commissioner Fyre moved and Commissioner Fessler seconded to approve the recommendations. Motion carried by unanimous vote of Commissioners present. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0004 ZONE CHANGE ZON 90-002 BINGHAM/SPIEKER (NPO #5) A request for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Light Industrial to General Commercial and to change the zoning designation from I-L to C-G. LOCATION: 6.6 acres located between SW 72nd Avenue and interstate 5 and south of the Oregon Business Park (WCTM 2sl 13AD, tax lot 1700) Senior Planner Liden described the subject property and presented a map showing the location and zoning designations of surrounding areas. He reviewed the history of the request, stating that applicants postponed the original hearing scheduled for April 3, 1990, to allow more time to study traffic issues pertaining to the proposed development. He advised that staff found the proposal is consistent with a majority of the Comprehensive Plan policies and relevant State goals; however, there are concerns about policies relating to traffic and transportation. He also said Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.1.1, relating to economic diversity, is not satisfied because the area is primarily Industrial. He reviewed the items in the packet, which were: - Memo from Jerry Offer summarizing staff's recommendation for denial - Memo from City Engineer - Letters from City of Tualatin, Washington County, Tri-Met, and Oregon State Highway Division - Planning Department Staff Report - Applicant's narrative - March 1990 Traffic Analysis and Market Study - June 1990 Supplemental Traffic Analysis Commissioner Boone advised that he has had business dealings with Bingham in the past, but he said he would be impartial in making a decision. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Lans Stout, Planning Manager for Mackenzie Saito Associates, P.O. Box 69039, Portland, outlined the format of their presentation and introduced the individuals who would be speaking. He distributed copies of an aerial photograph of the subject area. He stated their proposal is to change the Comprehensive Plan and zoning from Light Industrial (I-L) to General-Commercial (C-G). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 2 CITY ®F T1G4 M CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON! NAME: ; Lol7pJ-~ „ [ O~ DATE: ADDRESS (RES. ) : ,/gyp ' J`~~~ l/.E4 f c cC 97 zz,*Es . PHONE : 63 9 -F ~3 ADDRESS (BUS.): l U Z30 3.21,•-t~G BUS. PHONE: ~1~'`/-t9~yoZlo 7jt~ a/, ~c,rTt r LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD : J~l~ 4/~rr. Z°t4 SUGGESTED BY: Aw '7" WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? `7~~cl yc lch. .r ~ c . Wavle,-y EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND : ee9 •eS, l4 7 S~ j L~- t'vG~A GczQ ,57 S ~"ic S/ LV o-Y-K- N r- e:5- +4-r-c A, t SaC~TQ r c LY5 o -E' ! tJ A.{ f~ c t c: pdp ✓/.4 a' A S . OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND : / 9 7;2- 975 /~Qa.Cec/st~ + -rte jq 14 c-16 Zip- / 4T d! / e B Z - C '0-~ era_~ e"'z;r cc ns~l~ fiye7ica~'9ta~ ~n d2 - xL-e.4~ u. /tea e; w~t 1 ` N-74-- Zw G q~ (YK "^W LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? ~Q„~ ou.r~eQ &7:1 gwae 2 A- pau ~.e C~..rrt 21 Ao o THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? inig.1iaa d'"I 'ss PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: _wmtze- GA {'0.N Zvi'' }LI Af ~ 690ko-A-0-~A921%f'I-1 >5 `s N litfa5sitixr arTe •e fc~ -.zap ek~~c~rehl Sfei0.Tr~~ J ;YJ4ar~ ieQeOC Srcz t (La t wor K -~'o r- (1'I P s I~2 searct.._ aN drug add ~c~~d►~ ~Segffl S ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES : Crq,.5 . 0, 4, r►r ! /mod c~ c v 5~r l>~ ~e s 5~4t f l ,mil ~t 4r r. ~ v a n c_. J!. W r 1T e e- e a" 5 L, if -~a tv re- s ~c sync k 4e IVJOA OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS) : T.,~e qQ 41~e~ 5 ~u~ g 4-~c S jVg~.-~~e cC ~1 n n ` /1 J -Yi,~rt r wa, - A4w,1u ra~•,~"5 l )o "!a rar9 S • to-7- 1G n%T SP.,k~ C~• r e s 11 av~ G<< S o es,,,~deu c)`~.~t r~ s~ 4 W L~ c (ti S o J ecl 4--k e se- Qa1',-we-► e S Q_eo~- lie qx Gtr/(aY" e2C~J~hrd1.<7-~,crP S ly-e. b-c,j c►uic-f,! Jc vc'x 1140--'j e~ BOARDS, `/M1WITTEES OR NPO INT TEO IN: P GPO Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City sb/4772A/0002A 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 (CIWOFTIVA CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME: 100"o /en-z DATE: /.2 ~f-.S °1 ADDRESS (RES.): RES. PHONE: 634-q7-9 7 ADDRESS (BUS.): BUS. PHONE: LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: It , SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? .00-'r ffInGC Bfte y EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: 47 OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: ag /V--1' /3 n1-SA f s .!-InW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? ~K~~ _ THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY : C ~O C d'~ A . ,2 - ),?,f ane -o - ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES : / ltJ wyyo. ~.~2c', drn✓I' /-0 OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: N /p D fz Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City sb/4772A/0002A 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 aW 11FAR® CITIZEN -COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME: DATE:/Lb f4 ADDRESS (RES.): S aW► Ifej all ,M Teol RES. PHONE: 228 RE9 ADDRESS (BUS.): 9dyw_ BUS. PHONE: Sarre LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: B I 1 a W1 co- 080890 1 nbill 4 t6tes ar~{{ a INHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? liA _ a 1103 5 SGJ 13 5 M & b9 EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: B~IC C~ (fit' SC'IQIIC2~lY) IM t' C15P ~ lclatnr~ CC I~ • OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKG ND. ~P --~1~ GA 8 ! l~Kl C~ 1M dba ORPA Phsf CPA c,.)1 AX Ul 2a A , P_ P65:9A fli A, I 1on I CPA Pkw►S, } HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? S Q ICANTS ONLY) IS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO 11 Q'h PREVIOUS C4M U ITY ACTIVITY- Fka ld at 6_ .E Ju1~ 1S C' Q A h 7hnU LiQV1~ econ8v ~A mev~ ~ --T-t ORGANIZATIONS AND OF IC e. In J Am avallablLf wm1my Q n 8 l 2i(t '1S~ a 2U 2. h M_ ITdff 8 n8 SIT. OTHER INFORMATIO .(GENERAL REMARKS): tank ,oy, 8 Sv wl lah mere . ~~Sfol iS l~ ,a h o~ a~ 112 dmAJopm-evitt ~ lUa I % V ! EES O~j NPO I©1~1 E Vl ED IN! U 7- 3 Pd, L y' Date received at i y a 1 a&LWe- 'd J?4a9e'qServl4FegL) Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City sb/4772A ~002A 131.25 =11 Blvd P.Q. K2339 ,Tigard, eg n 97223 ) 63?-4171 9- fS 4~~ t1TKOT t T je ~ Ue- h 1151 S~ ~Se an . CPA/fll CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME: ► ~1' fl/ ~ ~ ~ DATE: oZ - Iy- 9 O ADDRESS (RES.): $SyS S. W, S;PezeCG S~ RES. PHONE: c?lV6o-S4/o?3 ADDRESS (BUS.) : M7 00 S'W "mil ~ 1 ✓al_ BUS. PHONE: g`~' 8 SS8 LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: .7 3e rr SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? :2eoIc 4e. EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND : 7I%y<c 6/-md't I,2 tjoa~~.,c b+osw. n.~+t L°~n Il~at dr~e.. i.; Cow v sc s _ OCC~CUPATIO/NA/L~ STATUS AND BACKGROUND/: ~/S_Elot -b US. ;414'-C M 4itCtpiemaae-j ig"Xa a&6rr Q60,8 6C L ~Jda i~i~,/ ~►s6~dG/ f~✓+ B.✓~.I •^d~b O~tbw~ ~1"ar use fa~~d.Tii.~~ ~T!! d~ / f E W LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? oZ ytevs `iS THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES`: (S#VL~J l3ol.d X-ho ea-TV. c t /E/e~( r~ ea ~A4~ 4 sac . i.. wood (~Jlu .t... T/,~. 16.5•SeG.,IT/IDw_ !"/YS•Q~w,-/ [,r tl~~lf~jo.` C -a,,,. l4ed.f' lftSciGit~ 466./ OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): ~Q~~1 is greo~ p~e2 /.ye; 601-rf.;. a SST ~ a.~cc . gel d...f,T// Scy, a TRP h~&Cra5 /t BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTEREST/ED IN: ~rta tr vQ,'fia.. ®'f ~s~ C✓eaK ~n._ a, /yee~u..- G`.►. ale.~.~ ~Y•tu . Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City sb/4772A/0002A 13125 SW Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 CI?YOF TIe4R® CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME: r1 1 • f- TPor f DATE: ADDRESS (RES.) : )v 6rce RES. PHONE: 6 31p7 75j9 ADDRESS (BUS.): BUS. PHONE: f LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD : SUGGESTED BY : (70,th 1! WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? D'I U 7~e n . O EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND : OCCUPATIONAL STATUS /AND BACKGROUND: Mel I Y ~ , ( i ✓ J ~ i° r 1//(,Q 7~G~PS . MU ah-f ScAna) .2yrc L Lye- j 47 5eyL-r g ( .f I l:12,~rKed- ,'n v s nfhe-- fin ri✓l 5ery/re aarr/e yd C'~Zr~~~' Irma/1. - I5 THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY : &tlene C'' E 6 ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES: Q/Dl1 P_ OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: PD Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed Board, Committee, or NPO Inside City Outside City sb/4772A/0002A 13125 W Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 hS.A~ ~ i99Q ZC5IVED 2 COfAJUNiTY DEVELOPMENT .~a1990 C;t;~MUNiTY QEVEI.ONMENI CIT1(~F TI~~IR® CITIZEN COMMITTEE INTEREST APPLICATION OREGON NAME : ) / c .S: \-6l e- DATE : RES. PHONE : - y7 2 ADDRESS (RES.): ADDRESS (BUS.): BUS. PHONE: _ LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN TIGARD: SUGGESTED BY: WHERE DID YOU LIVE PREVIOUSLY? EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: OCCUPATIONAL STATUS AND BACKGROUND: fL'-I ''^W LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED WITH THIS FIRM? Ca:aa THIS COMPANY LOCATED WITHIN YOUR NPO AREA (NPO APPLICANTS ONLY)? PREVIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITY: ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICES : OTHER INFORMATION (GENERAL REMARKS): BOARDS, COMMITTEES OR NPO INTERESTED IN: Date received at City Hall Date Interviewed Date Appointed or NPO Inside City Outside City sb/4772A/0002A 13125 SVV Hall Blvd., P.O. Box 23397, Tigard, Oregon 97223 (503) 639-4171 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. ,3, (0 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 13, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: August 2, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Contract with PREVIOUS ACTION:None TVCA regarding television production services. PREPARED BY: Elizabeth Ann Newton .11 TAXI k DEPT HEAD OR CITY ADMIN OR REQUESTED BY: TCVA POLICY ISSUE Should the City continue to contract with Tualatin Valley Community Access (TVCA) to provide cable television production services of regular Council meetings? INFORMATION SUMMARY Attached is an agreement for fiscal year 1990-91 which formalizes TVCA's relationship with the City of Tigard regarding television production services. The agreement details the present arrangements and costs for coverage of city council meetings. There is no increase in cost for this fiscal year. The agreement establishes a thirty-day advance notice for discontinuation of service. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FISCAL IMPACT The estimated $6,000 cost for the year is included in General Government Services in the adopted 1990-91 budget. SUGGESTED ACTION Authorize the City Administrator to sign the Agreement for Government Access Production services with MACC. AGREEMENT FOR GOVERNMENT ACCESS PRODUCTION SERVICES METROPOLITAN AREA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION TUALATIN VALLEY COMMUNITY ACCESS 1815 N.W. 169th Place, Suite 6020 Beaverton, Oregon 97006 AGREEMENT between the Metropolitan Area Communications Commission (hereinafter "MACC"), located in Beaverton, Oregon, and the City of Tigard (hereinafter "City"), a municipal government located in Washington County, in the State of Oregon. 1. Provision of Services MACC shall provide the following services: a. MACC shall videotape regular sessions of the Tigard City Council (hereinafter "Council Meetings") "gavel- to-gavel", twice each month, generally on the second (2nd) and fourth (4th) Mondays of each month. b. The videotaped coverage of the Council Meetings shall be "gavel-to-gavel", except during executive sessions, and shall employ industrial grade, three-camera color C video equipment, adequate audio pickups, character generation, and VHS format recording decks and tapes. C. MACC shall arrange to have the recordings of the Council Meetings played back (cablecast) on Government Access Channel 21 on the Columbia Cable of Oregon Cable Television System in Washington County (hereinafter "the System"). The recording of each Council meeting shall be cablecast, in full, on the System at least twice in the interval before the next regular session. 2. The City's Responsibilities The City shall: a. Provide the TVCA Government/Education Programming Coordinator with a copy of the agenda for each Council Meeting as far in advance of the meetings as is practicable. b. Provide one individual to act as a liaison in matters of confirmation of Council Meeting dates and communication of any other information or concerns relating to video coverage or System cablecasts. Page 2 Agreement Con't. c. Provide MACC and its representatives with adequate access to the rooms and buildings where the Council Meetings will take place, and access to AC power for lights and other equipment. i 3. Warranty i MACC warrants its video productions to be of reasonable quality, taking into consideration the nature of the Council Meeting, the space in which it is conducted, and other 1 recording situations beyond the control of MACC. MACC further warrants that its coverage of Council Meetings shall 4 be as objective as is possible. Recordings of the Council Meetings shall not be edited except for: 1) alphanumeric (text) information inserted into the video picture to provide the viewer with meeting dates and speaker identification, and 2) brief suspensions (approximately 30 seconds each) in coverage as necessary to allow for hourly videotape changes. f d 4. Retention of Recordings : MACC shall retain the videotaped recordings of each Council Meeting, for a period of fourteen (14) days following production, after which time the videotapes will be erased and recycled. During those fourteen days, the City may g purchase a copy or copies of the recording, or purchase the E original recording, in accordance with the prices listed in Section #6. 5. Cost In consideration for the services described above, the City shall pay, or cause to be paid, to MACC financial compensation in the following amounts according to TVCA's established rate sheet: i $200.00 for each Meeting covered up to 1-1/2 hours in duration: $ 64.00 for each additional hour, billed in quarter-hour increments. There will be no additional charges for playbacks (cablecasts) of the recordings of the Council Meetings. 1 R Page 3 Agreement Con't. Each month MACC will calculate the amount due for services provided to the City, according to the above formula, and shall invoice the City for that amount. 6. COpies If the City desires a copy or copies of an individual Council Meeting, the City shall pay, or cause to be paid, to MACC financial compensation in the following amounts according to TVCA's established rate sheet: $ 6.00 for each 120-minute, 1/2" VHS tape used $10.00 duplication fee for each copy up to 30-minutes in duration. $ 7.00 duplication fee for each additional 30-minutes The City may purchase the original VHS recording tapes at $6.00 for each tape without additional duplication fees. The parties (MACC and the City) acknowledge that they have read E.. this Agreement, understand it, and agree to be bound by its terms. They further agree that this Agreement shall terminate on June 30, 1991, at which time a new agreement would be necessary to continue the services detailed herein. The parties agree that any decision by either party to terminate this Agreement before June 30, 1991, shall be accompanied by 30 days written notice to the other party prior to the date termination would take effect. The parties further agree that this Agreement is the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between the parties, which supercedes all proposals, oral and written, and all other communications between the parties relating to ith subject matter of the Agreement. DATE : 19L70 SIGNED r e Cre 'MlkCC dministrator DATE : 19 d S I G D l CI OF ARD AU HORI// RE RJE T/ATIV/E ~tc(/tL~C J (PRINT NAME AND ITLE) C~. r COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO. ~I CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON { COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: August 13, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: August 3, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Initiation of PREVIOUS ACTION: Council Repealed Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan President's Parkway Urban Renewal Map and Text Related to "President's Plan on June 11, 1990 PREPARED BY: Ron Bunch, Sr. Planner DEPT HEAD O CITY ADMIN OR REQUESTED BY: Ed Murphy, CD Director POLICY ISSUE Should the City Council initiate a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to change the plan designations of that a portion of the failed President's Parkway Development Plan area from commercial professional back to low density residential, and to rescind the policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan Text. INFORMATION SUMMARY Several public meetings were held with area NPO's and GPO's. The general consensus of these groups was to change the Plan for the area back to what it was previous to the President's Parkway proposal. In addition, the Planning Commission was unanimous is a motion "To recommend to the City Council to: (1) reverse the decision that amended the Comprehensive Plan Map and text which initiated the President's Parkway proposal, and (2) initiate a planning effort to develop an area plan using the Metzger-Progress Plan as the basis to evaluate future land use and development opportunities in the area." ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The Neighborhood Planning and Citizen Participation Organizations, and the Planning commission in both a work session and public hearing evaluated the effects of not amending the plan as described above. This was determined undesirable because: 1) The Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations in the area currently do not match and property owners are subject to uncertainty as long as the they do not coincide. Furthermore, the current Plan text which applies to the area requires that development occur in accordance to a "master plan." The master plan does not exist, and cannot be prepared without substantial expenditure. As a consequence, the area is under a de-facto development moratorium. 2) There is inadequate time to evaluate a range of land use options and meet the 90 day timeline established by the Comprehensive Plan Policy 11.8.5 to "re-evaluate the policies.... and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment." 3) Tigard's voters said a definite no to the tax increment ballot measure. This may mean that the voters think that the City should redesignate the area as it was and concentrate its resources on other areas more suitable and available for commercial/professional development. 4) Without tax increment financing or a developer willing to invest in the area, there is no means to fund the necessary planning studies or infrastructure improvements to make the area available for more intense development. FISCAL IMPACT There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this action. However, there may be long term impacts on the overall assess value of the City. SUGGESTED ACTION To initiate a comprehensive plan change and text amendments as described in the attached draft resolution. rb/ccsumpre/prk a 3 , t , MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Edwards and Members of the City Council FROM: Ed Murphy, Community Development Director DATE: August 1, 1990 kl~f RE: Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Change Related to the Proposed "President's Parkway" Development Area PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission in a public hearing at their July 24, 1990 were unanimous in a motion, "To recommend to the City Council to: (1) reverse the decision that amended the Comprehensive Plan and text which initiated the q President's Parkway proposal, and (2) initiate a planning effort to develop an area plan using the Metzger-Progress Plan as the basis to evaluate future land use and development opportunities in the area." F BACKGROUND The Planning Commission hearing and recommendation was the result of a series of public meetings and hearings which the Council directed staff to initiate to receive public input in regards to this issue. Staff met with Neighborhood ( Planning and Citizen Participation Organizations during June and July, and also conducted a workshop on July 10, 1990 with the Planning Commission. At all of these meetings, public comment favored redesignating the area back to the way it was and repealing the associated text amendments. This course of action was determined appropriate for the following reasons: 1) The Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations in the area currently do not match and property owners are subject to uncertainty as long as the they do not coincide. Furthermore, the current Plan text which applies to the area requires that development occur in accordance to a "master plan." The master plan does not exist, and cannot be prepared without substantial expenditure. As a consequence, the area is under a de-facto development moratorium. 2) There is inadequate time to evaluate a range of land use options in the area and meet the 90 day timeline established by the above Comprehensive Plan Policy to "re-evaluate the policies.... and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment." 3) Tigard's voters said a definite no to the tax increment ballot measure. Even though it is not apparent what aspect of the project was rejected, e.g. the development itself, the method of financing, timing, or growth issues in general, the City should redesignate the area as it was and concentrate its resources on other areas more suitable and available for commercial/professional development. AW' 4) Without tax increment financing or a developer willing to invest in the area, there is no means to fund the necessary planning studies or infrastructure improvements to make the area available for more intense development. The Planning Commission's recommendation also took into account considerable comment from the NPO's and CPO's that an action to change the Plan for the area back to way it was should be followed by a planning effort to evaluate future development opportunities for the Metzger-Progress area as well as existing constraints. It was emphasized that this task must involve considerable citizen involvement. CURSES OF ACTION The issue before the City Council is to formally decide, following a public F hearing, the course of action the City should take in regards to the future of f the area. This is not a public hearing to consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Rather, the Council is acting in accordance with the Plan Policy E which initiated this process. The policy states: c 1 "If for any reason the President's Parkway Development Plan is not adopted or approved, within 90 days of such a decision, the Tigard City Council shall hold a public bearing in order to re-evaluate the policies noted above (Attached as Exhibit A) and the Comprehensive Plan Amendment." i F If the Council decides to follow the Planning Commission's recommendation or take any other action that results in a Comprehensive Plan amendment, then it will be necessary for the council to pass a resolution to initiate such action. Following this, staff will prepare the necessary staff report and final order. A joint public hearing can then be held between the Planning Commission and the Council to adopt the order. The public hearing could be held on September 10, 1990. The Council may also wish to provide direction to staff regarding future planning efforts for the Metzger-Progress area. The following should be taken into account if it is deemed desirable to initiate an area plan: 1) In consideration of staff's workload, a full scale effort could not be initiated within the short term. It will be several months before meaningful staff time could be allocated to this task. In the meantime, it is possible to begin informal discussions at the NPO and CPO levels about area concerns and issues. 2) Any review and update of the Metzger-Progress Area Plan should be done with the active assistance of Washington County. Attached for city council's consideration is a proposed resolution which, if adopted, would initiate the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process as recommended by the Planning Commission. k ti fi rb/Temp.1 -2- Michael E. & Beverly A. Mills 10211 S.W. Jefferson Street Tigard, OR 97223 August 12, 1990 Tigard City Council c/o Tigard Civic Center 13125 S.W.Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-0006 President's Parkway To Whom It May Concern: We urge you to vote to change the Comprehensive Plan map designation from commercial-professional back to residential and give us back our home and neighborhood. If the plan is left as it is, you will be sentencing us to a life of perpetual limbo. We will be sitting in a home that we can no longer add on to or sell because of the commercial status. (There is land in our area that has been zoned commercial for a long period of time that has never sold.) In the beginning we would have been willing to give up our home, reluctantly, so that the dream of President's Parkway could have become a reality. We felt that overall it was a good plan that would benefit the city of Tigard. We felt that by supporting the plan, we were doing the best thing we could do for the city as a whole. However, a vast majority of the people in Tigard were very much opposed to this development and Urban Renewal. This sends a clear message to us that developing this area is not what the people want! Therefore, we ask that you please give us, the people living in the affected area, your consideration by letting us move on with our lives. We have lived in limbo now for over a year waiting for all of this to be settled. We need to add on to our home NOW in order to accommodate our growing family and are very willing to do so in order to remain in the area we love surrounded by the people that we have cared about for the past 11 years. We can't do that, however, unless you give us back our residential status. Respectfully submitted, ~'1~t,c:~ s Beverly A. Mi Is bam .:atYL:a4v:cw:-_.u_i,>v,a c... ..........-4..,.: - . _ 10181 S.W. Jefferson Avenue Tigard, OR 97223-6616 August 13, 1990 Tigard City Council 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: File Title: President's Parkway File No.: CPA 90-0001 Members of the City Council: We urge you to uphold the recommendation of the Tigard Planning Commission to change the comprehensive map designation and offically adopt the Metzger/Progress Community comprehensive text to change us from the current Commerical/Professional designation back to our original Residential designations. Doing so would allow us the ability to get our lives, which are currently on hold due to the President's Parkway plan, back on line. We had originally supported the President's Parkway plan as a viable tool for the city to recieve a first class commerical development while substantially increasing its tax base. Feeling that the interest of many outwayed our personal interest we at that time signed an option for our home with Trammell Crow to show both support for the project but, more importantly to provide for the protection and security our family would need to be able to relocate within the Tigard area with home prices escalating as they are in the southwest metro area. We however did, on June 13, 1990, receive our option with Trammell Crow back, as they are no longer interested in our area. Even with this our future is still an unknown because of the mismatch between the comprehensive plan and the current zoning. We moved to the area three years ago and chose to live in Tigard, purchased our home in Metzger because it is an ideal location in which to live and a place where our family could grow. We have plans to add 900-1100 sq.£t. on to our house (which will nearly double its current size) and continue living in our current neighborhood for many years to come. However, you hold all of this in the palm of your hands as every bank that I have talked with concerning our addition is unwilling to invest residential money into an area which the comprehensive plan states should be commerical. We again urge you to uphold the recommendation of the planning commission to change the comprehensive plan and text back to its original designation and give us both our lives and neighborhood back. We for one family are here to say that our neighborhood is a viable neighborhood worth saving and investing in. Respectfully, August 13, 1990 Mayor Edwards Members of the Tigard City Council City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, Oregon 97223 Dear Mayor Edwards and Members of the Council: On July 19, 1990, the Executive Board of CPO 3, the Raleigh Hills-Garden Home neighborhood.association, voted unanimously to support the positions of both CPO 4 Metzger and Tigard's NPO 8 that the comprehensive plan amendment adopted by the city of Tigard to implement the former President's Parkway development plan (CPA 90-0001) be reversed to return the Metzger School area to medium and low density residential comprehensive plan designations, as requested in case file CPA 90-0006 and also to adopt the Metzger Community Plan text as comprehensive plan policies (to be added to the Tigard comprehensive Plan) accompanying the comprehensive plan designations. We testified before you in February of this year that a change in Tigard's comprehensive plan from residential uses to commercial professional uses in the Metzger School area was a mistake, and we are happy to be before you today to support the return to residential status of this very important area whose potential as a model suburban residential community should be encouraged by you. As your northern neighbors, we are committed to working with you over the next few years to assure that the change coming to our community occurs in a manner that respects the things we value and improves the urban residential qualities we share by living so near the existing Washington Square and Lincoln Center regional commercial centers. We strongly urge you to adopt the recommendations of your Planning Commission, made on July 24, 1990, to change the comprehensive plan map designations in the Metzger School Area from commercial professional to medium and low density residential and to adopt the text of the Metzger-Progress Community Plan relating to this area as comprehensive plan policies accompanying these plan designations. Sincerely, Terry S.H. Moore Vice Chairman, CPO 3 8440 SW Godwin Ct., GardenHome, 97223 e t :a b; CITY of TIGARD, OREGON 00=IL AGENDA ITEM NO. 5 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY AGENDA OF: _ August 13, 1990 DATE SUBMITTED: Auoust, 1, 1990 ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS ACTION: Planning Commission _Amendment CPA 90-0004/Zone Change hearing on Jul 10 1990 ZON 90-0002 (Spieker Partners) PREPARED BY: Jerry Offer . DEPT HEAD OK CITY ADMIN OK REQUESTED BY: POLICY ISSUE Should the City reduce its developable industrial land base to allow for additional commercial development. The proposal seeks to redesignate 6.6 acres from a Plan designation of Light Industrial and zoning of I-L to the General Commercial Plan designation and C-G zoning? The parcel is bounded by I-5 to the east, SW 72nd Avenue to the west, Lower Boones Ferry Road to the south, and the Oregon Business Park to the north. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Planning Division issued a staff report to the Planning Commission recommending denial of the application due primarily to concerns related to congestion at the intersection of SW 72nd Avenue, Bridgeport Road, and SW Lower Boones Ferry Road. The City of Tigard Engineering Division, City of Tualatin, City of Durham, and the Oregon State Highway Division also raised concerns with respect to potential traffic impacts that might result from commercial development of the site. In addition, staff raised concerns that the proposed redesignations would replace one of the few undeveloped prime industrially zoned parcels in the City with commercial zoning when there appears to be a surplus of commercial land. Staff also was unable to find that a change in circumstances affecting the parcel or evidence of a mistake in the original Plan and zoning designations exist. Subsequent to the original issuance of the staff report, the applicant's engineers conducted further analysis of the traffic situation at this intersection and prepared several preliminary designs for improvement of the intersection and identified potential improvement financing mechanisms. The Highway Division's representative commented at the Commission hearing that based upon the findings contained in the additional traffic analysis, the Division was not opposed to the redesignation at this time as had been reported in the staff report. Since the City Engineering Division's recommendation for denial had been based largely upon the Highway Division's concerns, the Engineering Division no longer recommends denial. The primary issue relative to this application now appears to be whether the City chooses to reduce the developable industrial land base to allow for additional commercial development. The Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's proposal and the Planning Division staff report along with hearing public testimony on the proposal at the Commission's July 10, 1990 meeting. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the requested General Commercial Plan designation and C-G zoning designation. Minutes summarizing the Commission's discussion and findings are attached. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Approve the requested General Commercial Plan and Zoning designations. 2. Deny the application thereby retaining the industrial designations. -=aaaa=aaaav=caaaaaa=aaaaa===vaaaaasa=s==caaaaaaac=aaacaa===caaaa===ac===a==aaa FISCAL IMPACT None. ==aaaa=aaaa=aaa===c=aaa==aaaaa=as=a=aaaaaaaaaa===a=aaaaaa===sagas===aaaa==aaa== SUGGESTED ACTION Deny the request and direct staff to prepare a corresponding resolution. fr~ J a MANpY c ~ f. W. ~ CARDINAL - LANE n. JND ~ w _ L W. Ross STRE T n T • _ o S. W. ~W, REDWOOD ~e® r ~-C - LANE ~~~~11EEy1f~~~ / fw LuLE LM / I ; v w fA. T it. n 1 .W. LANGTREE ST. ~ x ° it ~ Jy~ Mca ~ u L • I 1 ; or W. YEMTYRE LN. S.w. / ~t~/• PA TI O TFF emu. a i/ - arNillJ-' S. _ • 1 BARD BFI HOOL USA 5 TREATMENT E6j l J OREGON PLANT oRCO`ON I C WLNEss / L \ f srR_L fusmss • ! - YARN s ;R.08. oz DU AM rINO AY FP ~ • 1 / I / / / I I z:1 L w R' ono ' I / Fum"law s oAAT / / tff I 4 5w S:1 ;V LQC 1 END eP po 'ql.s 1 ~ C ~Q r it [ YAN AM[ EXISTING ZONING f D' L AGENDA ITEM 5.1 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: April 3, 1990 - 7:30 PH HEARING LOCATION: Tigard City Hall - Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 A. FACTS 1. General Information CASE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-0004 Zone Change ZON 90-0002 REQUEST: 1) Plan Map Amendment from Light Industrial to General Commercial 2) Zone Change from I-L (Light Industrial) district to C-G (General Commercial) district APPLICANT: Spieker Partners 5285 Meadow Road Lake Oswego, OR 97034 OWNER: Bingham Investments 3939 NW St. Helens Road Portland, OR 97210 AGENT: McKenzie/Saito & Associates (Lana Stout) 0690 SW Bancroft St. P.O. Box 69039 Portland, OR 97201-0039 ` LOCATION: Northwest quadrant of the intersection of Interstate 5 and Lower Boones Ferry Road at intersection with SW 72nd Avenue and Bridgeport Road. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: WCTM 2S1 13AD, Tax Lot 1700 2. Background Information The property was annexed to the City of Tigard in 1976, and has been zoned I-L since that time. No land use or development applications for this parcel have been reviewed by the City since annexation. STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIEKER PARTNERS PAGE 1 3. Vicinity Information The subject acre site is bounded on the west by SW 72nd, on the east by I-5, on the north by the Oregon Business Park, and on the south by undeveloped right-of-way along Lower Boones Ferry Road. Surrounding uses and zoning designations are an industrial park zoned I-L to the north; the former Washington County quarry, which is zoned I-P (Industrial Park) and which is currently being filled in preparation for possible future development, is to the west; Tri-Met's Park and Ride is to the south across Lower Boones Ferry Road within the City of Tualatin; and I-5 to the east. Industrial development is the predominant land use on the west side of the freeway interchange, whereas commercial development is the predominant use on the east side. 4. Site Information and Proposal Description The 6.6 acre undeveloped site is generally flat and is slightly below the grade of the freeway thereby providing substantial exposure to freeway traffic. There is a stand of large Douglas Fir trees on the site along with some smaller deciduous,trees and low-lying brush. The applicant requests a Plan Map amendment from Light Industrial to General Commercial and a Zone Change from the I-L (Light Industrial) zoning district to the C-G (General Commercial) zoning district. The applicant has submitted a statement designated Narrative In Support of _a Proposed Amendment to the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan Ma and Zoning Map. In addition, the applicant has submitted a traffic study in tabular form. The traffic study is summarized within the Narrative. Although the proposed redesignation would make the subject property available for development of any of the permitted or conditional uses allowed in the C-G zoning district, the applicant's Narrative and traffic study focus on use of this site for a combined hotel and retail center. Hotels and retail sales are permitted uses in the C-G ` zone and are not either permitted or conditional uses in the present I-L zoning designation applied to the property. 5. Agency and NPO Comments The Engineering Division has reviewed the proposal and offers the following comments: As mentioned in the applicant's submittal, there are adequate storm and sanitary sewers in S.W. 72nd Avenue to serve the site. The applicant has submitted a traffic study showing that the proposed zoning would result in increased traffic in the S.W. Jean Road/S.W. Bridgeport portion of the I-5 interchange. The Oregon State Highway Division has reviewed the study and has STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIERER PARTNERS PAGE 2 determii,ed that while the intersection currently has an acceptable level of service with limited reserve capacity, approval of the proposed application would cause the intersection to reach its capacity much sooner. Consequently, the OSHD does not favor the proposed zone change. The Engineering Division shares this concern and therefore recommends that the application be denied. The Oregon State Highway Division has reviewed the proposal and has commented that development under the proposed commercial zoning typically would be expected to generate more traffic than the existing I-L zone. The LOS (Level of Service) analysis indicates a "D" level currently exists at this interchange. Development of uses under the proposed zoning would use the limited available capacity of the interchange much sooner than uses under the existing zoning. There are only short term improvements planned for this interchange. The Highway Division does not favor rezoning that would exceed this interchange's capacity sooner than the existing zoning. The Highway Division also has commented that the narrative report does not say how driveways will be provided to serve the site. The Highway Division assumes that the development will have only one driveway at the northern end of the property with no signal at that driveway. To do this, the frontage would need to be long enough to locate this t driveway approximately 300 feet from the traffic signal at Lower Boones Ferry Road. The City of Durham has reviewed the proposal and has requested that every effort be made during development of the site to preserve as many trees as possible, in order to help preserve the air quality of our environment in this particular air shed. In addition, traffic controls should be provided in order to ensure coordinated use of 72nd and Lower Boones Ferry Road. The City of Tualatin Planning Department reviewed the proposal and offered comments regarding the applicant's traffic analysis report but made no recommendation regarding the .proposed Plan Amendment/Zone Change. Tualatin questioned the traffic analysis' assumptions regarding the timing for the future extension of Durham Road to SW 72nd Avenue and for the addition of turn lanes at the I-5/Lower Boones Ferry Road interchange. In addition, Tualatin cluestions the validity of assumptions regarding the amount of traffic to the site that will result from drive-by traffic. The City of Tualatin agrees with the traffic analysis' statement that this interchange and the surrounding roadways and uses are a regional issue. Should the requested land use change be approved, the City of Tualatin encourages the City of Tigard to actively support future freeway and interchange improvement projects in this area. The Building Division, Tigard Water District, Washington County ` Department of Land Use and Transportation, General Telephone, and PGE have reviewed the proposal and have issued no comments or objections. STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIERER PARTNERS PAGE 3 No other comments have been received. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The relevant criteria in this case are Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, and 12; Comprehensive Plan Policies 2.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.3.1, 5.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, 7.6.1, 8.1.1, 8.1.3, and 12.2.1 (Locational Criteria for the General commercial use); and the change or mistake quasi-judicial Plan Map Amendment criteria of both the Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code. The Planning Division concludes that the proposal is only partially in compliance with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals based upon the following findings: 1. Goal #1 (Citizen Involvement) is satisfied because the City has adopted a citizen involvement program including review of all land use and development applications by neighborhood planning organizations (NPOs). In addition, all public notice requirements related to this application have been satisfied. 2. Goal #2 (Land Use Planning) is satisfied because the City has applied all applicable Statewide Planning Goals, City of Tigard Comprehensive ( Plan Policies, and Community Development Code requirements to the y` review of this proposal. 3. Goal #9 (Economy of the State) is satisfied because the proposed redesignation would increase the City's inventory of developable commercial land although it would decrease the inventory of developable industrial land. No net impact on employment in the City is foreseen in the proposed redesignation. 4. Goal. #12 (Transportation) is not satisfied because the proposed redesignation could lead to traffic from commercial uses to be developed on the site exceeding the remaining traffic capacity of adjacent streets and the I-S.interchange before necessary improvements can be made to improve an already severe traffic congestion situation. Development under the current industrial designations would exacerbate the existing traffic congestion, but to a lesser degree than would be expected with most potential commercial use types. Staff has determined that the proposed Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change is only partially consistent with the Comprehensive Plan based upon the findings below: 1. Plan Policy 2.1.1 is satisfied because Neighborhood Planning organization #5 and surrounding property owners were given notice of public hearings related to the request and to their opportunity to comment on the proposal. 2. Plan Policy 4.2.1 will be satisfied through the development review and STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIERER PARTNERS PAGE 4 building permit processes at which time a development proposal for this site must be shown to comply with applicable Federal, State, and regional water quality requirements including preparation and implementation of a non-point source pollution control plan in compliance with the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission's temporary rules for the Tualatin River Basin. The proposed redesignation does not by itself affect compliance with this Plan Policy. 3. Plan Policy 4.3.1 is implemented through the development review process in which building placement and landscaping are reviewed with respect to minimizing noise impacts of the developing use upon neighboring land uses. 4. Plan Policy 5.1.1 is not satisfied because this proposal will not enhance the economic diversity of the Tigard area. The subject property is located within the primary industrial area in the City which includes an area from Sandberg Road to the southern City limits and from 1-5 to Fanno Creek. This area is important because there is no other land within the City limits or the Urban Growth Boundary that is as well suited for industrial activity from the standpoint of parcel sizes, terrain, transportation facilities, and compatibility with surrounding uses. 5. Plan Policies 7.1.2, 7.2.1, 7.4.4, and 7.6.1 are satisfied because adequate public service capacities are available to serve future development of this site. Extension of necessary public facilities to serve the site are the responsibility of the developer. The City of Tigard notifies applicable public and private utility providers of pending development applications. 6. Plan Policy 8.1.1 is not satisfied because the proposed redesignation could lead to development of uses on the site which would be expected to attract substantially more traffic than would be expected with development under the existing Light Industrial (I-L) designation. This increased traffic would potentially have a negative impact on traffic safety on nearby streets, especially at the. intersection of Lower Boones Ferry Road, I-5, Bridgeport Road, and 72nd Avenue. Comments by the Oregon State Highway Division indicate that this intersection is presently near its maximum capacity and no substantial improvements are foreseen in the near future. Further overloading of this intersection/interchange through commercial development would exacerbate the existing congestion that exists at many times of the day and would therefore increase traffic safety hazards. 7. Plan Policy 8.1.3 will be satisfied as a condition of approval of any future development of this site. Completion of necessary street improvements along the site's frontages would be required to be installed by the developer at the time of development. The Engineering Division, the Oregon State Highway Division, and the City of Tualatin would review any future development proposals for the site with regard to necessary road improvements. STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIEKER PARTNERS PAGE 5 a s 8. The locational criteria for General commercial uses specified in Chapter 12 of the Comprehensive Plan (Policy 12.2.1) are partially satisfied for the following reasons: A. The subject area is not surrounded by residential development on more than two sides. The closest residentially designated property is in excess of 1/2 mile away. B. As discussed above under Statewide Planning Goal #12 and Plan Policy 8.1.1, staff is not persuaded that the proposed commercial redesignation would not substantially increase traffic on adjacent streets and intersections and thereby exacerbate an existing traffic congestion situation to an unsatisfactory level and increase traffic safety concerns. This conclusion is based largely upon the analysis and recommendations of the Oregon State Highway Division and the City of Tigard Engineering Division. C. The site is located at the intersection of an arterial (I-5) and several major collector stree#s. Access to the site for any future development will be determined in conjunction with the Oregon State Highway Division` through the development review process. D. Public transportation is available across Lower Boones Ferry Road _ from the site at the Tri-Met Park and Ride. E. The 6.6 acre site is an adequate size to accommodate a variety of uses permitted in the C-G zoning district. F. This site is highly visible from the adjoining streets, especially I-5. G. Compatibility of this site with adjacent uses is difficult to ascertain without an actual development proposal. However, the City of Tigard's Site Development Review and Conditional Use review processes are intended to provide an opportunity for ` review! of a potential development's relationship with adjacent existing uses. Because the site abuts only industrial property and major streets, compatibility issues regarding future development would be anticipated to minimal except with regard to traffic concerns. In order to approve a quasi-judicial amendment to the Plan and zoning maps, the City must also find that there is evidence of a change in the neighborhood or community which affects the parcel. Alternatively, the City must find that there has been a mistake or inconsistency with regard to the original designation of the parcel (Comprehensive Plan, Volume 2, Policy 1.1.1, Implementation Strategy 2; Community Development Code Section 18.22.040(A)). The applicant's Narrative asserts that there has been a change in the character of the area surrounding the site because of the substantial amount of commercial development that has occurred within the STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIERER PARTNERS PAGE 6 City of Tualatin in the interchange area thereby making the land uses in the area predominantly commercial in character. While staff recognizes the change in character of the interchange area that has occurred in recent years, most of that change has occurred on the eastern side of the freeway. The majority of the development on the western side of the freeway remains industrial in character; therefore we fail to see how the commercial growth on the east side constitutes a change in circumstances supporting additional commercial development on the highway's west side. Staff notes that if the applicant's primary intention regarding this site is to develop a hotel, this may be able to be accommodated through redenignation of the entire site or a portion of the site to the I-P r (Industrial Park) zone. Hotels are allowed as a conditional use in the I-P zone. Redesignation to I-P could occur without a Plan Amendment, since both the I-L and I-P zones implement the current Light Industrial Plan designation. The applicant's Narrative recognizes this option but a concludes that the area of the site not utilized for hotel use would be too r small for most development under either the I-L or I-P zones. Development elsewhere in the City of Tigard does not support this conclusion. Although the City obviously cannot commit to a zone change such as this without conducting a complete analysis of the.-proposal, such a proposal would appear to be more in line the City's policies than the current proposal. C. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council for DENIAL of Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 90-0004 and Zone Change ZON 90-0002 based upon the foregoing findings. r A-4 X/ PREP BYs J rry APPROVED BY: Keith Liden ssoc Planner Senior Planner br/CPA90-04.jo { i. STAFF REPORT - CPA 90-0004/ZC 90-0002 - SPIEKER PARTNERS PAGE 7 t 13- 118 wow t t . ,c.'S1y qQ` I. ~tiy k~ cc ,f oRSGO" AD OREGOOS 1 - oq~~y g~ oEss BUStr4lEss PAR-`~^> Q 0 3 i►- PARK ~v c BRADBURY C-r N st~~ ~ ~ s_v. - w 7 z ~ RD t`a ~ ~ It ~ F~NO~A~ t ► 1 S.W. Ul 1/ 1 t ! V. 4 1 t - f ~ -1 ~ 1 1 ti¢~~ ~~ti ~ W • O LL AGENDA ITEM 551 SPIEKER PARTNERS CPA 90-0004/ZON 90-0002 PACKET CONTENTS July 6, 1990 - Memo from Jerry Offer, Associate Planner July 6, 1990 - Memo from Randy Wooley, City Engineer July 28, 1990 - Letter from City of Tualatin June 22, 1990 - Letter from Washington County June 29, 1990 - Letter from Tri-Met July 3, 1990 - Letter from Oregon State Highway Division July 10, 1990 - Planning Commission Minutes February 16, 1990 - Applicant's Narrative March, 1990 - Traffic Analysis March, 1990 - Market Study June, 1990 - Additional Traffic Analysis br/packet I t S YE i 1 f D MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Tigard Planning Commission 9 FROM: JerrYT Offer, Associate Planner DATE: July 6, 1990 SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Zone Change CPA 90-0004/ZON 90-0002 Attached is the staff report and applicant's submittal for the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Zone Change for Spieker Partners. Commission review of the proposal was postponed from the April 3, 1990 meeting at the request of the applicant. Since much of the staff and reviewing agency opposition to this proposal is based upon traffic concerns related to the SW 72nd Avenue/Lower Boons Ferry Road/Bridgeport Road intersection adjacent to the site, the applicant's representatives have conducted additional traffic analysis relative to the proposal. The Additional Traffic Analysis report of June, 1990 is also attached. The intent of the further study was to identify potential road improvements and methods to fund improvements that would improve the traffic situation at this intersection sufficiently that reviewing agencies and the City of Tigard could support the proposed redesignation. The applicant's representatives involved the City of Tigard Engineering Division, City of Tualatin, Washington County, Oregon State Highway Division, and Tri-Met in the review of proposed intersection improvements. Comments from these agencies are also attached. After review of the Additional Traffic Analysis and the comments of the reviewing agencies, staff finds that without satisfactory improvements to the intersection being in place or definitely funded for construction, potential additional traffic impacts of commercial development on the subject site would be too significant to support redesignation at this time. Staff continues to- recommend denial of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment of the 6.6 acre site from Light Industrial to General Commercial and rezoning from I-L tb C-G. MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Jerry Offer C~ FROM: Randy Wooley 1V✓" DATE: July 6, 1990 SUBJECT: CPA 90-04/ ZON 90-02, Bingham/Spieker Mackenzie/Saito have performed preliminary engineering work and identified potential concepts to improve traffic capacity and traffic operations at the 72nd Avenue/Bridgeport/74ower Boones Ferry intersection. Discussions with the various jurisdictions involved indicate agreement that the intersection needs to be improved. However, no funding source and no schedule for improvements have been identified. Therefore, our comments of March 20, 1990, are not changed. rw/cpa90-04 ......_::1 PUNNING CITY OF TUALATIN JUL 021990 18880 SW MARTINAZZI AVE. PO BOX 369 7 TAj6 TUALATIN, OREGON 97062-0369 (503) 692-2000 i S 3 June 28, 1990 t. E i Mr. Jerry Offer Tigard Planning Department P.O. Box 3397 Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Jerry: RE: "ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS" - CPA 90-0004/CON 90-0002, BINGHAM/SPIEKER g The City of Tualatin has received from MacKenzie Engineering Incorporated the Additional Traffic Analysis dated June 1990. We have not reviewed it in detail. However, our primary comment in our letter dated March 19 to you remains. f We believe the traffic problem at the north Tualatin Interchange and surrounding areas is a regional problem. Traffic from Tualatin, Durham, Tigard and Lake Oswego, as well as drop-in through traffic from I-5 users, all use the interchange. Freeway interchanges are limited resources and should be planned for and developed with a long-range timeframe in mind. This interchange is significant in the southern I-5 corridor and should be studied within a regional context. The City of Tualatin strongly supports freeway interchange improvements and understands that the City of Tigard does also. Should you have any comments, please call me at 692-2000. Cordially, ` am s F. Jacks, AICP Planning Director jb c: City Engineer Economic Development Coordinator t file: TCC-90-01 4 S ltPr A WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON June 22, 1990 MUM TRAMMM An= Mr. Lans Stout MacKenzie Engineering, Inc. PO Box 69039 Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 Dear Lans, The purpose of this letter is to respond to your draft report on the SW 72nd Avenue and Bridgeport Road traffic condition. Our review of the draft report has been somewhat limited due to the fact Daryl Steffan having left the County recently and Tom Tushner -is unavailable this week. However, we do feel that your study and report have thoroughly identified the traffic problem associated with the subject intersection, and feasible alternative solutions to the problem. Also, as stated in your report we concur that the problem is multi-jurisdictional and will require the joint coordination of three cities, the County ODOT, Tri-MET and other benefitting property owners within the immediate area to solve the problem. As with most problems of this magnitude and complexity, it will take a significant amount of "creative financing" to fund a construction project to solve the local and regional traffic.problems in this area. Given these facts, Washington County is willing to consider participating in funding this project. This willingness to participate is predicated on other jurisdictions and benefitted property owners' willingness to participate also. To accommodate cooperative funding of this project Washington County is willing to support formation of a LID based on the necessary petition process from benefitting property owners and to help facilitate coordination among other jurisdiction to complete the necessary "creative financing" par-kage for this "intersection" improvement. ti • If you have any questions or need additional information, please let me know. Sm J er, P. E. Capital Improvements Program Manager i cc: John Rosenberger, DLUT Tom Schwab, ODOT Mike McKillip, City of Tualatin Randy Wooley, City of Tigard Joe Walsh, Tri-MET JP:me JPLS Department of Land Use and Transportation, Administration Phone: 5031648-8761 155 North First Avenue Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 FAX: 5031693.4412 t a F TRI-COUNTY METROP4AN TRANSPORTATION DIORICT Of OREGON T -MH 4012 S.E. 17TH AVENUE PORTLAND, OREGON 97202 June 29, 1990 l ~ Lans Stout Mackenzie Engineering V JUL 2 0690 SW Bancroft Street Portland, OR 97201 Jerry offer City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Lans and Jerry: Tri-Met has followed with interest the discussions about potential improvements to the SW 72nd and Bridgeport intersection. Mackenzie's work on this subject has documented a problem that does need attention. Tri-Met buses anti the patrons at the Tualatin Park and Ride experience these delays daily. We have not evaluated the alternatives in any detail, but understand that alternative D is considered by some of the jurisdictions involved to be the most feasible. That alternative would not have a significant impact on the operatio0s of the park and ride lot, but would all but eliminate the potential use of the parcel to the north as an expansion site. While there would be some additional area made available to the existing lot under alternative D, it does not provide as Auch expansion capacity bs expanding the lot to the north. Mention is made of the existing lot's contribution to the existing problem, but it should be noted that the lot's construction also funded very significant street improvements 30 feet of new pavement and curbs and sidewalks on 72nd and 17 feet of rebuilt street plus curbs and sidewalks on tower Boones Ferry. In addition, the lot provides a commuting alternative that keeps over 200 vehicles a day off "downstream" routes including SW 72nd and I-5 and it's ramps. i Absent any more specifics, we cannot provide a Tri-Met position on the formation of a Local Improvement District to fund a major highway improvement project. Tri-Met's participation should not be assumed, considering that we are prohibited by law from i Lans Stout C Jerry Offer June 29, 1990 Page 2 spending our federal transit funds on general traff c improvements, and that agency policy has also been of to spend local funds on street projects except as directly r lated to a transit improvement. we do appreciate being included in the discussions too date and hope to be kept abreast of the developments so that'we may continue to be involved. Please call rqe at 238-4905 if you have any questions or would like more information. Sincerely, , . I oe Walsh Manages, Capital Project Development JW:llt cc: Tom Schwab, ODOT Jerry Parmenter, Washington Co. 4 Mike McKillip, City of Tualatin I i i Department of Transportation HIGHWAY DIVISION NEIL G=SCHMIOT Region GOVENNOR 9002 SE McLOUGHLIN, MILWAUKIE, OREGON 97222 PHONE 653-3090 July 3, 1990 In Reply Refer To Fde No.: Jerry Offer City of Tigard P. O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Subject: Review of Traffic Study 72nd Avenue /Bridgeport Intersection Washington County We have reviewed the Traffic Analysis Report for the SW 72nd Avenue /Bridgeport intersection prepared by MacKenzie Engineering. The traffic report was prepared in response to a project referred to as the Spieker-Bingham Plan/Zone Change. We have worked with the consultant during the preparation of the report. The report is quite thorough in terms of identifying the problem developing alternative solutions. Much of the rapid traffic growth and the expected future traffic increase in the intersection can be attributed to the recent and potential development within the immediate area. ODOT is making a substantial investment in improvements to the regional freeway system to accommodate the increased traffic growth generated from this area. We agree that cooperation among the agencies is required to implement a solution. I have suggested the consultant meet with our design engineer to see if the proposed improvement can be folded into the ODOT project. The project is scheduled for next July and after much delay in the past, we intend to continue on that time path. If you have any questions, please call. ~ TU Thomas H. Schwab, P. E. Transportation Analysis Manager J U L 71990 THS:cay L;I ]-Y U{- I MARL) PLANNING DEPT cc: Ted Spence, Plan and Programming Mgr. Lans Stout, MacKenzie/Saito & Assoc., P. C. 734-1850 (1-87) 0629jeof Co loner Fessler c that the memo should NPO #3 instead 0 #8 for Robert Senior Planner Liden fled for issioners the rements for appointmen n NPO, which includ being a proper er or business owner, as being a residen Commissi yre moved and Commissi essler seconded to ap the rec ions. n carried by unanimous of Commissioners presen 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA 90-0004 ZONE CHANGE ZON 90-002 BINGHAM/SPIEKER (NPO #5) A request for approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Light Industrial to General Commercial and to change the zoning designation from I-L to C-G. LOCATION: 6.6 acres located between SW 72nd Avenue and interstate 5 and south of the Oregon Business Park (WCTM 2sl 13AD,,tax lot 1700) Senior Planner Liden described the subject property and presented a map showing the location and zoning designations of surrounding areas. He revipwed the history of the request, stating that applicants postponed the original hearing scheduled for April 3, 1990, to allow more time to study traffic issues pertaining to the proposed development. He advised that staff found the proposal is consistent with a majority of the Comprehensive Plan policies and relevant State goals; however, there are concerns about policies relating to traffic and transportation. He also said Comprehensive Plan Policy 5.1.1, relating to economic diversity, is not satisfied because the area is primarily Industrial. He reviewed the items in the packet, which were: - Memo from Jerry offer summarizing staff's recommendation for denial - Memo from City Engineer - Letters from City of Tualatin, Washington County, Tri-Met, and Oregon State Highway Division - Planning Department Staff Report - Applicant's narrative - March 1990 Traffic Analysis and Market Study June 1990 Supplemental Traffic Analysis Commissioner Boone advised that he has had business dealings with Bingham in the past, but he said he would be impartial in making a decision. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION o Lans Stout, Planning Manager for Mackenzie Saito Associates, P.O. Box 69039, Portland, outlined the format of their presentation and introduced the individuals who would be speaking. He distributed copies of an aerial photograph of the subject area. He stated their proposal is to change the Comprehensive Plan and zoning from Light Industrial (I-L) to General-Commercial (C-G). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 2 2: Mr. Stout addressed the traffic and transportation issues. He reviewed the original traffic study (see packet) which indicated there was a functional problem of the intersections of 72nd and Lower Boones Ferry- Bridgeport Road and the Westside ramp terminals from the freeway. He said the problem was a multi-jurisdictional one, including Tigard, Tualatin, Washington County, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), and Tri-Met. He stated.there were-two meetings with representatives from these jurisdictions to discuss and study the traffic problem. He suggested that re-zoning would help bring about a solution to the traffic problem. o John Ingle stated he is the Director of Economic and Market Research for Palmer, Groth and Pietka, 50 SW Pine, in Portland. He reviewed the major findings of his analysis, which are included in his report (see packet). Based on the current inventory of Commercial and Industrial lands and market demand, he suggested that the highest and best use for this property is Commercial/Retail as opposed to Industrial. o Dave Larson stated he is a registered professional engineer with Mackenzie Engineering, 0690 SW Bancroft, Portland. He discussed the traffic and transportation issues using a wall map to describe the current primary traffic movement at peak hours. He said the purpose of the second level study was to evaluate the effect of additional impacts on the two critical intersections west of I-5 at the freeway off-ramps and at S.W. 72nd Avenue and S.W. Bridgeport Road. He indicated that the key issue is the stacking distance between these two intersections. He discussed potential ways to improve traffic conditions. Out of four possible scenarios, "Alternative D" was chosen by a majority of the government agencies who participated in the June 8, 1990 meeting. The ( concept would be to move the intersection west, which maintains the existing traffic pattern, improves performance, and increases area available to Tri-Met. This plan would require building a retaining wall, and it is estimated the cost would be $918,000. There was further discussion to clarify traffic problems and the proposed methods for financing the transportation project. Lans Stout spoke again reviewing the technical criteria for meeting code and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. o Greg Hathaway, Attorney, 121 S.W. Morrison Street, Portland, represents Spieker Partners. He advised that applicant has demonstrated compliance with the legal criteria. He suggested there were three reasons justifying approval: (1) based on location, it is good planning policy to re-zone the subject parcel C-G; (2) traffic problem currently exists which can be solved by cooperative effort of jurisdictions and applicant together; and (3) applicant can demonstrate that all applicable legal criteria have been satisfied justifying a Comprehensive Plan and Zone Change amendment. o Tom Schwab, Transportation Analysis Manager for Oregon Highway Division, Region 1, indicated the Highway Division identified the intersection at S.W. 72nd Avenue and S.W. Bridgeport Road as a problem and placed it on the regional plan in 1984. He explained that ODOT is responsible for the operation of the signal system. He described the schedule of work which has been done and is planned for Phase II. He presented a sketch of the intersection area to show widening and merging changes and dual +M PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 3 left turn lanes that are planned. He indicated this is not a long-term solution. He suggested the applicant's plan Scheme D would offer a feasible long-term solution to the existing traffic problem. o Senior Planner Liden responded to questions from Commissioners regarding the staff recommendation. He discussed the "change in character" issue and explained the importance of providing a diversity of possible business types that could be accommodated in the City. He expressed concern that the amount of land designated as Industrial is limited and will not increase, but there will be changes in the amount of Commercial and Residential land. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED o Commissioners Castile, Leverett and Peterson expressed inclination to stay with the existing Comprehensive Plan and zoning, supporting staff's recommendation to deny the request. o Commissioner Suporta was concerned about the "change in character" issue, stating that he supported staff's findings. o Commissioner Fessler discussed the traffic issue, stating zoning change might be premature: o Commissioner Fyer expressed concern about the limited amount of Industrial property currently in the City. o Commissioner Barber stated she did not find the traffic issue a problem, but would like to have more information. o Commissioner Boone commented that he could not see a valid reason for maintaining the area as Industrial, noting that it is normal for Commercial/Retail areas to develop around freeway access intersections. o President Moen suggested the subject property is relatively isolated from the other Industrial land sites. He commented that there would not be a significant impact on the City by losing this one parcel of Industrial land. He favored supporting applicant's request for change of zoning with restrictions imposed to address traffic problem. * Motion by Commissioner Leverett, seconded by Commissioner Fyer to recommend to City Council to approve CPA 90-0004 and ZON 90-0002 with conditions imposed. With respect to goal 12 and Plan Policy 8.8.1 with findings there would not be a significant impact of stacking or traffic in either case, which is supported by the testimony of Tom Schwab from ODOT. With respect to item 4 Policy 5.1 it was found that economic diversity is not adversely affected by developing this particular parcel. Conditions to be'imposed upon applicant: 1. At the time of site development, the applicant shall construct frontage improvement along the site frontage on S.W. 72nd Avenue, including curb, sidewalk, paving, and storm drainage, consistent with the City's applicable street design standards. C 2. Access to the site shall be limited to two locations: one in alignment with the proposed Durham Road extension/72nd Avenue PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 4 intersection, and one approximately at the center of the site frontage or as may be established by left turn lane stacking requirements. 3. Applicant shall provide a bond or other assurance in the amount of $85,466 assigned to Washington County for the future improvement of the S.W. Bridgeport Road/S.W. 72nd Avenue intersection. The bond requirement shall terminate if a project is not committed within 5 years. 4. Applicant shall sign a waiver of remonstrance against formation of an L.I.D. for improvement of the S.W. 72nd Avenue/S.W. Bridgeport Road intersection. If an L.I.D. is formed, the bond noted in (3) above shall be released. Motion carried by a 7 to 2 majority, with Commissioners Castile and Peterson voting "Nay." Commission Meeting recessed at 9:40 p.m. Commission Meeting reconvened at 9:50 P.M. 6.2 SUBDIVI SUB 90-0007 VAR VAR 90-0011 W ON IN'/GRANDVIEW 4NP A r st for Subdivisio roval to allow d' on of a 2.4 acre i into 10 lots be n 7,500 and 10,40 are feet in size. Also quested is a Vari to allow less th feet of frontage on proposed flag lot ONE: R-4.5 (Resi ial, 4.5 units/acre) '00 LOCATION: East a of-SW 97th Stre nd approximately 400 south of SW McDonal reet (WCTM 2S1 11 tax lots 100, 106, ) Senior P1 r Liden reviewed background and loc of the subject area. xplained that in two subdivisions a originally appro but were never p ed and the applic s expired. A new app tion was made fo a southern prorVrietw ith a similar lot ern with a cul-de access along t boudary of the prop ty cluding a partial rovement of Mo Lane. He said t taff asked for ange of the des' ecause the proposed sh street would n ign•favorably Elrose Street which i he opposite of of 97th Aven He stat at staff i~ r ending approval of plication. He advis' at the meeti acket contains the fol ng: - Copy of ff Report - Info ion provided by appli - M howing where streets d line up if the on ign was constructed i 81, and a map of loc of sewer ines APPLICA PRESENTATION 0 om Burton, 302 Tigar aza, representing W Constructio ed Commission for a co uance to allow time evise the pl e l requested that o ents be allowed to t y as he woul a to take their concerns o account before red ping the deve nt. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 5 w f: a c NARRATIVE IN SUPPORT OF A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF TIGARD F COMPREHENSIVE PLAN NAP AND ZONING NAP OWNER/APPLICANT: Stuart Bingham DEVELOPER: Spieker Partners February 16, 1990 C .__..._.v.__...__._.._.__._.,....._.........._. _ TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSED USE III. PUBLIC UTILITIES/TRAFFIC IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES V. DEVELOPMENT CODE VI. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS ATTACHMENTS • Application Form • Tax Map • Property Owner's List • Deed • Fee • Traffic Analysis I. INTRODUCTION This is a proposal to amend the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan and to change the City Zoning Map, for a 6.6 acre parcel of land on S.W. 72nd Avenue near S.W. Lower Boones Ferry road. The property is tax lot 1700 on map 251-13AD. The proposal will change the Comprehensive Plan designation for "Industrial" to "Commercial" and the zoning from "I-L" to "C-G". II. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSED USE The site is bounded on the west by S.W. 72nd Avenue, on the east by the I-5 r freeway, on the north by Pacific Business Park, and on the south by property owned by the State Department of Transportation. It is generally flat, Y slightly below the grade of the freeway, providing excellent exposure to r freeway traffic. There is a stand of Douglas Fir trees and brush on the 4 site. ! The site's location, with respect to the freeway interchange and major traffic routes in the area, make it logically suited for retail commercial use. The proposed development of the site will include retail commercial activities similar to those developed on comparable nearby properties in the City of Tualatin. This type of development would result in between 70,000 and 80,000 sq. ft. of building floor area and between 350 and 400 parking spaces. However, approval of this change will likely result in development of about 4 acres of the site in general commercial uses, and about 2.5 acres for a hotel. Although the plan amendment process must consider all potential uses, the hotel is a viable option which is needed in the area and is compatible with the surrounding industrial uses. It is noted that hotels are allowed in the IP zone as a Conditional Use and that the IP zone could be applied to this site without a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. However, if the hotel were allowed in this manner, the remaining 41 acre site would be too small for most development under either IL or IP zoning. Further, the hotel would be the focal point of a commercial center on the property which would serve both the industrial businesses in the area and the general public. Therefore, primarily because of the size of the parcel, the IP zone is not a viable option to allow the site's development. III. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND TRAFFIC Public Utilities The Tigard Water District can provide public water to the site from a 12-inch line in S.W. 72nd Avenue. M.tl\MIM\IY'.m } l,. - - The City of Tigard has an 8-inch sanitary sewer line in the S.W. 72nd Avenue which can observe the property. Storm runoff will be provided by an 18-inch storm line in S.W. 72nd Avenue. Police, fire, and municipal services are provided by the City of Tigard. The affect on public utility of changing the ultimate development of the property from industrial to commercial is insignificant. Traffic The potential traffic. generation from the site for industrial and commercial use is compared as follows: Y (1) Existing Conditions: 6.6 acres zoned light industrial at 32% coverage approximately 92,000 sq. ft. ITE Land Use Code 130 Industrial Park r ADT = 4.95 x 766 1221 VPD PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 87 VPH 18 ENTER 69 EXIT AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 109 VPH 89 ENTER 20 EXIT (2) Scenario 1 - Zone Change to All Retail: 6.6 acres zoned shopping center at 25% coverage approximately 71,874 sq. ft. ITE Land Use Code 820 ADT 5534 VPD j PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 473 VPH 232 ENTER 241 EXIT AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 103 VPH 98 ENTER i • 38 EXIT r - 2 - i (3) Scenario 2: 2.5 acres hotel plus 4.0 acres retail 105 Room All-Suites Hotel, ITE Code 310 (All suites, Code 311, has limited data) ADT 865 VPD PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 49 VPH 27 ENTER 22 EXIT AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 36 VPH 24 ENTER 12 EXIT Plus: i 43,500 sq. ft. Retail, ITE Code 820 Y E ADT 3992 VPD PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 362 VPH 177 ENTER 185 EXIT AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 97 VPH 68 ENTER 29 EXIT Totals for Scenario 2: C ADT 4857 VPD ` PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 411 VPH 204 ENTER g 207 EXIT AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) 65 VPH 92 ENTER 41 EXIT r E IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES i The Tigard Comprehensive Plan includes a number of goals and policies which are applicable to this proposal. Each is addressed and discussed below: Policy 2.1.1. "THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN AN ONGOING CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM AND SHALL ASSURE THAT CITIZENS WILL BE PROVIDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN ALL PHASES OF THE PLANNING PROCESS." The City's Plan Amendment review procedure ensures compliance with this policy. Policy 5.1.1. "THE CITY SHALL PROMOTE ACTIVITIES AIMED AT THE DIVERSIFICATION OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE TO TIGARD RESIDENTS WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS PLACED ON THE GROWTH OF THE LOCAL JOB MARKET." -3- i w.wwwtrr.sr This policy is explicitly met by the proposed change since commercial use of the site will diversify the job market in the area as well as support existing area businesses. The continued industrial designation of the site would not facilitate its development and, hence, would not be consistent with this policy. Policy 7.1.2. "THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRE-CONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT COINCIDE WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF ADEQUATE SERVICE CAPACITY INCLUDING: 1. PUBLIC WATER; 2. PUBLIC SEWER (NEW DEVELOPMENT ON SEPTIC TANKS SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED WITHIN THE CITY); AND 3. STORM DRAINAGE. b. THE FACILITIES ARE: 1. CAPABLE OF ADEQUATELY SERVING ALL INTERVENING PROPERTIES AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT; AND 2. DESIGNED TO CITY STANDARDS c. ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES TO BE PLACED UNDERGROUND." The above review of public services and utilities shows that this policy is met. Policies 8.1.1. "THE CITY SHALL PLAN FOR A SAFE AND EFFICIENT STREET AND ROADWAY SYSTEM THAT MEETS CURRENT NEEDS AND ANTICIPATED FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT." 8.1.2. "THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE FOR EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS WITHIN THE CITY AND THE METROPOLITAN AREA THROUGH COOPERATION WITH OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL JURISDICTIONS." 8.1.3. "THE CITY SHALL REQUIRE AS A PRECONDITION TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL THAT: a. DEVELOPMENT ABUT A PUBLICLY DEDICATED STREET OR HAVE ADEQUATE ACCESS APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE APPROVAL AUTHORITY; b. STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY BE DEDICATED WHERE THE STREET IS SUBSTANDARD IN WIDTH; c. THE DEVELOPER COMMIT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO CITY STANDARDS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT; a ??d d. INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPERS PARTICIPATE IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING STREETS, CURBS AND SIDEWALKS TO THE EXTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACTS; e. STREET IMPROVEMENTS BE MADE AND STREET SIGNS OR SIGNALS BE PROVIDED WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT IS FOUND TO CREATE OR INTENSIFY A TRAFFIC HAZARD; f. TRANSIT STOPS, BUS TURNOUT LANES AND SHELTERS BE PROVIDED WHEN THE PROPOSED USE OF A TYPE WHICH GENERATES TRANSIT RIDERSHIP; g. PARKING SPACES BE SET ASIDE AND MARKED FOR CARDS OPERATED BY DISABLED PERSONS AND THAT THE SPACES BE LOCATED AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE ENTRANCE DESIGNED FOR DISABLED PERSONS; AND h. LAND BE DEDICATED TO IMPLEMENT THE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CORRIDOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN." An accompanying traffic study shows that the anticipated commercial use of the site can be accommodated by the roadway system. Street frontage improvements will be incorporated into the site development. Section 12.2 identifies the intent of the Plan with respect to commercial areas. Each point is addressed as follows: 1. Commercial areas be planned at a scale which related its location, site and type of stores to the trade are to be served.' The proposed commercial area, six acres in size, is a logical size, shape, and location to serve the adjacent business community as well as the general public, by way of the major traffic routes in the area. "2. Surrounding residential areas be protected from any possible adverse affects in terms of loss of privacy, noise, lights and glare." There are no surrounding residential areas. "3. Commercial centers and uses be aesthetically attractive and landscaped." The eventual site development plans will be subject to Site Plan Review. "4. Ingress and egress points not create traffic congestion or hazards." The accompanying traffic study shows that the system can accommodate the use. "5. Vehicle trips be reduced both in terms of the length of vehicle trip and total number of trips." -5- i f~tl\MIMUM.,Ie The location of the proposed commercial center is convenient to area business as well as the public, thereby shortening trips to other commercial areas. "Linear Commercial" Locational Criteria: (1) Spacing and Location (a) The proposed site has not abutting residential area. (2) Access . . . (a) The existing system and anticipated improvements can accommodate the proposed retail use. Y (b) S.W. 72nd Avenue, which abuts the site, is designated a major collector. (c) Public transportation is available. (3) Characteristics . . . (a) The six acre site is an ideal size to accommodate either a hotel /supportive retail center, or a general retail i center. i (b) The site has excellent visibility from I-5, S.W. Boones Ferry Road, and S.W. 72nd Avenue. (4) Impacts . . . (a) The scale of the project, at 6 acres, is small compared to the substantial industrial development in the area. However, it is an appropriate size for the anticipated use. (b) "Privacy" of adjacent*uses is not a significant issue since the area is predominately industrial. (c) The only "significant site feature" is the existing vegetation, which will be incorporated into the I development as much as possible. (d) The noise and lights of the commercial use will be of no greater effect than those of industrial use. C, V. DEVELOPMENT CODE Section 18.22.040 of the Code provides criteria review of zoning map amendments. 1. The preceding discussion shows that the proposed Plan change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies, and, therefore, the corresponding zoning map change is also appropriate. 2. The Statewide Goals are addressed in a following section. 3. The Code purpose statement of the C-G District" is addressed below. 4. The vicinity of the site has substantially developed since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning. Recent commercial developments in the City of Tualatin reinforce the commercial character of the area, while extensive industrial development in the City of Tigard has established a substantial population base to be served by commercial development of the subject site. Section 18.62.010 provides a statement of purpose for the C-G District: i "The purpose of the general commercial areas is to provide for major retail I goods and services: 1. The uses classified as general commercial may involve drive-in services, large space users, a combination of retail, service, wholesale, and repair services, or provide services to the traveling public; 2. The uses range from automobile repair and services, supply and equipment stores, vehicle sales, and drive-in restaurants to laundry establishments; and 3. It is intended that these uses be adjacent to an arterial or major collector street." The proposed site, when developed as a retail center under the C-G provisions, will be consistent with this purpose statement since a variety of retail activities will be accommodated which will comply with the characteristics described in the purpose statement. The site is adjacent major traffic routes, providing convenient access to the general travelling public as well as the surrounding business community. - 7 - VI. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS Several statewide goals apply to this change in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Goal I (Citizen Involvement) is met through the City's Plan Amendment review process. Goal 2 (Planning Process) is met by the City's existing Comprehensive Plan and its review and update procedures. Ggal 9 (Economy) is met by the proposal since it will allow an economically viable use of the site, which will enhance employment and economic activity in the area. Y Goal 11 (Public Facilities is met since all public facilities and services are available to the site. Goal 12 (Transportation) is met since the transportation system can accommodate the proposed commercial use. l -8- N•tl\MIMUM.•Jv teo! % 1k. moo= LN woo .:,:.;.':~•%~"a- / w:,~3R 'mss ~i m • ~ ~ j ~ _ ~ ' •i, r - It C3 71 ' j ' a ' 84too K F E w~ H W~ N!"AR\' _ _ •1 ~ t~.',r ~~•+i tom! n'.. - 2 .7A o.. 1 J ' ua•sl' 1a3,~ 78.95'1a i -Ise, 1700 T 't•' • 3® Parcel I ~ . N 29 I 28 I '27 '126 a~'rw ro ~Isa•~ ~ ua• W_ fade ...o,+r ~ 1 =xz -,1M I Pa~c;d i TI 134 ?~1 1 • » I I 32 ~i /33 • N {j•( 0 -•I cetm 4 : T~do 04 it losrmer aid in E ~+s Mm leas wft b doses and Qatar ""Jos I i~ a • re fabft for a r L+e r W o of roAW= 4 eon. Isar Noun= 1 .ice i . gY' 1 M CITY OFTiGAROp OREGON COMPREHE*fSZQE_PTIAN Aj~N~.NT~O~ RANGE/ZGNE ORDINANCE MErinNrt APPLICQR CITY OF TIGARD, 13125 SW Hall, PO Boa 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 - (503) 639-4171 FOR STAFF USE ONLY CASE NO. OTHER CASE NO'S: RECEIPT NO. APPLICATION ACCEPTED BY: DATE: _ Y 1. GENERAL INFORMATION Application elements submitted: PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION 5-w. 7 Ave.. (A) Application form (1) S&Au- b)eo l 1W, (B) Owner'a signature/written TAR MAP AND TAR LOT NO . 7-A X Lo7- / 7o o authorization Alk-P 151-/3,40 (C) Applicant's statement ST"'A SIZE !o • (o ,dGZeS pre-app check liaci PLERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER* Btxq 644 t wyr- 7L" &Vr (D) Filing fee ) ADDRESS PHONE Z.Z `t -Z 6 7f. Additional information for Compre- Cl:.-LY uiLi ~vr~fi .~~Z ZIP X17 E J sivc- P'Ina ?-:.p Amendme:zts/7.: t:nanges APPLICANT* souci iL Pmurwtxi CJoo C-0 -4) (E) Maps indicating property ADDRESS 15~Z i'•S 5 4L r• " o.1 , " PHONE -cFbb~ location (pre-app check list) CITY L4dtt ~~IwFv CCCL ZIP ct-703 (F) List of property owners and *When the owner and the applicant are different addresses within 250 feet (1) people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record (G) Assessor's Map (1) or a lessee in possession with written authorization (H) Title transfer instrument (1) from the owner or an agent of the owner with written authorization. The owner(s) must sign this application in the space provided on page two or submit a written authorization with this application. DATE DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE: 2. PROPOSAL SUMMARY The owners of record of the subject property FINAL DECISION DEADLINE: request a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (if COMP. PLAN/ZONE DESIGNATION: applicable) from /NVUS'iR./G•C. to C.)r"ojC Cao(, and a Zone Change from Z- L to C. - G N.P.O. Number: OR ' The applicant requests an amendment to the Planning Commission Approval Date: following sections of the Comprehensive Plan or Community Development Code City Council Approval Date: 0737P 23P Revd: 5/87 1 ~ 3. List any variance, conditional uses, or other land use actions to be considered as part of this application: ' 4. Applicants: To have a complete application you will need to submit attachments described in the attached information sheet at the time you submit this application. 5. THE APPLICANT(S), SHALL CERTIFY THAT: A. The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. B. If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. C. All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants - so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. D. The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. DATED this day of P 19 SIGNATURES of each owner (eg. husband and wife) of the subject property. j 01 WV0 446~~/ (KSL:pm/0737P) r TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR A PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE Tigard, Oregon March 1990 by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street Portland, OR 97201 (503)224-9570 ~r 4 ~I0505~'~ O Y13. G L - c i I i CO TE TS f F 1. INTRODUCTION i II. EXISTING CONDITIONS e III. TRIP GENERATION IV. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT V. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS a i t t _ f 1 i i i i i s i I. INTRODUCTION t This study will analyze the traffic impacts of development of a 6.6 acre parcel under existing and proposed zoning. The existing zoning is "IL" (Light Industrial); the proposed zoning is "CG" (General Commercial). The purpose of the study is to evaluate the effect of commercial development of the site as opposed to industrial and to determine the ability of the street system to accommodate the anticipated commercial project. Two development options will be analyzed for the commercial zoning alternative, including a hotel/retail project and a fully retail commercial project. The assumptions for each scenario are cited in the Trip Generation section. The scope of this study has been discussed with staff of the City of Tigard and Oregon Department of Transportation. It is anticipated that these agencies, plus Washington County and the City of Tualatin, will have an interest in the report's findings and that the City of Tigard will request that each agency review and comment as part of the Tigard process. A narrative submitted to Tigard as part of the plan/zone change application contained basic traffic generation information, which is refined and adjusted by this study. C s. E i i i t II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site's only direct access is to S.W. 72nd Avenue, which is designated a major collector. The existing right-of-way along the site frontage is tapered, requiring a minor dedication to meet design standards. The existing street is a two-lane improvement with gravel shoulder and ditches. It is assumed that a frontage improvement will be included in the eventual site development. Other routes to the site include S.W. 72nd Avenue to the north, which connects to S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Road and S.W. Durham Road. To the £ south, S.W. Bridgeport Road and S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Road provide connection to Tualatin. Figure 1 presents a vicinity map of the study area. The major traffic system component is the I-5 interchange immediately south of the site. Recent developments in Tualatin, including Costco, GI t Joe's/Safeway, and the Tri-Met Park and Ride lot, have significantly increased traffic volumes in this interchange. The Oregon Department of Transportation has studied the existing conditions and has provided traffic counts which are included in this study. The study also assumes that an ODOT project scheduled for summer of 1990, which will provide additional turn lanes in the interchange, will be accomplished. It is also assumed in this study that a signal at the intersection of S.W. Bridgeport Road and S.W. Upper Boones Ferry Road will be operational. An additional issue is the future extension of S.W. Durham Road l southeasterly to connect with S.W. 72nd Avenue. Since no definitive schedule or design is currently available, this study does not reflect this future project. The following existing traffic counts are a combination of ODOT and Washington County data and field counts accomplished by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated. Figures 2 and 3 depict the AM and PM Peak Hour traffic volumes. 2 A Z (U S y JQeO~ ~ FO DURHAM RD A SITE Z tU ~G~ ~•G H ~ ~~S ~ O ti93~ a Q-~O LWI k. y z ~f~ u o F 0 99 j GOQO~~ ~pS ~p0 F~ FIGURE 1 VICINITY PLAN BY ODERMOTT DATE 03102/90 JOB NO. 190106 V a N JI ~ g 563 N a tt7 sa.... 73 230 r --ti• ~ i ► 544 1 ~0 l✓ m► 229 N ~N ~ UPPER BDDNES FERRY RD. ~ CA) 320 (r1 0 n ~7' ~ SW 72NB ~ GiOAF $ 1 MGEWAt C .T1 ~ GI 1 '~F O,yF~ p M P G rri -TI C C) m d UPPER 2GONES wU ,n FERRY RD. 0 U4 t",p~ ~FP ,P~ do t7d VIO c7 J C~ SW 72ND (T~ SW 72ND 0 ® /N m McEWAN RDn YT` - I 365 -n Cl t I © ~ a w 120 - 0-► - 498~~ } Ar-ti w m Z. z ti 351 266 6- 5 267---l' I 575 0--o I 4 32-► 63 83-s 4 - 72 288-b 4 235 234-o 4 - 268 615-> 706 56--*~ 89 542-1A ~ 158 - ~A- - 4-4~ ~ ~r.- 13 43~~ ~ ~A-- 86 O V NI+ N ~(X d pA + Nw N V 0 0 a. N o *4 i III. TRIP GENERATION The following trip generation analysis will compare the traffic generation of the existing industrial zoning and the two alternate development j scenarios. This analysis utilizes trip generation rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, Fourth Edition, for Land Use Codes 130 (Industrial Park), 820 (Retail Shopping Center), and 310 (All Suites Hotel). { A. Existing Industrial Zoning Assumptions: 6.6 AC zoned light industrial at 32% coverage - 92,000 s.f. floor area (ITE Land Use Code 130 - Industrial Park) F 1. Average Daily Traffic T = 1,221 VPD 2. PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) ENTER = 18 VPH EXIT - 69 VPH 3. AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) ENTER = 89 VPH EXIT - 20 VPH B. Retail Scenario 1 Assumptions: 6.6 AC zoned shopping center at 25% coverage - 71,900 s.f. floor area (ITE Land Use Code 820 - Shopping Center) 1. Average Daily Traffic: a. New Trips 3,389 VPD b. Pass-By (43.5% Diverted) Trips 2.607 VPD C. Total Trips 5,996 VPD 2. PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street): E a. New Trips 297 VPH b. Pass-By (43.5% Diverted) Trips 228 VPH C. Total Trips (257 ENTER - 268 EXIT) 525 VPH 3. AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street): t a. New Trips 81 VPH b. Pass-By (43.5% Diverted) Trips 62 VPH C. Total Trips 143 VPH i - 3 - i ' l C. Retail-Scenario-2 ' Retail Portion Assumption: 6.6 AC zoned retail at 25% coverage = 43,500 s.f. floor area (ITE Land Use Code 820 - Shopping Center) 1. Average Daily Traffic: a. New Trips 2,417 VPD b. Pass-By (44.1% Diverted) Trips 1.909 VPD C. Total Trips 4,326 VPD 2. PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street): a. New Trips 226 VPH b. Pass-By (44.1% Diverted) Trips 178 VPH C. Total Trips (198 ENTER - 206 EXIT) 404 VPH 3. AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street): a. New Trips 59 VPH b. Pass-By (44.1% Diverted) Trips 47 VP C. Total Trips (74 ENTER - 32 EXIT) 106 VPH Hotel Portion Assumption: 2.5 ac hotel 105 Rooms (ITE Land Use Code 310 - Hotel) 1. Average Daily Traffic 865 VPD 2. PM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) ENTER = 27 VPH EXIT = 22 VPH 3. AM Peak Hour (of adjacent street) ENTER = 24 VPH EXIT = 12 VPH Scenario 2: Combined Retail and Hotel 1. Average Daily Traffic a. New Trips 3,282 VPD b. Pass-By (Diverted) Trips 1,909 VPD C. Total Trips 5,191 VPD 2. PM Peak Hour a. New Trips ENTER = 138 VPH EXIT = 137 VPH b. Pass-By (Diverted) Trips ENTER 87 VPH EXIT = 91 VPH C. Total Trips ENTER = 225 VPH EXIT = 228 VPH 3. AM Peak Hour a. New Trips ENTER = 65 VPH EXIT = 30 VPH b. Pass-By (Diverted) Trips ENTER = 33 VPH EXIT = 14 VPH C. Total Trips ENTER = 98 VPH EXIT s 44 VPH - 4 - IV. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Figures 4A-4D indicate the traffic distribution assumptions for the three alternate development scenarios. Figures 5A-5F present trip assignments for the three scenarios. ~ - 5 r O t► -4k -4p It ® l~' O r` ~ O h 70 uRHAM n ~ o t ~ r SITE ~~S 25 t ti~ E F ~J i ~ N t ' t 1 t ~ LI.A ` NINA FIGURE T ` `I A ~ ~ DATE EXISTING INDUS ION ( ) JOB >Ja DISTRIBUT TRIP woo r O r ' t - v.. 10 R r- - t 0 S N Pr JQQ °~4~ RJ4A ~1 0 BB h SITE S N at y tiv°~' E F C W NO ~Ar r. ~ N ~ y ~B TRIPS) Y USE ~N ~S~D RET AI1. DA T I QN JOB t,a P POP U iP DISTRID TR I I I 1 1 1 26 74 © N O0 ® 1 1 1 ® 1 1 1 v N ~ o 0 z n 10--Al'~ 59 H OQ (10) o-- 2) JQQ S 4 jr- 4 y ~ R I P (47) DURHAM RD A O @- ® 1 ° 1 o O N i 1 ^ ASITE 3 l 5 a - ~ ~ - a 00 0-d 0 a C w _ U ~y ® W 1 1 1 q ~ V~'~Op- O O 1 1 1 W ~9. E F 0-• 0 © ° i 1 I I 1 a--e a-- 0 I I FIGURE 4C PROPOSED RETAIL USE (PASS-BY TRIPS) TRIP DISTRIBUTION BY DATE 03/02/90 J13B N0. 190106 _ o ► t 10 25 75 t r ~ N t ~ \ N ,yQQO~~~yQ'S-l 70 ~R1 ~ B N pSITE w5 ► i 6 ► ce ce w D 30 ~w. ► t ► W esq. S w CL ~R 11 ► t r 3 ~C4 nTi RE 40 EI... U~jE DaTE FIGUI P o UTION j RIP Ol TRIB r 1 1 1 -Jo A Ar- C w AM PEAK _ V • Li 9 , ( t UPPER BOONES FERRY RD. tTJ) + Z --'t 1 .e~ o,~~ , p~ to `r✓ 8.,~ R ~1~'' t""1~ cFA D sw 72ND Ar- _ Sw 72ND F N 1, vto PEAK H~~ , , N Q ' L P~A 1 Z M 1 1 t 0 o 40 , N 1 now- r 15 1 f _ N N r M6- 0 jAi J~0~4q, l-t'S~ , 1 1 25 A flG 3~ - D HAM RD so B 44~ 9, 1 r0 / ~ y Z cla t C-3 F !C 1 ta CL- G L~ IF 66 t.i CL- a- 1 ' a [ 1 1 9 7 I a rya S ~ ' 1 ` VVJJ E ~B sE ~rvE~ ~ DACE JOB POSED R ~C SCE pRQ s~`~N~~.N RIP A N , _ f rte, _ _ ---s ~EJ N ~ ~ -rte r 17' ~Q~Q'~ ~ , ► 1 ✓ c5~ ►ZNAM RD ~Y.. (20) a 30 Cki 3 a OQ? 86 t 0 4- 66 CL- ► ► ► JF' ~ t t 0-0 ✓ o ► t ✓_0 0 1RIPB~ MCI 5C PABB-B $Y RE L USE DAZE F 1 G RED p1 BEN p,Rl ~~g NQ. PRQP~SED ENS _ 5 AS~,IGNM TRIP f ' w V j -Ilk -4 Ar- C N K Hn - ~ AM PEA - ocon - ~y UPPER BUUNES FERRY RD. t73 - 'V1t ~ Za py ~ O Sw 72ND , C r _ . F~ sw 72ND ~o QAF N ul r ~~P,p}F V+m 1 , McEVAN RD0 Gil ti 9 _ 44 t 1 52 ti ~~r WNW All- N ~ y QQtVQ`~~yy ---r. t .`s~pp4~. ® , , t 5 } 4p 20 ( 'DURHAM RD ~ ~ (18} ~ SITE ti~ ` p? 57 O , 1 } O 4 4Q~` 4 N Q. ~ o 1 t t ~ ~ Pass - e $Y RE ~~E 0 2 DACE ~ ~ G RET p,IL S~~N p,R~ Jpe No. RaPp,ED ENT ~ P p,SS1~N~ -DRIP 10 " N /n I 1 1 t l 3 2 9 fiP fir gfi~ ~fi~ © I e! 1 1 1 ® { i ® I I cu i { y 1 7 DURHAM RD A O Q~ - ti } ® I I LL ® i I I C L..C_. O Z n 1 1 ^ ASITE 1 3----+ - 7 W O U -l ~Q ,g < W © I I I W G W O N n n I N 1 ` c 1_L. Z4 7- to 1 1 ~ , 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 • , e-• a f- , t--; 4-- 1 s i l l S I I I © n I I © 1 I 1 FIGURE 5F PROPOSED HOTEL USE TRIP ASSIGNMENT - SCENARIO 2 DA ODERM~TT DATE 03/02/„90 JOB NO. 190106 r V. INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS The intersections in the study area were reviewed for capacity and delay in conformance with the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual Special Report 2Q9. i. The levels of service for each intersection under the three development` scenarios are indicated in the following tables. Calculations to support the tabular summary are available upon request. Figure 6A-60 present the "combined" traffic for the three development scenarios. The level of service and capacity for "isolated" intersections was undertaken utilizing HCAP software which is based upon the 1985 HCM, SR 209, "Operational Analysis Method." Calculations for the four interconnected intersections on Lower Boones Ferry Road (72nd to McEwan) were calculated initially with the NCAP software to determine "Saturation Flows" which were then utilized in a PASSER2-84 arterial progression analysis. Pre-set phase timings were obtained from the O.S.H.D. and were utilized in both the NCAP and PASSER2-84 analysis.` p: The following tables reflect the NCAp analysis results. PASSER2-84 analysis results will follow. f x i F i ® a V N © V © V m( ® + A N M -TI O x - 410 ~ 73 248 400 1-0 ~ ~ 14 ^ V J 16-► 5 0-► a- - - 0 127-> f-- 37 563-► a- 140 ID --i C 51--* } ~A- 5 544ti~ 4 - --A~ } ~0- 34 421ti~ ~y- 105 76--A 13 zz;;a 1I I I m Ww NWT (T1 m ~ om uo a v v w + _ AM PEAK HOUR w E Q 223- 301 D C 258-~ 83 a I to N W N ® + * 1 UPPER BOOfYES FERRY RD. w __w 373 ~1& 0 I N - f- 0 °Oy Op 746-~ 320 O - fir- 596 ~J+ I d D 84-4 A-107 SW 72ND 1~ 1 ~l r SW 72ND ~,Q 1 1 1 VJ © p w m McEWAN RDn 123 -T j 0 ,nom f*1 0-0 Pps 498ti. 1 I 1 ~ °O tiF 4DI 13 > m ' PM PEAK HOUR z 14 351 I I 286 6- W 8 267- 582 0~ °t- 4 I 32-r 63 85-~ a- 79 288-► 235 234-s 268 615-► 706 56--*~ } 99 542~~ ~ ~Ar- 206 15ti~ 3 4-ti~ 13 45--*~ 87 Us N O Eno W CA W b O N O~ 1wO o V -TI O - 410 1 73 239 - 374 1-' 1 16 K Q G) 16-► e- 5 0-~ --P 123-► a- 46 551--► e---- 138 co -u C 51- 4 Ar- 5 544 - Aw- 34 421-• A• 104 75ti A-- 25 m m °am 1 wm w I Nam a a 10 1" o AM PEAK HOUR ® Q W Z W 223 301 D m t:s 258-1i~- t ~,-I-- 93 ~ D n 8ti 1 1 (jr- 24 C7 r N W N N u $ 1 ~0 UDR BOUNES FERRY RD. 06r 0 ®l~ 402 cF 1--W I 'a- 0 Z - i- 0'oy AOp 746-~ 320 - 596 j t7 D 72ND 81- 4 109 SW SW 72ND 1 I 1 ww1 ~~O.o © McEWAN RD V1 0 142-W 1 0 1 i 0-► s~I- - Pp~ p J 498•-y 1 I 1 ~ OO tiF ' PM PEAK HOUR W IA 352- 266 6--w 27 267- 590 0__w I 4 32-r 53 98-~ f-- 141 259-► 229 234-► 268 615- > - 706 56-0, ~ 4 99 542--*~ f ~0-238 194---k~ or-- 64 4ti~ } ~A- 13 58-'*, Ar 101 I N N -W O aO w W~ w O~ V ow -TI 0 410---r 73 242 I - I 381 1 17 0 0 C) 16-► 5 0 - 0 122-► 44 555-~ • - 138 co 51--* 5 544--* - -ti 34 421 108 74--* 24 o ~ sir ~Tr gig ~ r ~ r z a o AM PEAK HOUR 4 w 01 223 302 l J ty 258-t~► 1 ~~-I--- 93 D e~ 1 I 1 24 D C N oN r \ ~ ~ ~ CO UPPER B4pNES FERRY RD, p ~o roc 1 o 404 F 0 746-~ 320 OP,f A - } 596 ~J+ tj ~ a C) D 80--A ~r 109 4 I v SW 72ND 1 SW 72ND G,o 1 _ i Z u w m NcEWAN RD V1 0 144J° V-- O ~F m 0-• •I-- - ~'p~ N 498ti 1 1 1 ~ p0ti o to m PM PEAK HOUR m-1 *4 ~l 353- N"- 266 6-w 22 267 587 0- I 4 t:J I 1 32 63 93 127 265-► 231 234-> 268 615-► - 706 55--*~ ~A- 99 542ti~ 4 ~Ar- 234 170ti~ ~Ar 55 4--*,~ 4 ~~r 13 55 ~~r 100 w ((A _ I N O O~DONi V aWi~ N OVi w OA OW A.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING 1990 MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 10.27 0.78 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 14.40 0.70 B C. 72nd/Site Access N/A N/A N/A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 13.50 0.47 B E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 12.23 0.51 B F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 19.31 0.69 C G. Lower Boones/McFwan Rd. 24.80 0.89 C P.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING 1990 MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 11.10 0.74 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 16.87 0.82 C C. 72nd/Site Access N/A N/A N/A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 14.82 0.50 B E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 14.42 0.67 B F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 13.05 0.69 B G. Lower Boones/McFwan Rd. 21.49 0.90 C A.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING & INDUSTRIAL ZONING MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 10.90 0.79 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 14.50 0.71 B C. 72nd/Site Access B A A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 13.50 0.53 B E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 19.01 0.82 C F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 19.31 0.71 C G. Lower Boones/McEwan Rd. 25.13 0.90 D 1 P.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING & INDUSTRIAL ZONING MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 11.23 0.75 B E B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 16.96 0.82 C C. 72nd/Site Access A A A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 20.16 0.56 C E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 14.72 0.68 B F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 13.46 0.72 B t G. Lower Boones/McEwan Rd. 21.51 0.90 C t k i i C - s ~ fi A.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING & SCENARIO 1 MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 10.90 0.79 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 14.47 0.70 B C. 72nd/Site Access C A A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 14.08 0.52 B E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 19.01 0.82 C F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 14.54 0.70 B G. Lower Boones/McEwan Rd. 24.89 0.90 C i i P.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING & SCENARIO 1 MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 11.91 0.78 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 17.29 0.84 C C. 72nd/Site Access C A A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 35.891 0.60 D1 E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 14.72 0.69 B F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 13.72 0.74 B G. Lower Boones/McEwan Rd. 21.52 0.90 C 1 Revision of O.S.H.D.Is signal timing would allow operation in the 15-20 second average delay range, which is LOS 'C' - 9 - A.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING & SCENARIO 2 MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 10.98 0.79 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 14.46 0.70 B C. 72nd/Site Access C A A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 14.22 0.53 B E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 19.31 0.82 C F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 14.81 0.70 B G. Lower Boones/McEwan Rd. 25.05 0.90 D P.M. PEAK HOUR UNSIGNALIZED SIGNALIZED LT RT LT AVG V/C L.O.S. EXISTING & SCENARIO 2 MINOR MINOR MAJOR DELAY A. 72nd/Upper Boones Ferry 11.83 0.77 B B. Upper Boones/Durham Rd. 17.21 0.83 C C. 72nd/Site Access C A A D. Lower Boones Ferry/72nd 27.461 0.58 D1 E. Lower Boones/West I-5 I/C 14.72 0.69 B F. Lower Boones/East I-5 I/C 13.64 0.74 B G. Lower Boones/McEwan Rd. 26.58 0.90 1 Revision of O.S.H.D.'s signal timing would allow operation in the 15-20 second average delay range, which is LOS 'C' 10 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report has evaluated the potential traffic impact of deveiopment of the site under three alternate scenarios. The first scenario, which assumes development of an "industrial park" project, is established as a baseline condition to which the commercial options are compared. Traffic conditions in the area are complex due to the significant impact of I-5 and the large industrial land base to the north. Further, the planned ODOT project at the I-5 interchange and the future connection of Durham Road to S.W. 72nd Avenue contribute both positive and negative impacts. The study has found that all intersections in the area will function at an acceptable level of service under all three scenarios and that signalization of the site access point is not warranted. However, the S.W. Jean Road/S.W. Bridgeport Road portion of the I-5 interchange does not function adequately under existing conditions. The problem in this area is due to inadequate separation between the ramp terminus points and adjacent intersections, particularly on the west side of the freeway. The 1990 NOT project will improve conditions, but the long-term solution must include significant alterations, such as major rerouting of S.W. 72nd Avenue and S.W. Bridgeport Road, to increase the distance between this intersection and the ramp terminus and to remove one leg of the intersection, if possible. NOT has preliminarily reviewed such options, but no definitive study or funding has been established. This situation is a regional problem, exacerbated by the GI Joe's/Safeway and Costco projects approved by the City of Tualatin and by Tri-Met Park and Ride Center. Development of the site under either of the commercial scenarios will result in an increase in total traffic in the interchange area when compared to industrial development. However, the retail project would divert left turn movements northward on S.W. 72nd Avenue, which would improve stacking conditions at the intersection of S.W. 72nd Avenue and S.W. Jean Road. Therefore, although total volumes would increase, the intersection's performance would likely improve. Therefore, the development of this site under any of the alternate scenarios can be accomplished with the following: 1. Right-of-way dedication for the ultimate street width. 2. Frontage improvement for the ultimate street section. 3. Access location based upon the length of the left turn stacking lane in S.W. 72nd Avenue and the future location of the S.W. Durham Road connection. 90-03\90106\06tal.ksw . 11 - i' 44; ;ql,:i MARKET RESEARCH SERVICE Rezone Bingham Property for Speiker Partners NEC of SW. Jean Road and SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon Prepared For: Mr. Lans Stout Planning and Business Department 0690 SW Bancroft Street Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 Prepared By: PALMER, GROTH & PIETKA John D. Ingle Director, Economic and Market Research 50 SW Pine Street, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon 97204 Telephone: (503) 226-0983 112 W. 11th Street, Suite 250 1201 Western Avenue, Suite 504 Vancouver, Washington 98660 Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone: (206) 6994844 Telephone: (206) 343-7477 ( 155 108th Avenue NE, Suite 605 1750 Howe Avenue, Suite 250 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Sacramento, California 95825 Telephone: (206) 455-4965 Telephone: (916) 641-2206 s a ■ ELMarch 15, 1990 Mr. Lans Stout Planning and Business Development Mackenzie/Saito & Associates, P.C. 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 RE: BINGHAM ZONE CHANGE Dear Lans: I am pleased to submit the enclosed report on existing market conditions, availability and location of neighboring industrial and general commercial land, and the suitability i of the Bingham property for general commercial uses. It is further understood this documentation will be used as part of your presentation to the Tigard City Council on the pending zone change. The subject property is located at the intersection of S.W. Jean Road and S.W. 72nd Avenue in Tigard, Oregon. Site amenities include immediate access to and from Interstate 5 and, exceptional frontage/exposure to the interstate on the site's eastern boundary. The 6.6-acre site is currently zoned for light industrial uses in the city of Tigard, Oregon. Palmer, Groth & Pietka examined a variety of economic and market issues and offer the following conclusions: With the exception of the subject property, it is difficult to find unencumbered industrial or C-G land in Tigard over 6.0-acres in size. Existing C-G land is found in a small isolated pocket near Highway 217 and Pacific Highway below road grade. This concentration of land does not service the retail needs of businesses and residents along Interstate 5 near the Bingham property. - A review of existing retail space indicates that only one project is situated on the westside of Interstate 5 between Highway 217 and Nyberg Road in Tualatin. - Emerging development trends in the immediate environs of the Bingham property suggest a shift away from industrial to predominately destination retail and highway-related commercial uses. Mr. Lams Stout -2- March 15, 1990 Land improvement patterns within close proximity of neighboring interchanges have attracted the highest and best use (office and commercial) to off-set premium land values. Industrial development of the Bingham property is difficult to market because of its isolation from other established activity nodes, the possibility of being overshadowed by activity planned for the Pacific Corporate Park and, the land value attached to the property. The indicated value analysis recommends the type of use that will generate the greatest future benefits possible from the property. Palmer, Groth & Pietka evaluated the value potential of the Bingham property by various land use scenarios and land price options. Based on existing land values and marketability issues, industrial development is not economically feasible. The highest and best use of the property is general commercial assuming a zone change is approved. In summary, rezoning the Bingham property will have little impact on Tigard's current inventory of industrial land and will facilitate development of the site and, enhance the city's tax base more rapidly than otherwise possible. The existing industrial zone is not appropriate for the site based on the needs of area residents and businesses, opportunities and limitations indicated by current market conditions and, accepted land use planning practices. If you have any questions regarding this analysis, please feel free to contact me. Respectfully submitted, PALM ER, GROTH & PIETKA, John . Ingle, Director Economic and Market Research JDI/bjm I. INTRODUCTION This report is being submitted as part of a proposal to amend the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan and to change the City Zoning Map, for a 6.6-acre parcel of land on S.W. 72nd Avenue near S.W. Lower Boones Ferry Road. The property is tax lot 1700 on map 2S1-13AD. The proposal will change the Comprehensive Plan designation from "Industrial" to "Commercial" and the zoning from "I-L" to "C-G". Mackenzie/Saito & Associates have been retained by Stuart Bingham (Owner/Applicant), and Spieker Partners (Developer) to rezone the property for retail commercial use. Approval of this zone change could likely result in development of an estimated 4.0 acres for general commercial uses, and about 25 acres of the site for a hotel. The applicant notes that hotels are allowed in the existing IP zone as a Conditional Use and could be applied without a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. If the hotel were allowed in this matter, however, the remaining 4.0± acre site would be too small for most development under either IL or IP zoning. Palmer, Groth & Pietka (PG&P) will assist in this effort by providing research and analysis on the need for the zone change. The enclosed report documents existing market conditions, availability and location of neighboring light industrial and general commercial land, and the suitability of the subject parcel for general commercial uses. YI. SITE DESCRIPTION The Bingham property is located near the interchange of S.W. Jean Road and Interstate 5 in Tigard, Oregon. Site amenities include immediate access to and from the interstate system and, exceptional frontage and exposure to other neighboring traffic routes. The site is bounded on the west by S.W. 72nd Avenue, on the east by Interstate 5, on the North by Oregon Business Park (Building 16 - Western Tool), and on the south by property owned by the State Department of Transportation and proposed for a future park and ride. The 6.6 acre parcel is generally flat, slightly below the grade of the freeway allowing excellent exposure to passing motorists. The site's exceptional location is ideally suited for retail commercial use. Public water to the site is available from a 12-inch line in S.W. 72nd Avenue through the Tigard Water District. Sanitary sewer and storm runoff can be adequately handled by existing public services. Police, fire and municipal services are also provided by the City of Tigard. Neighboring uses include the Oregon Business Park and other industrial uses along Bridgeport Road and SW Upper Boones Ferry Road. Commercial retail uses are approximately a quarter-mile south of the site along SW 72nd Avenue i 6 p®NTLAND RoeOLITAN ~AUVI Is MET v nco>s~ r M... AREA Oc'fo'Spg111CSO F a a W~t10u~1 MSiA t) ~,~...r-•• yuu + Sk -'+J ter.., 6 n s \ ton t°ma,~ $ !S a0 o utdale e Ott Ptains 30 m ~ CU e~~ + cosh et Rndy ~ 4 ~ ' ce a ~{jllS r r Hi S, Slo c 10 e FoT st SCOT[ gotina e plaha av A 2v pa esc s ~,n R ~ tlwaukl w , Gpk 212 Sand CIIOVe 4rr e 1. ove ackam s 211 iia[d G[ ~ Clack z~ stn + C[cek 43 tadstone ~ Est cst LiM Tuata ' n ,ty a h,~ 4 re o,Wood L M Mkt ~ star-saw 6 ~ Be Creek 19 Wit son rs Newbor 4 Canby IL ~y r ation 0al 1'.~Inua, t ~tu~h. pirtka ma Sleflen > rl i ti~.Ir3!L.'iY t tau T I ' 1 i ® I SW JEAN RD i i KENNY-ST' i sy zI /9 s N ~ l T4v C~ ~ • WN T -j~ I i 'almer, Groth, Pietka and Steffen UNeighborhood Map J and Lower Boones Ferry Road. Existing retail uses in the area include the Shilo Inn Hotel, Best Western Tualatin Inn, Arco and Texaco gasoline stations, North's . Chuck Wagon, Koon Lok and the Pig-N-Pancake restaurants. The Bingham property is located roughly 10.0 miles south of downtown Portland. Distances to other major activity centers are described below: Destination Distance Downtown Portland 10.0 miles Highway 217 Interchange 1.0 miles Interstate 205 Interchange 2.5 miles Tigard CBD 3.0 miles Tualatin CBD 1.5 miles Salem 35.0 miles III. RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS The Bingham property is located in Washington County, which along with the counties of Clackamas, Multnomah and Yamhill in Oregon and Clark County in Washington (state), forms the Portland Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA). Future development of the subject property is significantly influenced by growth trends emanating from this larger regional economy. While an analysis of the region's economic base is beyond the scope of this assignment, a review of several key indicators will clarify the urgency in rezoning and developing the ( Bingham property. A. Summary of Regional Economic Indicators Total wage & salary employment in the Portland CMSA has increased from 390,210 in 1970 to 676,900 by year-end 1989. Jobs were added at an average annual rate of 15,100 workers over the 19-year period resulting in a compound growth rate of 2.9%. The majority of this new employment growth, however, resulted within the last five years. The Portland region is still rebounding from the recession of the early-1980's. During this recession, Portland witnessed a significant out-migration of residents in response to a slow-down in new job formations. The first signs that Portland was emerging from the recession occurred during 1984 when an estimated 25,520 wage & salary jobs were added over the previous years total. Last year (1989), it is estimated that 26,200 jobs were added locally, reflecting signs of continued stability in the region's economy. The economy is in its sixth year of recovery and is still expanding, although at a slightly lower rate than in recent years. This continued expansion occurred despite slower overall growth last year, uncertainty in the timber supply situation, growing labor shortages and, more workers on strike in 1989 than at any time since 1978. The unemployment rate in the metropolitan Portland area has remained in the 5-6 percentile range for the last three years. Economist generally assume that an unemployment rate between 3 and 6 percent is necessary to allow employers adequate choice in the workplace. Portland's current 4S% unemployment rate is at the lowest level of the decade. With the unemployment rate in the 4-6 percentile range, forecasts for 1990 suggest that an additional growth of 25-30,000 jobs are probable. Continued employment growth over the near term between 1 and 2 percent per annum can be expected, barring a severe national recession or international catastrophe. Finally, the strength of Portland's economy has increased migration into the region from less than 5,000 per year from 1983 through 1986 to 18,000 in 1988. In the March (1989) edition of Oregon Economic Indicators, First Interstate Bank concluded that this surge in net-migation in 1988 to over 1 percent of the existing population, was similar to the rate experienced by California during the last decade. Note figures for 1989 are unavailable. The region's expanding economy is encouraging record levels of new construction and increasing demands for developable land. In 1990, Grubb & Ellis expects a 10% increase in the value of Portland land transactions, which totalled $300 million last year alone. Tigard's ability to compete in this ever changing marketplace will depend on the location and inventory of vacant/available land. B. Vacant/Available Land Inventory in Site Vicinity (Tigard) The maintenance of an efficient land market is important because it allows the Tigard real estate market to remain competitive in the Portland regional economy by servicing the needs of new businesses and residents. If new or expanding firms have no choice of sites on which to locate, then economic development goals remain unfulfilled and the community's competitive edge in the marketplace is restricted. PG&P asked Tigard's Community Development Department for a current inventory of industrial and general commercial land that was vacant and available for development. Other research parameters included parcels larger than 6.0 acres and within the general vicinity of the Bingham property. Property owners were contacted to verify location, development intent and, availability to outside parties. PG&P inspected each property and summarized field notes in Table B (see Appendix). { i The city has an inventory of 21.52 acres of general commercial and 81.85 acres of industrial land vacant and available for development. In general, two of the five (19.46 acres) industrial parcels are located and controlled by existing business park developers and assumed unavailable (Koll and PacTrust/Oregon Business Park). The remaining three parcels (6239 acres) are located in a heavy industrial/manufacturing area with limited visibility and a variety of development constraints including preservation of existing wetlands, adjacency to single family residential activity, and obtaining right-of-way permits to cross railroad lines to gain site access. Two of the remaining three sites are controlled by FWF Investment Company/Coe Manufacturing, a neighboring tenant on an adjacent parcel. The net-result is that vacant and available industrial land in Tigard is practically nonexistent. It is also difficult to find unencumbered C-G land in Tigard over 6.0-acres in size. Existing C-G land is found in a small isolated pocket near Highway 217 and Pacific Highway a considerable distance below road grade. One of the three parcels are owned by the Robert Randall Company, a development company specializing in multi-family apartment construction. The remaining two sites are traversed by Fanno Creek and have no existing access or public services. In summary, the existing concentration of C-G land does not service the retail needs of businesses and residents along Interstate 5 near the Bingham property. Tigard's industrial land inventory remains troublesome to develop. Retaining an industrial zone on the 6.6 acre subject property will not adequately compensate the community for this apparent lack of available land. More importantly, emerging development trends in the area suggest that general commercial uses on the Bingham property represent the highest and best use, will satisfy immediate public need and, better responds to changes in the local marketplace. C. Emerging Development Trends The vicinity of the site has changed substantially since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation of the Bingham property. PG&P compiled a list of competitive industrial and retail projects in the immediate vicinity of the property. Major conclusions from subsequent analysis of this data are provided below. 1. Retail Market Seven retail centers are located in the vicinity of the Bingham property including three strip centers (123,500 sq. ft.), one community center (187,000 isq. ft.), one specialty center (60,000), and finally, two neighborhood centers (278,300 sq. ft.). This information is summarized in Table C (appendix) and ( illustrated on an area map. i. A review of existing retail space indicates that only one project is situated on the westside of Interstate 5 between Highway 217 and Nyberg Road in Tualatin. The overall vacancy rate of 1.8% is very indicative of the success that retailers have found and maintain in the local area. The area's low vacancy rate, above market lease rates ($8-$14 sq. ft.) and, access to developing employment and residential centers will further induce retail development in the area. Retail services proposed for the Pacific Corporate Center, for example, should service the needs of businesses in the Oregon Business Park environment while leaving adequate household support for other retail centers. Note that planned retail uses will be a considerable distance from the Bonita Road exit and less likely to draw passing vehicle traffic into and through this heavily developed area. The area immediately adjacent to the Bingham property is under-going extensive (re)development pressure which will continue to benefit the future tax base of the City of Tualatin unless the Bingham property is rezoned. Recent active and proposed development in this area indicate a shift from industrial uses to predominately highway-related commercial and destination retail uses. As noted earlier, a variety of highway-related commercial uses are located .25 miles south of the Bingham property along S.W. 72nd Avenue. The existing Arco station is considering plans to expand the facility to include an AM/PM Mini Mart while an adjacent vacant gas station will eventually reopen as a tire store. Other new investment in the immediate area include buildings for Costco Wholesale (open), Director's Furniture and Carpet, and Recreational Equipment Incorporated (REI). The Director's project recently finished the building pad for this 2.5 acre site with a final completion date set for September, 1990. REI has recently submitted site plans to the City of Tualatin for a 25-30,000 square foot building on a 2.5 acre parcel off Bridgeport Road. Other available properties adjacent to REI are back on the market to take advantage of this retailer's tremendous drawing power. Bridgeport Road is being improved to handle additional traffic and a new signal is planned at the intersection of Upper Boones Ferry Road. The Bingham property is virtually at the front door of this retail activity. This emerging trend combined with growth patterns adjacent to neighboring interchanges all point to increasing pressure to rezone the site for general commercial uses. A windshield survey of interchanges along Interstate 5 and State Highway 217 reveal some interesting conclusions. 2. Interchange Land Use Patterns A property's land value is determined by a number of factors including site exposure, access, development constraints and zoning approval. Land adjacent to interchange improvements extract a higher value by virtue of their exposure to thousands of passing motorists. Consequently, the real estate use programmed for the site must produce a high enough income to cover exorbitant land costs. The impact of land costs and development alternatives for the Bingham site are evaluated later but clearly, retail uses produce the highest yield when compared to varying land costs. This conclusion is particularly evident from the number and type of users that have located next to Interstate 5 and Highway 217 in recent years. Burlington's Cascade Plaza, Silo, and the Good Samaritan Immediate Care Medical Mall all occupy land on the westside of Highway 217. The Highway 217/Interstate 5 interchange has attracted extensive commercial development along Bangy Road (Kruse Meadows Commercial Center) and Kruse Way (Howard Johnson Suites Hotel and Standford Restaurant). Land use development pattern along Interstate 5 also reflect a predominately commercial nature with such additions as Gevurtz Contemporary Furniture, Ethan Allen Georgetown Manor and Gallery, Parker Furniture Design Center, and South Lake Center. The premium value of interstate frontage has forced less intensive uses to seek inexpensive ground further south in the Wilsonville area. A review of the area's industrial market provides a clear example. 3. Industrial Market The Portland area has an estimated 33.9 million square feet of developed space available for lease. The industrial market absorbed 2.3 million square feet of space last year after a record performance of 2.1 million square feet in 1988. In-state expansion and relocations from out-of-state helped to sustain this strong demand. In addition, industrial employment increased by 1.7% last year due to a stronger market in primary metals, machinery, electrical equipment manufacturing and supplies. Portland's industrial vacancy rate dropped 1.8 percentage points in 1989 to 15.7%. Lease rates held firm last year ranging from $21 to 5.28 per square foot on the shell and $.45 to 5.55 for office space. The combination of declining vacancy and stabilizing lease rates have also fueled a stronger speculative construction market. The Bingham property is located in the Southwest submarket. This industrial market experienced the greatest amount of speculative development in 1989 of any location in the metropolitan region. An estimated 37 percent of Portland's 1.3 million square feet of new construction occurred in the Southwest. Approximately 1.5 million square feet of space is currently under construction or proposed (1990) in metro Portland. Of this total, about 52 percent or 783,300 square feet is located in the Southwest. New industrial activity in the Southwest is generally confined to areas within Beaverton and Wilsonville. In recent years, however, industrial activity has shifted from the Sunset Corridor to the Tualatin/Wilsonville market to take advantage of cheaper land cost, abundant and developable land, and a corporate neighborhood that includes Payless Drug, G.I. Joe's, Tektronix, and Nike. Developers such as Trammell Crow, Hillman Properties Northwest, and Scherzer Partners followed this inevitable path of growth and delivered service, manufacturing, and large high-cube distribution space. During this process, the subject property was bypassed because land costs were too high and, to some extent, the site too small to accommodate emerging growth opportunities. Table D (appendix) lists an inventory of business parks located in the immediate area. Based on our research, none of the surveyed projects were developed on ground less than 7.0 acres in size. The only exception is a small flex project of 56,800 square feet on 43 acres under construction at SW Bridgeport Road and Upper Boones Ferry Road by Sundance Development Company. Tenants for the two buildings will probably include office and service firms due to the percent of office space being constructed. Oregon Business Park and Pacific Corporate Center are located immediately north of the site along Interstate 5. Each project will deliver new space during 1990 including two buildings and 56,300 square feet in Oregon Business Park III and, two buildings and 100,000 square feet in the Pacific Corporate Center. A new hotel and retail space are also planned for the Pacific Corporate Center. Development of the Pacific Corporate Center is occurring on ground purchased several years ago for an estimated $3.50 a square foot. As shown in the following section, if the land value reflected current market rates, industrial space would become more difficult to develop because the potential lease income will not off-set land costs. Again, retail users are willing to absorb higher land values and lease rates because superior access and exposure will ensure a larger market share of local retail dollar support. In summary, industrial development of the Bingham property will be difficult to market because of the sites isolation from other established activity nodes, the possibility of being overshadowed by activity planned for the Pacific Corporate Center and the value attached to the property. IV. INDICATED VALUE POTENTIAL AND SUMMARY This section examines the potential income producing value of the Bingham - property based on three development scenarios and various land values. The development scenarios include traditional industrial space (2001o office), flex space with 40 percent office and, general commercial space. Land value calculations range from $3 to $6 per square foot. Other development assumptions including lease rates and gross building area were derived from other competitive projects surveyed in the area. This information and comparable land sale transactions are attached to the Appendix. The methodology used in this analysis is summarized in Table F and, actual dollar figures and assumptions listed in Tables F-1 through F-3 based on a land value of $4/square foot. The indicated value analysis recommends the type of use that will generate the greatest future benefits possible from the property. This evaluation is based on the principle that the value of the property is related to the lands physical characteristics and, that no one would pay more for the improved space than it would cost to do so on a comparable site. The following is a summary of the indicated value potential by land use scenario and land price option for the Bingham property. The asking price for the land could not be disclosed but local brokers suggest a value in excess of $6.00 a square foot is probable. SUMMARY OF INDICATED VALUE POTENTIAL BY LAND USE SCENARIO AND LAND PRICE OPTIONS, BINGHAM PROPERTY Indicated Value Potential 2 S/SF Land Use Scenario 53.00 54.00 S5.00 56.00 Industrial (Standard) Scenario (524,757) ($312,257) ($599,757) (5887,257) Industrial (Flex) Scenario $1,127,185 $09,685 $552,185 $264,685 General Commercial Scenario' S5,114,346 54,826,846 54,539,346 $4,251,846 Notes: SF = Square Feet. Industrial (Standard) Scenario assumes .32 coverage and 20% office build-out. Industrial (Flex) Scenario assumes .30 coverage and 40% office build-out. General Commercial Scenario assumes .25 coverage. See Tables F1-3 in Apperdix. Source: Property Income Value Calculations; Palmer, Groth 8 Pietka As shown, our analysis indicates that industrial development on the Bingham property is not economically feasible based on existing land values and marketability issues. The highest and best use of the property is general commercial assuming a zone change is approved. In summary, rezoning the Bingham property will have little impact on Tigard's current inventory of industrial land and will facilitate development of the site and, enhance the city's tax base more rapidly than otherwise possible. The existing industrial zone is not appropriate for the site based on the needs of area residents } and businesses, opportunities and limitations indicated by current market conditions and, accepted land use planning practices. t. i APPENDIX i _ Y.Y r TABLE A: SELECTED ECONOMIC INDICATORS FOR THE PORTLAND LMA. 1970-1989 Wage b Portland CPI-U Civilian Salary Unemployment Non- (Annual Average Year Labor Force --Employment Rate Manufacturing Manufacturing Change) 1970 445.300 390,210 6.4% 88,600 301.610 1979 615,690 570.620 5.4% 120,640 449,980 13.6% 1980 663.650 572,820 6.3% 119.020 453.800 13.2% 1981 688.770 562.920 8.0% 112,630 450.290 8.9% 1982 692.500 537,280 0.2% 103.590 433.690 3.2% 1983 697.500 533.280 10.1% 99.010 434.270 1.1% 1984 707.350 558,800 9.9% 106.950 451.850 3.7% 1985 716,100 575.900 7.6% 107,300 468.600 3.8% 1986 712,500 590,150 7.4% 104.780 485.370 1.4% 1987 740.600 620.590 5.7% 109.620 510.970 2.S% 1988 755,100 650.680 4.9% 114.960 535,720 3.4% 1989 777.400 676.870 4.5% 117.220 559,650 5.4% Average Annual Change Number/Percent 1970-1989 17.480 15,090 11510 13,580 (19 Years) 3.0% 2.9% 1.5% 3.3% 1979-1989 16.170 10.630 (340) 10.970 (10 Years) 2.4% 1.7% -0.3% 2.2% l 1984-1989 14.010 23,610 2.050 21.560 ( 5 Years) 1.9% 3.9% 1.9% 4.4% 1986-1989 21.630 28,910 4.150 24,760 ( 3 Years) 2.9% 4.7% 3.8% 4.9% 1988-1989 22.300 26,190 2,260 23,930 ( 1 Year) 3.0% 4.0% 2.0% 4.5% Notes: Portland LMA: Includes Clackamas. Multnomah. Washington and Yamhill Counties in Oregon; and Clark County, Washington. Source: State of Oregon. Employment Division; Washington State. Employment & Security Division; METRO Data Resource Center; and Palmer. Groth & Pietka. TABLE B: EVALUATION OF SITE AREA VACANT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL LANDS INVENTORY, CITY OF TIGARD Size Site Location Zoning Status (Acres) Access and Visibility Comments 1. NWC SW 72nd Avenue C-G Vacant/Available 6.01 Poor Property owner: G. Martin. Unable to contact owner. and Hermosa Way No access to interior of site. Single family Tigard, Oregon bordering most of site. Site slopes from south (2sl 0 1 BA 101) to north and drains into Fanno Creek. Access most likely from 72nd avenue with public financial assistance. Utility service currently to site perimeter. 2. SWC Pacific Highway C-G Vacant/Available 5.94 Good-Average Property owner: New West Federal Savings 6 Loan and Proposed Dartmouth (Stockton, CA.). Property represented by Caldwell Banker. Road Extension Located considerable distance below road grade. Tigard, Oregon Currently poor access from Pacific Highway but good (lsl 36 CD 2200) exposure from 217. Significant in-fill needed to allow development adequate street exposure and maximum use of land acreage. 3. Near SEC Pacific Highway C-G Vacant/Available 9.47 Fair Property owner: Robert Randall Company. No and Proposed Dartmouth Road development plant to date. Wetlands and Fanno Creek Extention divide property into halfs which makes development Tigard. Oregon more difficult. (131 36 CD 2000) 4. SEC of SW Hunziker I-L Vacant/Available 24.37 Good Property owner: FWF Investment Company Property located and SW 79th Avenue (approx.) in heavy/older industrial area. Immediate access Tigard, Oregon to SW Hunziker Road from site. Property owner has (2s1 O1 00 B00) cleared under-bush and is planting grass seed. Plans to develop storage for nearby Coe Manufacturing. 5. South of Southern Pacific R.R. I-L Vacant/Available 26.32 Poor Property owner: FWF Investment Company located immediately and North of SW Tech Center west of Southwest Commerce Center and adjoins several Drive (approx.) residential neighborhoods. Future access and development Tigard, Oregon of site contingent upon seeking approval for railroad (2s1 O1 00 1200) crossing at SW Tech Center Drive. Extension of streets through residential neighborhood seems unlikely. Significant wetlands and vegetation on site may hinder full development potent lal. 6. South of SW Tech Center I-L Vacant/Available 11.70 Poor Property owner: Iwan Starkweather Trust. For comments Drive and West of Southern see above. Pacific R.R. Tigard, Oregon (lsl 01 00 1400) 7. Koll Business Center I-L Vacant/Not Available* 10.11 Good Property owner: Koll Company. *Site most likely SW Nimbus Avenue Drive to be developed by Koll for future business park expansion and Old Scholls Ferry Road or compatible user. Property significantly encumbered by Tigard. Oregon flood plain. (Isl 34 AB 6301) B. Oregon Industrial Park I-L Vacant/Not Available* 9.35 Good Property owner: PacTrust. *Site to be developed by SW 72nd Avenue and PacTrust for future business park expansion or compatible Boones Ferry Road user. Land typically for lease only. Currently providing Tigard, Oregon fill to site and plan to extend SW Durham Road into site (2si 12 DD 100) via PacTrust Business Center. Source: City of Tigard, Community Development Department: and Palmer, Groth 6 Pietka. johnli l { Q~ at ~ ~ i 1 tw, c •;r • t; 3 (^t ' ~ ' -'l►ypf[O ~ ~tYrtMS QOM a S 1 1 36 i ~ s ~q 1 .tRR • ` fit q tw ` •rowo :a .v. 1 _ ap._ ~w ttvt~w~! O~tV. ,y w • Sw ' o MEN?~ 1 y`~ \ 1e 1 tw 4 ••p w via o -rI I-P so S.W. -UR ,w 1 trR ccr*cR °t"vc w. rccw A Steffen pietka and troth, tilmer. TABLE C: INVENTORY OF SELECTED RETAIL CENTERS, INTERSTATE 5 SOUTH, 1990 Year Vacant Vacancy Rental Name/Location/Type --Built GLA (SF) Space (SF) Rate Rate (SF) Tenants (Anchors) 1. Kruse Meadows Commercial Center 1989 54.000 4,200 7.8% $14.00 Sizzlers, Portland Teacher's Credit Union, SW Bangy/Bonita Road Alpha Computers. Lake Oswego Type: Strip 2. Meridian Square 6400 Lower Boones Ferry Road 1986 123,900 0 0.0% 13.00 G.I. Joe's and Safeway Tualatin Type: Neighborhood 3. South Lake Center 1986 45,200 0 0.0% 14.00 Fuddrucker's, First Interstate Bank and 17815 SW 65th Avenue J.K. Gill. Tualatin Type: Strip 4. Carmen Center 1985 24,300 1,800 7.4% 8.00 K.S's Mart, Protectron One, and 15983 SW Carmen Domino's Pizza. Tigard Type: Strip 5. Tualatin Convenience Center 1974 154,400 1,170 0.8% 12.00 K-Mart, Safeway and Volume Shoes. 7900 SW Nyberg Road Tualatin 6. Fred Meyer 1980 187,000 Fred Meyer 19200 SW Martinazzi Tualatin Type: Community 7 Martinazzi Square 1986 60,000 4,700 7.8% 12.00 Taco Bell and Izzy's Pizza. 19455 SW Martinazzi Tualatin Type: Specialty TOTAL/WEIGHTED AVERAGE 648,800 11,870 1.8% $12.50 Notes: 6LA - Gross Leasable Area SF - Square Feet SOURCE: Shopping Center Guide, Grubb 6 Ellis; Site Inspection/Telephone Verification, Palmer, Groth 6 Pietka. Johnrc SELECTED b ~p PORTLAND Ypt1CWYM C B~pilY t RAETRQP®LITAN S,,,VI IS AREA BY GEO GRAPN1C5gi ` t s Washooo Mile* CUMBIA N SA imam', ~~~yS' y Bns l,t tp^rDa. y 30 ton O an Ott Flail' y F .t utdalc p CAS ~ 47 out pia resh ao i ~ and w y{11t t wCcda i - 0 Slo c t0 Stott For Gi Aloha gorini eav no ,e to M7 ilwwkic pe etc t 1t9 CIIQVt err wsw pak Z12 Sand i and a Grove w ac amt Ztt Zt0 ® Clack 13t stop t Fagle Creek q N u 413 ladttoric A ti Tuala pctt Linn ;ty R cf te$0 t 47 y*t t ; +r erwood rs staCada 6 Bfek 19 Wilton its Nowbcr Canby IL Palmvt. Gn,dt, p~rika an,l SµSicn f TABLE D: CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED INDUSTRIAL PARKS IN THE INTERSTATE 5 SOUTH CORRIDOR, 1990 (JANUARY) 1/ Number of Total Percent Date Buildings/ Leasable/Vacant Vacancy Office Lease Rates Types of Uses No. Name/Location Compl. Acres (Square Feet) Rate Build-out (Whse./Office) Building Features/Comments 1. Koll Commerce Center-South 1987- 4 bldgs. 108,000/23,460 22.0% 20-40% $0.30-0.48 Light assembly, office-services and distribution. I-5/Stafford Rd. Interchange 1988 $0.64-0.75 Project landscaping at 24% of land area. Tualatin individual tenant signage, recessed private Land Price: NFS entries, on-grade and dock-high loading and Coverage Ratio: .350 parking at 4:1,000 SF. 2. Koll Business Center 1975 11 bldgs. 187,800/51,000 27.2% 20-100% $0.28-0.36 Phase I: office/industrial SW Nimbus Ave. Drive/ (Phase I) 44 acres (Phase I) $0.67-(P-II) Phase 11: single tenant, office, research and Old Scholls Ferry Road 1987 89,200/26,000 29.1% $13.50 T.I. light assembly. Multi-tenant office/industrial Tigard (Phase II) (Phase II) center. Fully landscaped grounds, campus atmophere land Price: NFS with common area in central park featuring pond Coverage Ratio: .329 gazebo and deck. 3. Lake Oswego Commerce Center 1977 7 bldgs, 210,000/18,200 9.0% 38-39% $0.23-0.29 light assembly, distribution and manufacturing. 6024 SW Jean Road 15 acres $0.45-0.50 Concrete tilt-up panels with clear glass panes. Lake Oswego Buildings with dock-high provide parking Land Price: NFS at 3:1,000 SF. Minimum landscaping and Coverage Ratio: .320 project/building amenities. 4. Oregon Business Park I-I1I 1982 18 bldgs. 942,700-158,800 18.8% 10-100% $0.23-0.40 Light assembly, distribution, sales/office. I-5/SW Upper Boones Ferry Road 60 acres $0.50-0.60 Multi-tenant office/industrial center. Minimum Tigard. Oregon landscaping, no project amenities. Grade-level Land Price: $3.50 loading and 14 foot ceiling clear heights. Coverage Ratio: .360 Parking very restrictive at 2.5:1,000 SF. Individual tenant stgnage above doors. 5. Intel Industrial Park 1982- 6 bldgs. 189,000-33,750 17.9% 10-20% $0.22-0.28 Distribution, research and development, manufacturi. Southwest 90th Court 1985 20 acres $0.45-0.55 Parking ratio estimated at 2.0:1,000 SF. No Tualatin, Oregon 1988 1 bldg. significant project amenities or featur-es. Land Price: $2.75-2.85 2 acres Coverage Ratio: .360 PARKS SELECTED t E ORTLAN® P METROOLITAN :~UYI nco»v r ; y REA 9YGE0•GRNpNICSo t ~i 4 I( M ~ ~ S W~~Uwt q_`___ M ti uS MBIA S fk MINMn Aifp°ll fi n t0mbar Slit' 6 on t lsins ton 90 0 utdale '0 L " Gt6 •1 R° out TCSh a ndY f11 ~ CEda Po+ N 11 b r tii s F 4 r w S1o a to Qot 6% a moha scoff gotins au Beav rto 20 tP R c.~ itwsuki pp sscus Sa 214 pak 212 SoAd +rr i8atd c Gsove psw , ac *m"' ` 211 aw L-- ~ acfc~~• a~ stop Ea8 Meek ,s ►adstone to iau ~ • n Est L TU a reBo ity fl sf . ~T 97rF x. etwood 4fr.r SlaCadB 6 eck deck 14 vri►soo it4 rjCWbet Canby wtt and Steffen f ietka i atmcr. ~;iuth. CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED INDUSTRIAL PARKS (Continued) 6. PacTrust Business Center 1984- 7 bldgs. 223,880-41,800 18.7% 10-100% $0.30-0,35 Manufacturing, research and development and office. SW Upper Boones Ferry Road/ 1987 19 acres $0.55-0.62 uses. Addition Phase planned at end of SW Durham Road SW Durham Road. Tigard Land Price: NFS Coverage Ratio: .271 7. South Center 1985- 3 bldgs. 170,000-19,100 11.2% 40-100% $8.90-10.50 South Center designed as "flex" space, although I-5 North of Nyberg Road 1988 36 acres buildings have been leased to office users Tualatin (PGE, Digital, Allstate Insurance, and Colonial Land Price: NFS Pacific Leasing). Coverage Ratio: .300 8. Bridgeport Woods Business Park 1988 3 bldgs. 67,400-0 0.0% 10-40% $0.27-0.29 Distribution, light assembly, office and services. SW Boones Ferry Road/ 7 acres $0.50-0.55 Primarily grade-level loading with limited Bridgeport Road/ dock-high. Durham Road Land Price: $2.95 Coverage Ratio: .220 9. Tualatin Business Center 18 II 1981- 3 bldgs. 400,400-32,000 8.0% 10-30% $0.26-0.28 Distribution and manufacturing. Tenants include 18343 SW Lower Boones Ferry Road 1988 14 acres $0.45-0.50 Nally's Fine Foods, Bonair August Systems, and Tualatin Precision Plastics, Inc.. Land Price: NFS Coverage Ratio: NA Notes: inventory list compiled with assistance from Cushman 6 Wakefield; Norris, Beggs $ Simpson; Grubb b Ellis. Data on project operating characteristics - PG&P NFS - Not For Sale NA ■ Information Not Available SOURCE: Palmer, Grath b Pietka johnl5 TABLE E: LAND SALES TABULATION CHART No. Location Date Sales Price Size/SF Price/SF Zoning Utilities Comments 1. Intel Industrial Park 8/88 $ 195,967 71,000 $ 2.76 Indus. All Available Level. generally rectangular corner site since SEC of Tuulatin-Sherwood Cash improved with a 25.500 SF m,iltitenant distribution Road and SW 90th Court facility. Tualatin, Oregon 2. Intel Industrial Park 8/88 156,400 54,900 2.85 Indus. All Available Level. Irregular shaped site purchased for the con- SWC of Tualatin-Sherwood Cash struction of a fire substation. Road and SW 90th Court Tualatin, Oregon 3. 11100 SW Avery Street 6/89 866,160 313,600 2.76 MG All Available Level, irregular shaped site currently being improved Tualatin, Oregon Cash with a distribution warehouse for Coca-Cola. 4. Tualatin Commerce Center 12/89 N/A 41,400- 2.65- MG All Available Asking price for industrial sites within the Tualatin SW Avery Court 130,200 2.95 Commerce Center. There is also a ;.15/SF LID Tualatin, Oregon Asking surcharge. 5. SEC of SW Bridgeport Road and 9/87 654,075 221,720 2.95 Indus. All Available Level corner site being improved with a 67,421 SF SW Upper Boones Ferry Road business park known as Bridgeport Woods. Tualatin, Oregon 6. 18175 SW Tualatin Road 6/87 129,634 41,817 3.10 MG All Available Level, rectangular site located Si3ota Industrial Tualatin, Oregon Park. Site has since been improved with an office/warehouse facility. 7. W. side of SW 72nd Avenue and 2/86 375,000 89,298 4.20 IP All Available Property consists of two adjoining tax lots purchased across from the intersection by PacTrust. The property is level, with with SW Upper Boones Ferry Road approximately 252 feet of frontage on SW 72nd Avenue Tigard, Oregon Excellent access to the Interstate 5 Freeway. B. NEC of SW 72nd Avenue and 10/85 395,000 109.771 3.60 IL All Available Level, triangular site with excellent exposure and SW Boones Ferry Road access to the 1-5 Freeway system. The site has Tigard, Oregon been improved with a good quality business park facility. The site is triangular shaped with good frontage on SW 72nd Avenue. 9. West side of SW Teton, 750 feet 5/87 244,950 100,188 2.44 MG All Available Level, rectangular site since improved with an south of Tualatin-Sherwood Road industrial manufacturing facility. Tualatin, Oregon SOURCE: Palmer, Groth & Pietka John.ls SALES LAND plow b r 3E . PWITLAND w„~,y« pt-STAN sAUVI is ~ ncou~ t „t.o METROP ,~S@ F A R EA BY GEO•~+RAPII M 4 lo\ a s Washougal MASS Mu. h ~C~aLUMB1A rV AitPoet _-Y B o s ~ Lt ton tOm~.. S ~ st ~ O otdate Ott [plains 3o p 9 ^ ~ Ct> eur * resh 4t c 24 µ a~dy ta+ b r eaa NI _ w s►o a 10 For S% t At SCOTT Boling t c Aloha o Beat rt 20 pa ascus a{~o R ►►waukic ~ 2t9 c0%, " w Nu 00 212 sand Mr igatd c Gtove ackaln s 21t ~ t C,ack,~~27► tadston ksgt, Crecy stop 13 ~ c ~ i est Linn R. V 1tY oy re8p° ty 41 ~r f t ctwood ~ Mrs stacada b BC vet teck to Wilson Its Newber CanbY W1L utd 5ttd(cn ('Moth, 1`it•tkd Palutt•t. -MENEM TABLE F: SUMMARY OF PROPERTY INCOME/COST CALCULATIONS Bingham Property 6.6-Acre Parcel S.W. 72nd Avenue near S.W. Lower Boones Ferry Road Tigard, Oregon Steb Description 1. Estimate building size - acreage * gross building area ratio or floor area ratio (GBA/FAR). 2. Building size (shell/office/retail) * lease rate/month * 12 months for annualized income. 3. Total Potential Gross Income (PGI) = results of Steps 1 and 2. 4. PGI minus vacancy factor = Effective Gross Income (EGI). 5. EGI less expenses for property management, reserves for replacements = Net Operating Income (NOI). 6. NOI divided by Capitalization Rate (Cap Rate) _ Preliminary Value. 7. Estimate Development Costs: a.) Land Acquisition - acreage (SF) * value. b.) Improvements - shell/office/retail GBA * value. c.) Site Improvements - acreage (SF) * value. 8. Establish Entrepreneurial Profit - percentage assumption * total development costs or PGI. 9. Final Income Potential - Preliminary Value (6) less development costs (7) and entrepreneurial profit (8). SF = square feet. Source: Palmer, Groth & Pietka. C_ TABLE F-1: PROPERTY INCOME VALUE - INDUSTRIAL (STANDARD) SCENARIO BINGHAM PROPERTY 6.6-ACRE PARCEL S.Y. 72ND AVENUE NEAR S.V. LOWER BOONES FERRY ROAD TIGARD. OREGON Warehouse Shall: 92.000 SF x $.30/Month x 12 $331,200 Office Area: 18.400 SF x $.55/North x 12 $121,440 Potential Gross Income: $452.640 Less: Vacancy (5%) $22.632 Effective Gross Income (EGI): $430,008 Less: Operating Expenses (NNN): $25,800 Professional Management (3% of EGI) $12.900 Reserves for Replacement (3% of EGI) $12,900 Net Operating Income: $404,208 Divided by: Capitalization Rate (9.75X) $4,145,718 Preliminary Value Potential: $4,145,718 Development Costs: $4,457,975 a) Land ($/SF): $4.00 $1.150,000 b) Shell Costs @ $22.00 SF $2,024,000 c) Office Build-out Cost @ $30.00 SF $552.000 d) Site Improvements @ $1.50 SF $431,250 e) Developer Profit (10% of Total: B-0) $300,725 Indicated Value Potential (Preliminary Value minus Costs): ($312,257) Notes: Gross Building Area: Acreage x SF x .32 Office Build-out: Assumes 20 percent. Source: Palmer. Groth 6 Pietka. S s TABLE F-2: PROPERTY INCOME VALUE - INDUSTRIAL (FLEX) SCENARIO BINGHAM PROPERTY 6.6-ACRE PARCEL S.V. 7200 AVENUE NEAP. S.Y. LONER 80ONES FERRY ROAD TIGARD. OREGON Flex Space: 86.300 SF x $.60/14onth x 12 $621,360 Potential Gross Income: $621,360 Less: Vacancy (5X) $31.068 Effective Gross Income (EGI): $590,292 Less: Operating Expenses (NNN): $35,418 Professional Management (3% of EGI) $17.709 Reserves for Replacement (3% of EGI) $17.709 Net Operating Income: $554.874 Divided by: Capitalization Rate (9.75X) $5.691.020 Preliminary Value Potential: $5.691.020 Development Costs: $4.851.335 a) Land ($/SF): $4.00 $1.150.000 b) Shell Costs @ $22.00 SF $1.898,600 c) Office Build-out Cost @ $30.00 SF $1.035,000 d) Site Improvements @ $1.50 SF $431,250 e) Developer Profit (10% of Total: 8-0) $336,485 Indicated Value Potential (Preliminary Value minus Costs): S839,685 - Notes: Gross Building Area: Acreage x SF x .30 Office Build-out: Assumes 40 percent. Source: Palmer. Grath & Pietka. TABLE F-3: PROPERTY INCOME VALUE - GENERAL COMMERCIAL SCENARIO BINGHAM PROPERTY 6.6-ACRE PARCEL S.W. 72ND AVENUE NEAR S.W. LOWER BOONES FERRY ROAD TIGARD, OREGON Retail Space: 71,900 SF x $1.16/14onth ($14.00/Yr) x 12 $1,006,594 Potential Gross Income: $1,006,594 Less: Vacancy (5X) $50,330 Effective Gross Income (EGI): $356,265 Less: Operating Expenses (NNN): $57,376 Professional Management (3% of EGI) $28,688 Reserves for Replacement (3X of EGI) $28,688 Net Operating Income: $898.889 Divided by: Capitalization Rate (9.75X) $9,219,371 C Preliminary Value Potential: $9,219,371 Development Costs: $4,392.525 a) Land ($/SF): $4.00 $1,150,000 b) In-Line Retail/Strip @ $35.00 SF $2,516,500 c) Site Improvements @ $1.50 SF $431.250 d) Developer Profit (10% of Total: B-C) $294,775 Indicated Value Potential (Preliminary Value minus Costs): $4,826.846 Notes: Gross Building Area: Acreage x SF x .25 Source: Palmer. Groth & Pietka. ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SPIEKER - BINGHAM PLAN/ZONE CHANGE Analysis of the S.W. 72nd Avenue S.W. Bridgeport Road Intersection June 1990 Project Number 190106.01 prepared by: Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated (MEI) 0690 S.W. Bancroft Street P.O. Box 69039 Portland, Oregon 97201-0039 503/224-9560 503/224-9570 GIN Irv~ #10505 9 r' '•i ~ O Y13, 0 ~`~n L Aar CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. EXISTING CONDITIONS III. STUDY PROCEDURE IV. ALTERNATIVES V. FUNDING VI. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE SPIEKER/BINGHAM ZONE CHANGE APPENDICES A. LIST OF STUDY PARTICIPANTS B. DIAGRAMS OF INTERSECTION ALTERNATIVES C. COST ESTIMATES D. CALCULATIONS INTRODUCTION Traffic considerations, and specifically the intersection of S.W. 72nd Avenue and S.W. Bridgeport Road, is a consideration with respect to a proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Zone Change in the City of Tigard. The site is located on S.W. 72nd Avenue north of S.W. Bridgeport Road. The proposed Plan/Zone change is from Industrial (I.L.) to General Commercial (G.C.). Initial review by the City and other jurisdictions indicated that additional studies would be appropriate to expand the first level of analysis accomplished by Mackenzie Engineering Incorporated (MEI) on behalf of the applicant. Therefore, the Planning Commission's consideration of the proposal was tabled until July 1990. The purpose of this second level study is to evaluate the effect of additional impacts on the critical intersections, and to analyze potential ways to improve traffic conditions. To facilitate- this effort, representatives of effected agencies have met and discussed the issues. A,list of agencies and contact individuals is included as an appendix to this report. MEI, on behalf of the applicant and property owner, has prepared this report. EXISTING CONDITIONS The initial study prepared for this project documents that the two critical intersections west of I-5 at the freeway off-ramps and at S.W. Bridgeport Road, both function adequately when viewed independently. However, the vehicle stacking distance between them is deficient, resulting in vehicles not clearing the intersections on green, often blocking opposing lanes. The key issue, therefore, is the stacking distance between these intersections. Jurisdictional coordination includes three cities, the County, ODOT, and Tri-Met. The participants in this study concurred that the problem is of a "regional" nature, not easily solved by a single body. It is also clear from past analyses that there is a substantial problem at this intersection with the current level of development. It is therefore inherently clear that any additional development in the area will exacerbate the problem, notwithstanding any proposed rezoning. 1 "Regional" traffic is also a substantial issue in this area, with pass-through traffic bound for Tualatin, western Tigard, and Durham. Congestion at the Nyberg Road Interchange (Tualatin) has encouraged drivers to exit at the subject interchange and proceed to north and west Tualatin via S.W. Boones Ferry Road. The future connection of S.W. Durham Road to S.W. 72nd Avenue will further increase traffic in the subject area, as a more direct route to the west is available. p-~\MIW.OI\IfT1.Rfw - 1 - The unique trip characteristics of the Tri-Met Park and Ride facility also present unusual conditions. Further, Tri-Met plans to expand the existing 250 space facility by an additional 150 spaces on a vacant site at the northeast corner of the S.W. 72nd ? Avenue/S.W. Bridgeport Road intersection. STUDY PROCEDURE t. The initial study accomplished for the proposed Plan/Zone change analyzed several options for development of the subject site, and evaluated the intersections in the k immediate vicinity. This follow-up study includes several goals: 1. Design recommendations for Washington County with respect to the Durham Road Y. extension. 2. Revised intersection analyses for 72nd Avenue/S.W. Bridgeport Road and at the west side of the I-5 interchange. 3. Design alternatives analysis for 72nd Avenue/S.W. Bridgeport Road. 4. Funding recommendations. Y' Item 1 is covered by a separate contract with Washington County and a report under separate cover. The other study components are addressed in this report. C` Data collection and analysis included a "license plate survey" to determine the G actual flow of traffic from Durham Road west to I-5. Findings from this survey assisted in the redistribution of projected traffic utilizing the Durham Road extension and S.W. 72nd Avenue. The Park and Ride facility was also evaluated to assess peak hour traffic volumes. Traffic projections from ODOT and METRO models for years 2005 and 2015 projections appear to have questionable accuracy. Therefore, this analysis relies upon 1990 volumes with the addition of known or planned projects. Four design alternatives were preliminarily generated for analysis. The overall goal of each is to reduce left turn movements and/or increase the stacking length. Each alternative was analyzed in terms of performance and cost; and the results were discussed at a meeting of the multi-jurisdictional "committee." A cost allocation scenario was subsequently generated. S 2 d: ALTERNATIVES The four alternatives for improvement of the 72nd Avenue/S.W. Bridgeport Road intersection all are intended to improve performance by reducing stacking requirements and/or increasing stacking distance on S.W. Bridgeport Road east of S.W. 72nd Avenue. Alternate A Concept: Eliminate the west leg of the 72nd/Bridgeport intersection to increase green time; route traffic via S.W. Hazelfern Road. Pros: • Relatively low cost • No new signals • Marginally adequate performance at current volumes Cons: • Does not significantly improve performance • Potentially detrimental to existing businesses • Inconvenience for westbound Bridgeport Road traffic Cost: $522,500 Alternate B Concept: Divert southbound freeway exiting traffic to reduce left turns to 72nd and lane conflicts due to lane crossing maneuvers. Pros: • Substantial performance improvement • Maintains existing patterns south of Bridgeport • Increases Tri-Met area south of Bridgeport Cons: • High cost • Confusing traffic pattern • One new signal, plus one relocated signal Cost: $1,017,500 Alternate C Concept: Move intersection west, divert 72nd Avenue traffic southbound to S.W. Hazelfern Road. Pros: • Good flow for southbound traffic' • Substantially improved performance • Single traffic pattern Cons: • Potentially adverse impact on business • Tri-Met traffic routed via Hazelfern • Cost Cost: $979,100 3 - a Alternate D Concept: Move intersection west. Pros: a Considerably improved performance e Maintains existing traffic pattern Increases area available to Tri-Met Cons: a Requires retaining wall e Cost Cost: $918,000 It should be noted that none of these alternatives require the acquisition of right- of-way because of the existing excess ODOT right-of-way and County-owned land that is available. , The consensus of the review group-that met on June 8, 1990, including all agencies listed in the Appendix,'was that Alternative "D" offered the best combination of improved performance, simplicity, and cost effectiveness. FUNDING There are two major considerations in establishing funding scenarios: the basic sources of funds, and the allocation of responsibility for the costs involved. The inter-agency group participating in this study generally agreed that the need to improve the intersection capacity currently exists, that it is a "regional" problem, and that there should be a method of allocating costs among all of the effected parties. The major participants in the project are summarized as follows: Tigard - Tigard has an interest in the performance of the intersection as a secondary access to the southern parts of the City, and as it effects development of properties in-the City. However, even if funds were available, the intersection is in Tualatin. Tualatin - Tualatin has a more direct interest in the area traffic, but has not traditionally "conditioned" new development for offsite improvements or L.I.D. waivers (i.e., COSTCO, REI, Director's, and Tri-Met). The City has expressed reluctance to be the "facilitator" in an L.I.D. to improve the intersection. Washington County - The County has a direct interest due to its jurisdiction over Bridgeport Road and 72nd Avenue, and the Durham Road extension. The County could potentially sponsor an L.I.D. Although no funds are assigned now, the County may have some responsibility due to the re-directed Durham Road traffic and the future development of the "pits." i 4 se-estsoee.eun..w - - r ODOT - ODOT's interest in this area is based on facilitating freeway oriented traffic. Also, ODOT is the "land owner" and "developer" of the Park and Ride station. ODOT has a project to improve the ramps and lane configuration scheduled for 1991, which it may be possible to join with other substantial improvements such as Alternative D. Tri-Met - Tri-Met's interest is in the performance of its Park and Ride station as it exists and if expanded. Although ODOT, on behalf of Tri-Met, added some lane widening with the original facility, it is clear that the Park and Ride has a significant impact on the intersection. Apalicant IProperty Owners - All property owners in the area have an interest in the intersection. However, Washington County, PacTrust, and Spieker Partners/Bingham Investment control the bulk of the developable land. Spieker/Bingham has the most pressing interest due to the pending Plan/Zone change application, but clearly not the largest share of the ultimate cost of the improvement. It should be noted that development of the site under the existing zoning is possible from a jurisdictional standpoint (although not economically feasible), so the true impact is not total traffic, but rather the added increment due to the rezoning. 5 It is clear that no single entity can fully fund the needed improvements, and that the inter-jurisdictional coordination will be critical and time', consuming. Therefore, it appears most appropriate to establish a cost allocation cenario and a methodology to proceed with formulation of a project. The recommended allocation of responsibility is based on a comparison of existing conditions and conditions with anticipated development. i i Existing Conditions means current traffic levels and directional distribution. Future Conditions means current traffic levels and distribution with: 1. Revised distribution due to Durham Road extension. 2. Added traffic due to Tri-Met Park and Ride expansion. 3. Added traffic due to the increment of increase due to the change from I.L. to G.C. zoning on the Spieker/Bingham site. 5 Accompanying calculations indicate the relative impact of these factors on the future traffic conditions at the intersection. The cost and responsibility scenario is summarized as follows: ADDED PERCENTAGE OF "FUTURE ITEM PM PEAK TRIPS CONDITIONS" TRAFFIC Existing Conditions 1953 77.44% i Tri-Met Expansion 94 3.73 Durham Road Extension 240 9.52 Spieker Site @ I.L. 74 2.93 Spieker Site @ G.C. 161 6.38 TOTAL 2,522 100.0% Cost Allocation Based on Alternative "D": RESPONSIBILITY PERCENT COST TOTAL Regional - Existing 77.44% 710,899 Tri-Met (Expansion) 3.73% 34,241 County (Durham Road) 9.52% 87,394 Spieker/Bingham (w/G.C.) 9.31% 85.466 TOTAL 100.0% $918,000 The "existing condition" portion of the cost may be funded through re-allocation of the ODOT project funds, other development projects in the area, and potentially the assignment of system development fees. The method of collecting these funds and accomplishing the project may be an L.I.U. or a County/ODOT joint project if the improvements can be constructed in conjunction with the 1991 ODOT project. The "Spieker/Bingham" portion is established at 9.3% to provide for the impact of site development under I.L. zoning and with the C.G. Plan/Zone change. This amount should therefore be the total responsibility of the site, whether the improvements are funded through an L.I.D. or as a "permit" project. E f; RECOMMENDATION FOR SPIEKER/BINGHAM ZONE CHANGE The following conditions would be appropriate to address the impact of the proposed plan/zone change from I.L. to G.C.: 1. At the time of site development, the applicant shall construct frontage improvement along the site frontage on S.W. 72nd Avenue, including curb, sidewalk, paving, and storm drainage, consistent with the City's applicable street design standards. 2. Access to the site shall be limited to two locations: one in alignment with the proposed Durham Road extension/72nd Avenue intersection, and one approximately at the center of the site frontage or as may be established by left turn lane stacking requirements. 3. Applicant shall provide a bond or other assurance in the amount of $85,466 assigned to Washington County for the future improvement of the S.W. Bridgeport Road/S.W. 72nd Avenue intersection. The bond requirement shall terminate if a project is not committed within 5 years. 4. Applicant shall sign a waiver of remonstrance against formation of an L.I.D. for improvement of the S.W. 72nd Avenue/S.W. Bridgeport Road intersection. If an L.I.D. is formed, the bond noted in (3) above shall be released. Tire max4mu i-l o_f=the--site-4n-the•L:.L-IL . shall--:b_e_--9:F-3%-oLAh-e_ improvement-cos.t_-based-o --impac.-a ed..aboYe. w ~fF0{\MIM.tII\I~T~t.tw 7 _ APPENDICES a CONTACT LIST FOR 72nd , AIRHAM / BRIDGEPORT STUDY CITY OF TUALATIN 692-2000 SPIEKER PARTNERS 684-4666 , City of Tualatin Spieker Partners r P.O. Box 369 P. 0. Box 5909 Tualatin, Oregon 97062 Portland, Oregon 97228-5909 Mike McKillip - Engineering Jim Eddy Janet Young - Planning WASHINGTON COUNTY 648-8761 TRI-MET 238-4905 Washington County Tri-Met 150 North First Avenue 4012 S.E. 17th Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Portland, Oregon 97202 Jerry Parmenter - Land Use & Transportation Joe Walsh John Rosenberger - Land Use & Transportation CITY OF TIGARD 639-4171 , City of Tigard 13125 S.W. Hall Blvd. P.O. Box 23397 Tigard, Oregon 97223 Jerry Offer - Planning Keith Liden - Planning Greg Berry - Engineering ' O.D.O.T. State of Oregon Department of Transportation 9002 S.E. McLoughlin Boulevard Milwaukie, Oregon 97222 Tom Schwab Ted Spence Ron Failmezger. . .653-3100 BINGHAM INVESTMENT X224-2676 Bingham Construction 3939 N.W. St. Helens Road Portland, Oregon 97210 Stuart Bingham MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED 224-9570 Dave Larson Lans Stout Rick Saito r` D Ae ~ nclr~ ~ _ ~_.._.r _ ~}II~LI'~IIII~III IIIIIII Il~llll IJI~I)I III III III 111' 1TI I'~I I~1 III 111 IIT~1~1 III Ilf III III Ilf ~I 111 ICI 111 III III III III ill ill Ili III ili 1~1 III III Ili III Ilr ryl bll F-"---'^~t _',_,1„a„~ - . ~ j ~ NOTE: IF THIS MICROFILMED ~ 2 3 4 _ 5 6 7 B 9 IO I l 12' ~ DRAWING IS LESS CLEAR THAN I, i, THIS NDTICE,`IT IS DUE~TD THE QUALITY OF TFE ORIGINAL i DRAWING. I t Z 9Z SZ, bZ EZ ZZ IZ OZ 61 81 LI 91 5f bl EI ZI II OI 6 8 L 9 S b E Z I~~~ ''I' I I~~ ' I~''r I I 1 I.... ulllinlllnlluuhulllNlluuluu~lnl~pulIIIIItIi1~IW~uu~uu~uNLwluulnill1111IIlIlIII~IIIIIIII►IIUIIt~IIIIIIIIq~IIIIIIIlII1N IIII U)INII,I,IIIIIIIIIIIIWIIIIhIIlIII11IIIIlIIIII~lU1WWUII~NI~uuIIIII~IIIIII111~11WI1pII111111)l)11DWIllIW~W~IW1W1~1111 f: RUARY _R_~__ _r~r _ _ , ,.........r - e ° } t!1 :r y A r, Ki c I, y4 1 ~ ju ,F ~ a ~~q[~~ a + ,it ~ ~ Rt , I~• ~YakT ~~~v ~~`7yt} '~'>"x'•4`LtC~t,r~'Q ~,,~~~'i``~ ~ ~ W' ~r~ s {k ,6~`i ?I~~{, ~ ~ , y? f ..lu. nr~ r~ t~~„+,tyd'i Atf~~~t{,'~~. a , d I ~`L~4 , a 'tt~) (F~~4~' J) t It7r t~ r t ' I ~ 11Y~'1,{4~i~~~A ~{Sr" 1 y y { ~L{~r/~'SJat~4~ ~f~ .f~. A IF`°thtr . I s ~i. ~t~r. , U 1~w fl)r~?"~~~tk lw E~i {fir (1 off}A }'Cr / +~~„3~ (r (G~,F~ 6't ~''ii-~f~-'fir ~ " l~ t v~ y 114 E~ d~ r a I~l~f hF'i t rL 1 , I ~ 'r y4t~.Y,,•;. 71~~''Fr! = p ~ _ ~ f ~ 1~ ar"'~7 °t l t ~ A r t}1 ~ + §r 4Nrf 11f ry :L.t I ~ h ~ r~'i ' - .t ~ ~ t ~ ,n': ~ ~ ;~~y'~1 :ti 4. .ul` v ,:.`~ty')ti ~¢c :>~tr~~r. c* ( - ~ 1 i . I ~ jj F t r~ -7 ~ ~ i t. ,G.4 Y f 1!t i r ' , = N _ 3 y ' I ~s ~'.YSltf I }t~~Wtr ~ ~t tt q fit .~•~tt ,y " y,,. . .v _ _ - i r~t'F t f~ y i rr'1 t ~ 1P7 fr;, +GGG ~'ar ~f, rt h°{~'?d. ~ r ~~d t4i' 4^ . y t ~ Via' r G d w !j li 1 ~y~yY,v+'j ~ !t ' 4r rf - t L'Cf,~1 ~r t t i r t,.rtwr,rr 1 v h° :a " 4 l,~tt ! / T,,' _ r, ti ~j r?~.tt r 5 ~ tyro t 1 ~ t ~ik ~'tti r~ r), t ra~~//' ~ r /}~A~~•P ^ - ~ _ ~ y ~ ~ 4, Ci ~ F. 4 f t1 ' t' ~}t` (rputvr i~.1~ y+~~J~, '~i~ + I~t~A ` / ~4yf _ r~~~11r"',i r ~L 'yY 1 h 7 g Y~~ h ~i E ~ 3 j 71 ,L s ry W - _ ~ ~ h'~' 'tF FFaS t' ~ {,-L!y .I~.rt6 T~C(tl Zqi rY t , ~4)f1 ~~f ~r ~:1~=F`~i t~+ "t ~ 1 ~,t _ u^ ' N i ' ~y ~ { CrG ~ 1 ~~irt y d~ "'{yi~`N ry y~ )~f}$ +tiat ~r~~.`~ , w N = . ~ y G t°+.. ti. ~ 'L}t M''' ~}~t' e t o K}' t~' 1' ~ ti ;~,I ,as ~~•~f'4 ~Lg~t t,~ ~Y - _ ~ tt e l tq +n? t~"t 'l t 1'•~"( Y' g y ry~~, 4 q~+ ~1 1 . k f 'J~'~ X14 ~5 •J7~~k+~ J~¢~ `N. - ° - a I t ~ 1 .t ~ 7,L "?v A "L'~F ~ F 7.9i+~f'r~1~i~ r s~f4) ylY ~ t pi E>~~J s A~{? y4' S 4 g~~•: _ - I. ~ 'frt ~`;Z ~'t' ~~;t l'•^' :,E ~~"~d ' ~"+'s',~/}y``+ k'i3 ~~y4i°~ ;~~I = f f t'd ~ k ~ ~ . t, ~ '~tri~' +rya t "yr,Yf" .,,f• . ~ 3y', r" th.~;( t Qr~Y`3{, t si;' . r, . r J n ~ rr t . ~1 t t,f . SI~+' +aS~r`„y f° ~ s.... < }"a 3~,~ j , •4~{' i c - N I ~ _ ~ ' ` ; (.t { ~ ~f `5 i Pv + ° (9Q rr• ~y~yt, 4y 4+,yG- l~ kts _ ,•~3" ~ $ ~:s} `"tl"~tr• k4t~}~g' +44yk~r ,~~~~~•.kk~ rt a,ti ~V. r;. - h _ I ~ I, ~ i ~ ~ } I ~ 1 Y S~~n<e"r~+r'i~a ~ te"~skr,+r``"2p ,%l i ' ~~~~~~jj1 1 t. ti, JN lrlved _ _ _ ~ '9 ti ~ t r nt "k Il: Yt.:b ~ af. P;JattY,tF~^i4~j ~`4 T~`+~ j't ' 14. A~ t. _ li. y ,~f t} b.'n r y...fhi~k`y.S~\ y~~' cv I t { 1 ,k yr t1t ,ty tx ' 4r.r4 ~1N~ t sir ?~i~~Lr~,~tt ~ s t~ ~ ~ ( 1 triw~ 1id~ ttNb" ~~r ~ ~ ~ °~"C ti N i .A _ ) ~ ~ lilt' t>>~ ~ r t ~ a ~k ~ 4 " t a .~'v~ F ~ _ i } , w a~ I+ i i ' } r ) ry v, t y ' yn rf ~r I _ F! '~41 _ri t ~rJ. C # ~~~~i4;, I l' ~ ~~~i : y ~ .rr y ~r' ~ ~ TI, 9rt ~ S 1 )n r S ~ Lr ~ ,r ` = I = t t 4t ~fa ~ (t~~r~{~,y 4~.~fi'~' S~T.w.'{" " a ( frF 't - i m cn - : ~ ~ ! f t 1., h L ~ e ~ ~pp'~y r ` +~',gy ~~1 Q>~% '~q~r f., - ~ } r y. ; ~ i r~ a. r ~ a.y ~ ° \ ~ 't Ala'tt.' I "0. '~~,R'r a t- are+d ' ~ ~ : f ~ ; r r* ~ + ,-5}?L t'~ j~ ;u ' 1t~ dr ' 'r <Pt . ; r 5 1 + r • , _ , { ' t + f f ~~r I ~ „ 1 1 t ~ ` tl t, ~ • ° rlc ~ ~ R r dt rl n~ t tNt t~ ~ ~ ~ _ t0 - R1 ' !~}p.~ t `r'tt •:Y +'Po ~y % r t PVa~` qr r~ya'tY1 `t h, ,q'r y r'~!r - b~k'~t ( ~ i Y "tt.,~ttY~ ~y ~ ,t`S a~:n k~};rS:F~ k •~~iti, l ,,i LV tiY t ) + 4. i y~a. 12' ,n 4R~v,t r~ r 't_ ~i \~17y tr ~ e. , +.A ,'ti'~4t `t 1'( 1f 4~~ 4. Syt? '~YVt: - ''r't . t ~ t + ~ y t;,'r+t~ .t t C0yi,1 F~~~ 4tlF~ 1 ~ , KY , ~~,~4,'A ` . et d L 5r t t y' tr1 pr h S - ~ _ r( t t t Arl L' h~~~ >1s a~''~ry~ ~ ' ~ - .ee. / ~ w~~ .',,ryi'z~ - i d S ti' ~5~,' : ~t t- u i r~ w ,t_t as,`'+ _ S ~y J''+'`'Yyy}++: I'l ~ f. a t ~r st.Y ~,w,t ~ r . - - :,LY 1 t. ~y t ;t~.~(F~}~ ~ 4 r t' It ,tCR h t ?tt ry ~ rZtt~ r'r'! 4 r _ _ ~ 1 S t tit A q4{ 1 ~ ~ ~ X14 S ~ .r r"r , , rT 't,: O (b , } ~ t 4 test 4 Ih.c M~ 1. f' ~ 1 ~ , ! I h AA`~~la~x~S i t SSt { ~'tn „ A J' . A n t+ r ~ y° b r,. '~-t tr~`~,`tDr r r ~ tj hrty'Z fi t: ~t y 'WS;..,r+ a ygF' .fit+~' ~ ~ t. N; ~y r~~ at+ j. 1 _ I ~ , t >sy o- ,wry ~,s"t~ ~ht0• tt' - elvS ~ •d s'aF++t t "nti r:`t,>`' - *"Sr.{ K e,t t rvl, r r.. ,,f`~tL i v ' e {f. P ~'x t.. ~`+r4'~~~ - + ~)i t L(~t~.,_,J:~ ;,r r, -Y' ~ y, Hy h ~ ~qp~ r 1'; ~i.! W~' t i~~ rt"f, = t ~ i t. d3;' . !f+~+,/ n tyx i r ~lx 7 :F:• ~ I~ 1, L 1 t~~Y ' -r'r'l ~•d 6`+ "'1~. SY 4 7i+/" m - f ~d s~~. r~vX ~ < f 4,• .Y'f~Yri ~ i W 4~ , ! A 4&1. (0 ~ ~ ~ F t~,~w4x'"r t , +,r.r~~*~,a? 1Y' ..r p'~xrQ 8 t.}~ ~`r K1'r,°yh , _ ~ ~ + r .y;,;s/ ,M„'`t~t~fs' I t~aw4, t*~.r . I ' f t ~ltj ~ +7tj}~~~~~q ~t NI ~Y f. ~~7'~~ri1 }ri.rRd',~~; . t~{~ ~.'S,v •Q. - v.,s , ~ _ 'r at^K, i S i~ r~ty~v~.~M,y~'"~"~E'11r'~'tPyr~`aiit'~ yl " " Ytr ~(~'Gf yG r "}fL4`e 'i"~ . = I- - '~Sd ~ f.V t")'t ~ ~ ( y~>"'f'`'yt11 F 4},,f {~.~Y t of Fa N' ,.t 1. - I = i ~ ry t r ,r ~`tL~n °i n? eyt f ~v t f~kl ~ t}„~-~k. - . ~ ' .t ty a 1 ( t ~ 7 ~a~v'1k't tti aAt +1 ` t If ! J~~~??~ ,il7r` )~Yr t r t ~ } . 1 y{ k ~ t ( S t, _ ° - I ~tl"~dt t ~ Sr J, ~'ilC r ;tJkv^,Y, s¢t~ r .tt4 r 't ( r:'t S A E y'r iti ~s S k {~.'I ~ ~ri. `h y ~~~.,tt ~ ~i < $~t r ~ L It ,x ~ ~ L S.j~v ~F r!'< Ott ,~tir~~" y'a a ~tt~~vF ~ n 3.i ;~r n '~t y ~ ~ „art - _ ` ~ ~1 t t .~1. 1r t rritl J~•~ '4~~` f '~r iA' )'~o O;, -N _ vw T i i ~ ~ . , , t ~ ~ 'f tt ~ r 4 A#~yat t ~ ~,'tt ~ z t'('~ d n~ ~ sq. ~ ' r1~`~t'~ m - i ~ ~ t } ! w ; tr 'fir )w ~ dtf . , n '~i a ( r~•~''rt, 1:E 1 $ tt , ~ ttr 1 S~v t I _ - ' : r ( J - 1rk)., »ti Y t r r, . ,o J , , 'i< r'h. ~i ~ - _ ' 1 ~ tV - ' ' ~ ~ } ~ ~ , ~ ~ t ~yl}i~' *t. t,r sl ti Y ~'~1 ~t..Y vl: i ~t /I..~..r r t ~ _ II'. m ~ ~ ..r3 tta~r r N i ~ F ' tip:+S+ a, , r -4~~ I 't e~~~J. S :iy t. ,~i. .y, 2,r r { ~ y 'Y S. W. 72ND. .~S,rt=lhel, tw>Fa+~ ~ AVE. / `s ~ BRIDGEPORT ~ ~ • ~ :~t,i ~ s r u D Y - ' ~ ; t .t. ~8t~:t ~ rye ~ A f« !r'tt' 1f.n~t I~d1~,jrj+~ t ~~W~eA ,1?:4 i t ~ t ~ N- t). Jj/ - tA'1S t,,f,4P "`ii ~ y •~i. _ f• , r,'~}7- 4 r j•~'f' ry ~,~i 'W7~ v)~~'a~i. it~ r ~ ct, w..• 141 a 4t r. y''~ i~1+ iti~ Rr 'T~ tj'~ ~'r c~i T l~ i 6,It J , ~j 1` j y r~ s rr + ' j f V, 1 \ tIY ~fjbR 11 I : A + f ;~a~AP T°'Sr vi t Ir,. i n +.~i~i ~t ,1 It~.al~~I a~l ~.j. ~y ~,~a ?py+,4 ,'~ru+i"t,5'~~t ~}ard t~, _ t 1 .~~1r,~ A ~ :.v i4~1 {~t. ~ ~"t~ f`rih~~' x. y., :,,-,F i/:' k 1 44 { ~ -h, ~ = i` , ~ r rL~y ;~r;~' 'rtt bra ,5, s, 6f I t'~ _ , ~ ~ ~ Y yS~ , 7 ~ti/W r1~ .rt yet ) 5 1 i i ~ I r t 1 - "'>T•~+:4•. ~ ,1 ~rf r v ~~1-{1 Z '"~`/"a r J~.ri 1,' "i~ ' a'~ ' ' frt. p , I a } , a >4 t ~ ~ V1h " + ~ ydi ~~n~t~ ' ~ V - ~ Y ` ~ - - ! - k. ~ n k " d v~a`t~} a ~ r a'' w - i t r ~~r .i, ~ t r ~~`r 8`~w ~ pity i ~ ~4~rray y~+'Syr N ' L' s ~t '.ti• ~ , 7, x~ (s }~'C 1 rL'~TI ~YY' 1 fJ f4",~~M' , ~~',C~r^yF.,~+'y N ` ~ , , a~ + "'t c,`r ~j~+~ gk d tt1~t °`1t's~; ~N s, a+'~.'~~y ~ ~ e d,"r~',~, 1 ~t ylt$s 1'y --N _ ~ iafl Ih~. ~ r ~~1~4 °i~, f+,.:rt' x~~~~+~7'~~~~ '`~d:~.p+'r - I c ~ t"yJA9.tq'. ti,~'.p}yam 'Y~~ 1),1ft r t l 4 7''.. - J ~1 d S` b~ x s .I; ~r~ , ( 1+1}g",i`i I k. S ` r 1~+~ rVci ,i. + xmxh 1^ 7 ~ r " `~t - ° _ §i i : 0\ $~ay~ w"'9' t5. i~, " v i, r I d , t 1 i,A f r -N - I v' it , a u r F t,¢~ t,~ , r~ ~d~ , ~ ' ~,=1 = _ f {g~1 ~n t t`.~k~ ~y~Y~Y~ r s~t~ t7~j"~~7+~~~r'~~~~y1~ ,I't Ir}4wy i, b - t i~v ~ ~'}~M, f+ 1~ 4, ro. , ~ J* r ;m is J - N _ } j ~'i , I i b.~.r fFt` }sajr Ft j,if..~'~`'if•.r,ns~' i~t+'~c ~~a` ~r~ ` ~ { - +CV F _ ~ cv - 1 " t~~1. ~,1 y ! `.1 •f" , ;3"~ y, y ~ 4a,,+~ ~1~,-,mot, o~'t ~'w,, .,,~,t.,' F< 3 r +w i , .,i, k ._t. t a~ ~~r4 4Y~ b~t1S`,~~f1vg.'.r`;'S''~y/~.Cm. VL'~~~'7,tls/.,~>..r s'.y2y y Y r:- i~~ .y N _ ~ F 1 y~.. ~ r ~,d,l~ r~~r,`f~~ f w ~';1' k 4A 1 `~F r dihr~. I rr i ~.E rf t' 1 --N ~ _ ~ 3 i. e}l,^+{{+,.•DJ " ¢~tr1 J ~t fwgr rd ffi tCM' Apr 1 r,~'?f f,,ry y ~V _ 3 . " ~ y j i n R,y~ S ~N ~t~4 ~ 7' ~ w"~^~~,n }y 41 n F t~ l wT{+}f*i ~ { f~~ ~ ~ ` ti 'i 1 = _ 1. ~ ( , -".f ~V''JJ 14 d+1N~a'I L`' ~1 ~7\,~ •fa..(. fS~ "Y l.y yt~r M ~y♦ F F. - N i xk iS •t+ 4 t>Xa! " S t~"id'}'}i ~+~2 ~ 1 ,sf Ys £+r3 - ~ ~:t o ~ - 1 j to t .y rt~ , ; . ''f w ^ }~eslr 1 n yis~~ ~p~~`rr~ RS r t wt .a't~ i N ~ ji " `.i, 4 , t~,St1~'iy~+~ ~s t y ti r ~ ! rr: ; i %',f, - _ - r at4~ S t. , S` 1 tly~~('r~~~'~~. F..~~i ~ ~ w~':M"t '}e(r?. h rPm r ~ = I - r @ ~j r"" R' t ,1~,' SI' S;a d r, r~~~r•~ f r d. I ~ ~ 4 Hwy t . ~ s t q~j,y~ r~~'`L `.r~, 1'd "84 : pub M.1 d ,i A _ft.} i~. r _ ~ ` ~ s ~ ~ q r •'t r• Fr '1• M r 1` i sir` ,~..x . r ~ Y ~ t .i~l•N 9 ~+G~~i,P'r~ 1< ? E fTf : r" > Is ~ w ~ z. 5i{ y t ' M t A' i - _ i t _ I k,9~S, 5'rt' ' i "'.y.fig ~ry ~ ,+,~'n V ° i.. ~t ~ .~f~ p f4 at - ! r .iy~ a fy ei' i'.i - In ~ - I ~,ty t ~ •1i ~4 ~1 ` tt ~Q ,~1,i 4 F r r _ - I y} T(iy. f Tk ~ 4~'i4 ~ ~ r~<iM I ~ y'~~h ~ e _ 1r . i x'~ ,~i" S:, 1~ r . , I , t ' r r i,~ r ~ 1~ a. " r~ ttt r - 1 I 4 ~"+`3 4 : ~4'Fnskp!t}~ 11r r /rr~ F ~ ~ ~ q fad' r^. Y I i 5 i, `f~1T.j~ j ,f '4c a>. Rr, , yti ~tt~oa Ys.¢ tr j i - ,w.i1 . i ~ I ~ys/ _ _ 4 t 1 1 L ~r w . k~~ ' 4 n~t r' ~ k ~MI.'1#cm4 i _ _ 1 i r r re`~'1 r~xsJ'' dlr}sa ~ tt I ~ ViK 1 _t4.4Jti "f y~ , _ _ d I > 1 ~ i~{{c t ~ ~ ~ d ^th ` k CCr+yq r - ~ h• r {i ~~i k~ l , 1 ~ ` i `!m}. ~ 4 ~ ~ ~yt` 54 ~ C f.~~a', y i r 1 _ 1 : ~ ~ 41 ~ - 4Mr grit `4i];• f , ~yi' v ' 1 k y~7t~}~r i, { 1~~ 1,~ I q•,. t,~,. ~'r 1iY'c'~'y~ Ai~~ i7'r yid "4' . _ - 1 i ;<a . ~ 1 1 f s.' G~ f ''~~"idT~~ r y° - ~ ~ n k ~ ~ - ; ~ l i f t ivl l r~,k~ ' ~~~:i'y~+.•r"^ r,@ N + ~ i.. v' ~t; „ 1 x - ~ i . ~T~ ~ ti N ~ ~ ~~•;~K ~ v+° w ulr •i .,'~4~'" Sr"".• ~ f r . t m ~,sipc^e* +,rl i' ~ ~,,Lr.+ :N' ~ y y . ~ fcA a,,t~L'.: - _ ' , `~'~'QaY~r~`>~1. ~~ii ~ A yi+c'r.;~y, r rd"' v f, Utr)y r • : ~ ;ki;j ~i('N,y p ~~~r'rr i~ a ~ ~ _ k ~e~~,Y t' ~ by+ # tar t, r« ~ ~ss~?y~~ rt4 a t.,, r " t ;7' ~~~~R1r ~ v ¢ , ,d ~ ~ ~ Jf ~ 4,,, ~ ' 4 k , _ . _ - ~ rf 4 pry ~ i~1 T47,`.. r p-_ ;.~.Yl.' ti~~ y. 8L~"', ~ •4 ~ [ * , r i t = ~fp "t , P n z L3 F~ r' a y r YT! r tt r r.i L ~Ia p! t ,w 'a k - - •AI ft. i .e i r1 ~ 4 CFI ' r - _ ~ : t ~ j r,- r l t ti y~yyy k. r . ~ r. ~ t ~i ~ 1. t - _ - = i , l r .f 1 i~ 4 ; ~ t~ , a ~3 i, ty?w~a~ ; ~,4~~ + 'f r e~ ,i~~y~; ' O N.~ yi~.~+ - _ ~ f I i 1V" 1 "~,Y "^r S' ~r 'u~~~~~~ly ,A k •t n - t ~ . j 4 r ttj~ ~ s Vi :,i psi y~ ~•~i F M ti N r s➢ ~z _ f ..nh a7 t a ~t ` r.~ fix: ~f} 1A1' m _ 'ay't?e ~ i, l't _~'"J~f' # ;"t•~kt~irrp4~. 5 T...si`• ~,~!ti~ ~~7r 5~(>~i;j. et1'~ ! , f ~ F.`d rw ! " +t7 ti, y < , .<y. ~ iFFr• ,1 'yr~~k 1 - _ ''i t i { f i , i d a y. t i ~"I t' ae~ it 4, ~ }~"`.~'~`i)~lm' Ji• i V, ti It" ft''r`.yyw Sr, r L i _ 'i Ire - n ~"~1 .P rf~ V Y 1~ ~ ^ u 11 rj 4 Llt .y.v~t,'( ti ;j1 S~G,~t"~ Y. ~ a ' . ~~n g }~,p./ Ry{,j { V F t li t 1 iL i K "y: ~r : f4il, taf~ ~.l', t} d.° n , 0 ~ ~ ~ 3 1 ~ tY ~~fxi;i 1tlYf vYit ~ , ~ y~ ilk pd gg~~ i Z.v.' i ` r , •1•.t ~ `~5° }'t~~°~ d+ dfo to ly y: f ,171'; ~ ~ { Y i ~ 5+ `.i~ d"dS a~? rr ` ;r t s ~`n~V~y~~ i , , i t t d., y i e ~ y ~,,*,t ! .ti ~ A`~~ry At .Yrai Hfy}~1.. Y,. ~.{1 ~f T.' ~Y~k`;, X'i~•~ 'r; z ~ ? S. W. 72ND. AVE. / ' . , ;;°~°;i~' ~ BRIDGEPOR~t ' STUDY - :,~~1 ; Y9,; k ,1f ✓ !.iP , ~ ,C. ~ ' 4 ~L , I 7n (;ttv' d~f v do , a 5*i \ n , .S f i A :r? t." r' S9, N ~ ;~;1eAt,rd'srs'~ I _ 4 r~54, ~f~in b +s , 4 fi, + f+t~, , _ ,N - i ;fir. ~ .4 t a .P ~YhJ Md r . rr,.si,. ~ ~,~'6 ~j ~1k d f f ~4> _ s f"> t,t~rL'y'~t~5~ y~f~"J' ,'y~ ~ "4~ . _ i ~j S +`~{r5tf tt i7 f r v t J n ~'L~, ilrt,r~ - ~ _ ~ ~ M - , d + - f~':JW.P' L .j ~t ✓j Y'rd 4M~ ~ `t'~j1 ` ¢ t1r1.'i' _ n1- x ,4}; t . ~~r.1t , r.r• ' r},!1~~yyLi~'~+ r +~1, c T`R a 't, r 1~ . ,s. V! _ . Y , ,Y"/~ 1 y.Jdb f tom. s L S..' ~'.r a,~A,^ a y N _ ) ~ r saF' M1 ~5 r~srrix3 ~sj~+,~ r !}t,Weih~`~~~ft~/'+ t .i ~ ...u. _ ~ :n i,µµ1 ,;,~'3''r ~t(h rrlf~~t~{'~#~F.s ✓•j~l~ g'~~~f~i~` ~~f' 't. _ pl _ I i* tit t- tyy~l~i R~Cdli°~ r ~I.i Y Yf ~4 ~ S, Gwt ~•1{Y''tJ"y i 71 ~ iY 'St`ir f• IBM l f 2 J/~~ 'iN,~X.'L d/r / J' d r,~ „ • d ~r r r = _ i ~ ~'a,~ '`••~.~~~~~r h~ `r ~ rtv~' h „r Wn~+~'~.k 't~ }°r iF~4 r s' ~ {~~~rvj .a - {u ~1 r r ~a~~e e a m: ~r o ~iintt ~~J'i` `fir S~ ~tj~4d'~ Y~ L, J - n iti', ~ tr't7,~~y-,ai ~~~t~,r~~~r?~ +r s~~r~'~ito+~{~~tsr*~i °k~ •.1 r{ t7r° ~ `i? ,u:fd Y~y~tt rrY'F~. 41?^~Shh9y{I''r}r'rfir ~ +'r~'n~la"~ra~'is + t-,G ~y-~ f~ tisv ~ : M .yi A~° ~ ?4ti. ~".2,~ i ~A; 1 2 -ti ~ _ ~ ~tr ~ ~d~Mt~ ~ul'n A1~ ~ Beta}ttS 2 v ij'k Matt k~ _ _ _ i ry (J~ ~Y r F 'r ~ o t Q r r ? r 1 ~ v r ` ~ r' t fi ~ ,,.7-A,Pg y f Y atvhY r. lz `~4 a oy '~i4~'~l~tt4.r`'~: - _ _ ~ t i. ~''r. t\~` >1i iiF r r a t. 1 e, t'it e v~'Yri ~'t SA4 ~`at4'~* d~ I 4 $ ry~, t ~j~'rt":" 4 c }t q~?,i~~yw,t. 3 t r w oyr>~' ~ 4 ` - tA'+.~~ .t,_'t~ ~ ~ ~t~hy~~` t .r~"~ ` : t .~.~t'3~}~•J ~~i f~ 4 r!~ ~ ~rt`e~ilK' ~i1 ~ = c* _ i ~ t7 }}1 } .r ,~d' p t t :A ~ r `mss s~ ~ ~ a t'i i, C "tif" tr F At dp ZY6'~ f ~ _ i t , ~t '1 ; t , r~+\`~tr ~fw' ;ey! 3~~• 't ~~.Pt~j~ o-~ ~ Ul-~ f I itr ..i.F + F r~ ~ a+atA^x t ~'~u~, 't .bY'4 Y \~,yy d"F ,n,+rx~a . n - ~ ~ t r+i 4 y~~l rn"o `A s; r' 4r p't"~ ~~~r ii =,o _ ~ t ~~g`~~CY~; ,N~,'~ ti .f~; ~'s e.• Y~ xr~f~~ t`~,{~rY,~Vtf~~, t ~ l'i ~~r t t' ~ t ~ ~ i r{rj~ _ ~ ~ t ~ 1 }s ~~f`,f y~ fir. _ _ ~ i r . t~ :t bt ~ °~3` ~ ~ tv' • C ! t~ }~P s~',pt~~' ~F`. _ t , 1a~ ~ tt.~~ flJ ~ ~ s ~ ~~¢q .fit = r _ ! t 4; t~V ~ t.,,~t 4 ~"1`~ ~ rt6~C`~/~: ~f y ~,rk yy~` - idf t ~ w r u' ~ _ ! l ~ ; ? ~t'~y,, i ^ "d C 1.A 4"4a4+' & 4 µ - 1 r aF 1 S v ' Y~7 .S'iJA' ' ,,Y{~~r.'~ ~L.,.. 1 r t~ ~ ~ ry, 1 "t - _ I - F~'t ar s a t8 ; J' ir+ ""^t{~t`SY~ p~k .Tr 4,~yq.~' i dt 5 + N... t y ~1' k ' F ~ ~e ~+F.~ ~ 7 s,E ''~y,~ r~ ~ ~ t5?~ 'fi~A '11, " M~ "fir _ o m ' ~ "F r 4 ~ t 1 4 r .t w , . L >~tr' s'kii 31' t+~ yr 4~4~~~~'+' ~~t F f ~ a ~~W f ~ r r ~ Y-. + tit ` , @f ~ s. ~ .?'1' of ty n t =o, _ .,rjk tj Ya F S ~'y",i i "''1J r s.- 'a 5. f,~ ~ ~ w,t{,~., ~'T > •t w...~:....,~ . >S~" ti t r1 Y'~' bb `"~~y,. t+ •oy, s' - ~ fn ♦~a rr ~ + t yr r' ~ J Mi'~ ~k ~ t7~C ~ 'ia ' i kR. ~ d + ~ r, ~~t/ i ^P'ty t. ~ dflh S~ rt~, I . J~ ,rtu. t t l _ _ .t ~ t ~ -a^,r+l ~M~,te f~. 'r' t~ 1 A tl ~ ~ rri "~t. s T,' - _ f i 4 y r' Y r'~1S ir11 ,n to '9 ? ,~r`~ •~p r~°a~~. F . _ - , FPM r ' r + ~ 4 rr'.' 1 ~°~s ¢ c~.\ Y' ' $ s?', r `Y ;a't ~j 7h - , fir' ~ v j i M s r ~ y~,r,, 1 ~ ~ ~ _ 'Y ! ~ ~y'~yry t 4- i 1 ~r ~i ~ t i q F Y y~iC~ r~~~t3b F~~t i f1,~. j l t r1 t ~ ~ " t !rv i t 'tl~l~~ ~ I V*` 4J t° eY rr i r Ll' f ~"Py~4 t rJ']~,5+ _ _ T _ } ! ~ r.;at 9~~rJL r+s °j~ r X~dy~ t~' ~s... yp~~li~~` O _ - r ~ r b ~ t is { S' t ;+6n 4 ~p !s _ C'F~"i ~ ~ ~ n - _ ~ ~ a 1 I 1 - ~ Yt i_ ix r f r J vt .Sd ~ D - _ ~ ,t, ,t r c~fr txJ1~5t,`SI !1P F* l,•kdt ,'n r } s Y Cd r~ . ~m r T qtr , ~'n rr ~ ~ - P ~ F ,~'¢"~y t* ~,i j t; g yy~~ r~".'r ~ry~''1 f aJ4 cr•t t 4 i 9 1' ~ Pti~{ I~~r•+C~~7t~ f y - J [ d ~ -~,t 4"4° " r t ~~i yS" ~(e i a s~e r ~ nir + ~ - 4 t ~ ~ t t i~ 4dr~~~'' t rxlBynkl~ 27rr Y ~ ~ _ P~ ii t t '4J{"gr:~ .~r~~c w~) i,. I - J : ~ r Ilt i ~ r 4~i~t:r~~''''Gy~gd s .~.yi a tl. t i{ J 4 + ~ t ~ ~ Ja ~ t i ~ 1 i^~l+iS ~a ~ {g~:' '.t +~~R~` ~ ~ ! L~ ~ 1~ O_ n ~ 7 ~1 • t TF y t 4:'!4 ~~R'' ~ , S Vr7i'~ 1J~ tnY 'tt n O y C' q 3 i ~ .qtr,/.. ..t f'`¢ 5 1~ ~TK ` r!2~ ~ ~ i ~i.{: ~ rt t ~ j ~ ~~v.~;,'lti~s.{"r, ~7 r~yd ,.4 3 ~~~k t 4 ,L 4 _ ' # ,lr ~ ~ y AL " a~w ~~1 k~' y i 4 ~ r3 4 ~~1. +'"Eat. f~,t t tit rn47y. ~r.r •~t. r,. y...-- .t,i ,•r: z ~ e S. W. 72ND! AVE. / ' _ ~ BRIDGEf'OF~ I . TUD`r ~:r I ,pan is / 'any 'aNZL M S a z Y ~ tun r F.. i w`i~~~• ,1Cy t rls t t e " fed .r'~`Cq + i 1y ~ ,1r d ~ r~ Je?~~15" " l t i. ,t i. t ~ m e ' 1 } ' , a f ~4~~' ~ ~ ' : y tl r . , 1 rot T jj 4s~- - - i 5 4 p,~ ~ r r O ry' ~y o'~F' +Z V i i. ~ ~ ~ ty •~l rrr J'~}_~ t + r*'1`~' _ f~~ ~ i . - a+ F ~ '~aTR'' 'p"t ~ 1 .t~ . ~i ~,.V~~.~' I ,ylrt'1 i t 1,+~,~{,{ +•2~ ~ f d ' f ~ Jl`F, j , ll q $ , a ro i , ~ ' r y.t$ T'k~i, 1 4~,t1ytil,",4~ ~~'~71 r t d 1 - I - _ ® A~. , ``+4 , ,Y. it - ~ D,f~'`~ - ` - I c 2 `A ~ 1 rl Y~, , ~.gA 'l. yt 1 D .1 1.~ _+°P`~ r ~~r 1 4 1. it .{5 I "i3sIrIN 5df~ ,rJKS 475' tt~'r~ ~y' tt 3lD l~y1 J~ 1 t ~~411. _ ~ _ .i AY t" hrt, t t .rt r'wJ, 1 nT~ 1 ~l 6 t r[ t° It [n - _ '5~~+~p~y~~ll i ;,I,::^~ ,A. ~ 3 " q~ Ya p~~sr "~~J` b,~. i } ~~3..,N~ _ J r~ f. i`~ ~~k n a r , ~'r~ fi ~d,~S' 1»b !1R f rA{,'s+ i l~ ~ 1 i 1 ~ [ ~ - _ Q - 'sa ~+r ~ ~.r% ' a^`t 1'~! ~rrt >r•1d u z R j.'i ~ ~ 1 f i'E - _ ~ ~ yr '~'<D • r^ ar' F 5 { "^1~ ~ t f ~ ~nt .r ~i } i f . _ _ f .rot , .r ' r '1t ~ r i t s. i~.! 1 t+ s a°` N O ~~t , ~~~Ir ~ ^ v i5 f^µd~1~ $ l~lJt J1h Iklf~'' r~ 4 - ~ Y`.1 .'.1; ,1 't ~ ~St~~7~- q r ~f 'gw.h Il , l 1,~ /y~f1:Vt qu q~• r ~ ~'w'~$ qr Did 5 ql~ OO ~i }Ld ~ 1T~ fFl S~ rd~` h!. 1~ ! nk x 7.'w~i t~ 1`tlt ^~.1 It^r t.t b{e'{ l f ^ r ~ro t'~a~~t ,"ltik"vf! r~ ail ` ~ , l F f: • _ ~ H. 1~ek u',~,1~ l{tf'' ~f° t~~f1< i" S r ~ + 1'.,e"Itc/f t 't r i 1 I 51. r~, ~Y4 ,.+t r ~ 1 + s Y 6 p F'itr 4V(', ~ t l.,I _ = 'e t C I T t ° 1 .r V , ~ .,is? yy},y, t c r.• 4p 0 + r lT+' _ O ,n = ~y~a#g,11:,r. 54' q.~ 6 ' ~lr~~i i ~•7 erd~~ly~4~4?IC `i~~{ ~t z~ t ,~~z.' "ro r~ f 'y~F.,'LiS 'I,P'+`.tiffft~~$p~`ii}li} ,c s ,.~A~r~~"Mf~~ydsarjj.`~''sf! t y;~]Jo~,lt ...Jr.+.' {[r ~ I i a 1 - a "?Fr'Ft.~ ~ ~ al'^ it k`ltllJ i~l v~ y{t ~0.~'i{f~~~r.,t/'~~`y.~i i-~}~ " t o I ~ ! } ~ •r~'' - _ r_ ,..;ttr9 , r4~1~ {N'M t }S }3 f 1` n`t1 a4r.~5~rw, ,.aa~ 7 V` t n ♦ ` t+ ~ ~ y,, .7 ~d~.',~ks l"~31~~'~~~ i 4tJDy 5 ^ r* ~~a3~^., - _ .r , T y~ YY~.~~~~ ~IE, ei ,A~tra i ,7j 1 t~r,FFrf '~c"i. ~ t i ~ ~ ~ i`~,F,~ _ m 'rai s F ~Jkti }~•~~~4y~a t ~,d1Y'l ,y 1p., ~ r , _ ~ "N _ m it ~ D;1§~ !f"; iRnn are ~ ~ f ~ - _ Z °,r , S ~ ; a~~ .t.u s{{{„"„ 5~. r, r ~r„r r w a ~ r 1 ~ , _ ~ f b 6a A(,4 ~ ~ t ~ 'a - ~5~3.~~ ~~y; :t Y lµ~t~'~ ."Il~v'~ r ,e x ~ ' 6 - _ w e~ 'i, ` '~i~,4° Mrva~ a 'sY~~n"ra ''fy a~ 1 ~ t A .Ef . ~ ~ f' _ f{r5rolf~~ylit, f~ L'yr ,J~ty ~t ~ t~.....✓ {'ra1~~+tt se~ t~ IJ,~ ~ l 1 i 't 1 y+ ~ = q~ o ~ c- r ~ ' 1tr r" ~ .,!d ytr t.;~z tlr ,,,rrr^' ~iA'~ ! t~x ~ S"~ ~ .Y . t , : ~1, ~ t a t +~r ~r 1 f ,r., ' ~ 1' , n 6 i e~ a~ t ,..i ; { ' - - ~'Sr y 1t~ h, s~ ~7~ ~,y~yj'(` 'f ,y.5 .IS G 11 \y ~1 ~y 1 1i _ i q ) .P' ~ ; 1~'' r h tf ~r~D M' f ' NN,M ~9 1, q j~ ~+~1~ 5 "y~~7{y'~~"~` t ~ ~ f 1 _ - - ~ y. .1 r >d ~ S` f 441. f fit t'" P,J~y~{M1'D ~.Yr 1 i - n bV`, i. t@ ~ t r i / ' ,~5. '~i 1 ti,. h+ ~ t+~ ~i -,tt'rr'3 V~7+' . ' 4 ! ~ i i i = _ a ~ 4 .Y` 5{,t ~ ~ y ft 1 ~ 5 ~ i y Did ~ ~i .1~ ~ ~Tt 1 ~ b~ .~t 1 ~1 _ N - ~d J t, t 1 e +rEY51 i3 ~ k 1, y ~ i%,~q1~ ~',~1d L f. ' A k 1 _ ~ M" ~ xnr~' r D ~~~s ~ .D :~yM1~~'~S t~ i t1'l It ~si'8 ~'~'Riroj hV:ITi, r li,tV .1~ f ~l~k~{~ syt'` - ~ r n,~, 'ti.`' ri nsr? r ~1~ i t';, ' c ~~r. 11}}',Y D ! f ~ .s a - L1 r V ' ~ rr', ~ 's ^t' '~1r~'RF* ~t~~ Asa 1 1~ ~ F ~~t alt ~~tr r,,~r+r ~,;ti;1~~5~~,' 3~ fty~,~;~,~, t ..14 f _ - '~t4~ ~ .~{,~t .',l ~ . r ~ r.,~y 1 ~ h+Tr~~„ "f +i '12w t' 'r ~ ~ ~ ~ } ~ft 1){ (1 S _ _ }4~t~ " I'd ~q°y ~ ~s:~ c +4 1'ki L~ ~1. f~l~ I t = ~ - ~~.T". 1 tV 1. ~~.4 1. .'t`}.t ~ , ~r„y rod S.F~. htJ r. $ r.. v i; 1 1 xj 1'~ t 1 _ 't• - A y~ L' S 1 y,y ri .1 ! t• 6 ~ ,!t _ ~'i t?'l niro t Y:; tiD1~,"~ ey ~Vr f~ i. i.. ~r1{, ~~1` 'Vqy~, 1St~y~i7.,. + ' * ~4 ia:. y','4~yI~ v - tL_y,S':Yn ~Sii~', ~r ~ '!4 ~ ~ ' r}~~~ e`,5, 1 ~ Y - ~ = 4~'~'i et/ "T bf, R ~ S "'R !l'', G )~sn •i 1 1" ~ 5 ~~Dl ~ I _ _ %,t ,µD 1 1 Y ~ yRy.'"?, r~ + a . yF ~ r r ' r ry „J~''~ a~.n {{"et ~ + ~ ri w3 4 1 - _ }---~~'v ',~L qur r ~ ~ ~y { ' = i'ce' ke S Pr j 1 e Y%~+'4~~ ~ ~4! i~sl~'t"f k' Ay ~i~i a~ _ I ~ ~ f'j' q ~t ay, ~ S~ b 5, , P 1115 ~ It - ~ - e 4 ~ r d 2 r' j. 7 ~ . 1 : " t rw~ • ~ t 1 1'~ y`~ , ~ _ I n, ~ ( a ` i`ro,t,~ ; i ! 1t ~.1'+1' 1~ y 1 ~r ~"~~e. k ~1, ~t SS sr 3'sr' ~ i . _ _ ~~1 t "`7 Al t 3 L. '`x1 ~ !~,y 5 t~ ~ ; fly l I ,7'11 D ~ 9 v 1t it~ Y 9 "iV1~ Cs rf: l 4 l ' ~ - ,ll t d eft t rf M E !f x.44, r f v~ r °~4a'tt q ri ~ c _ rv y 1• 5 L r $r;~ r'i ri 1 , A - I~C~71's~, ~ f - - 1 r, 4 rJ~ t.. to lnkM'yft ('rt T ~ e r'+`yr~y,;'~"'a~ a e A' r h _ rv i `Y. ~ rdais ,r C3 Y~ly}~ d~ " rl jt~xq ~ 'i•i1 j•. :e 1 _ _ 1~ ~SY~ t l1 ' 4~ 1A .rK' ~ ~~If'~-; i* f' $ ~~^~~o, pg~~~tu~,,.~ rgg,, y~ * 5 ~fp~'+,, S qyn ? ~D.,, 1. t ~ ~r' ~ - ; N (r••=+ ~u x { SYI y~. y g+~' ~~"~4~~~>~~.r'"txi~tF'Ld, S~~ .~i'j \~.N 15 .4f` I;'~ 4t ,n~ i = W = `~4 .,,.'ft'~,( ~•.d s r +,'3,ri`c, D ~~•;i„x'}rt ~'E. :rtt~l.; e r't~+'. ,a,. 1~ • ~k.' _ a ° t°41.~ Y ~'n ?!~•(,~le ~;i'F ~'".~'G~'p1'S~~u~, ~ + r"! .,"dl ~f .w`~r"f~• ~•f ( d - p- ~ S i,l +~x i;N.V~, J D1J r~+le C,/~~• ~u Sj~tr*y,~"~ W Pkt ~ r k y,a~~fl.l 4~t~i ri w~..,.f 7 .y~`S ^'~4 ;i ~ - _ V~ """fff y~ i ' 1: " t t '{~,~t~// t 1F f r °fho-~t~3i'y, 't}y+i•~!1'~~lr w ~ { ' .'ry~„ pr";11q't ric f 0 ti ~ ' _ rv ~':y D.. \5 4~.✓ 11~}~'s' yji~ ,~1r ''kW a4 as cW "G ~a r 4V ti~ xi ~ - ' a q, .}'u+11" 1 Ir 1 t'} rl'•.i ~arv~lwt,r ;n~bf7tt,WI~~11 ay'^ \ r 1 - '~'J~~i ~ 'ti;.s;.~•~; 'fir .3 r iV'i"s3!'i!" F'/„ + Q n.,, er An •d ~t {i'.t ro~ ,.h -j; i N _ e t t F Y" ~~~'~~~p x M,, _ ~~~~}f ~~~'~S`r~M)rhit`fS~~~~rJ'J 1~'r V.f i~f~.yF rt. R., ~`1 51 .S 3r, ~ - - n. a y 0 Df~t,t~ ~ e ^ti.~ qD V W t 1~ rC`7v D 1. py~ 4t lt; ( - ~ - ~W s ,~ry~ .y~~/ ~~~n d, ~~,•i 'r1V'F, iT I + it ~ ~ -++7 ~ "l tl - _ (a ~pp~:,hT~ ~dZ''C 1 P r fr .q?GY Y e .~y~„q ~ - t^: {,r df rt°(. 1E' ~'~f~ i .4![IS~C f Abe! ~,t fY14t 5~i. *d g 'y _ _ etiJ~ ''i'i{I.'r• } t'~l ~ c~b' , 11 f Myl l~ ^ 1~. _ D. `tF"-,p2"l` ~ ` _ - Nrt}.'~3 •1. tyh J~~qa ~r r ' 1tYJ k ~ t ~ t'r DD+1 i5~,~ ; ~ ~ - - _ P~ r: r'~''r~ ta; -.1 ~Tt~tih ~ }j~'~n r~ 1 h. 4 ~ ~ t _ .n - . r 1 3 ~ ! t ~r1 ,~c ~ ti ` ~.Y• n~ h D ! . , t - N - , 1~'f"r,.A.. 1~4~"4 ~r^~1',~p ~t ( ~.Z'~51 .hrs .,q~ I; t..`f~Y.~j1C~, ,S _ W ' t t W 4~ trx 1 + . 1 ' ~ t~r+ ~t ~ A~'`z' ~ ~ ~ i t t r, 1 it .~1 / `S M 1 ?tan / .et .;9' f, i' Mr a.ya!{?I,.,~'f 1~ ~~4~+b ~,,r,1 'j +f s~j ft ~fnr~ r~ ~ t I - X { r ~/'3'!'4P r t1 L n ti t e ~ + tr + ~ SJmn s i^ 4~ t } r ,t 1 .i titrlt ~ ,+7 ~ f y 7 ~ ! 4- .>~~,'t i'1`~„~ '1~jf~~. tir4d^3 p``TM I,D~, a~,,r tl1dk. ..17,s~ D~~ry'}, 1 I' aY ~f, ,1 f rJ~ +ti;li rfrl~ _ Nlr ~~tt ry ~r`~ 1 t `r' ~i, APPENDIX C S.U. 72 NO AUEJORIGGEPORT PREPARED BY: A HOEri iI-Jon-i0 PROJECT 80. 140166.01 SCHEME - A IN MATL LABOR LABOR UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION OTY if COST MIS RATE C05T C05i OIUISIGN 2 EARTiifGR% Nobili:ation o General Requirements : I LS 935,600 Traffic Control I LS 516,460 State Irmrovmmts = Excavate Existing Shoulder - 3' = 2386 Cf 0.6406 35=.16 $2.05 MHz Had Excess Material to Stock Pile: 2386 CY 0.0150 !82.76 $1.24 314462 Deno a Remove Curb 8 'cutter : 560 Lr 0.0200 $ .SG $0.95 $551 Deno 8 Remove Concrete Sidewalk 2320 Sr MOD $1750 $0.18 $1,102 Curb a butter 580 Lr $3.31 0.06GO $17.50 $6.16 33.5=3 Sidewalk 2328 Sr 90.81 0.0350 3=756 4Z.17 35,-m Asphalt Pavement : 647 TH $ZS.OO 6.0290 ac43.7i $32.07 $20,742 Aggregate Base 46a C:, $6.00 01006 $SG.is $13.05 $14fi 9 Signal Modification 1 LS 960,600 Striping = 1 IS $2,50v t : STATE i'MPROU:BM - SUa IRL $13i,6BO r.. Scheme - A inprovmenis Clear 6 Grub 1.06 AC 92,560.00 12,651 Excavate Existing Shoulder - 3' 5114 CY 0.0408 $51.16 $Z.O3' $10,528 Huai Excess Material to Stock Pile= 5144 CY O.G1SO $82.78 $1.21 $6,368 Curb a Gutter = 1570 Lr $3.31 0.0600 $47.50 $6.16 $9,671 A Sidewalk = 6280 Sr $0.81 6.033500 $47.56 $2.17 $15,527 Rsphalt Pavmmt = 1122 TH $25.00 0.0246 $213.71 $32.07 9354970 Aggregate Base : 343 CY $8.00 01000 $50.98 $13.05 33a,i8i 3' Rsohalt Overlay = 32340 Sr $9.50 0.0006 03.71 90.65 920,400 Guard Rail Time 2A : 700 U $10.00 7,606 Roadway Island = 3 ER $I,Sv"O.u^6 $4,500 Signal Nodification I LS $50:000 Striping i LS $7,666 : • STATE IMPROUEMFF - SUSTOM $Z03,~c6 s s r~x~ w~~vrr;E;wwwrrxwr~riw SOat6TAL THIS mauri S389.9s; t K S,U. 72 0 NE.161I06EPORT PREPARED BY: R HUETT II-iun=,O PROJECT NO. 140100.01 SCHEME - A UH MIL LABOR LABOR UNIT TOTRi, DESCRIPTION MY IT COST "HIS RATE EST COST CUHTRACTORS ON a P 1 10.001 S34,uOO SUBIGHL. THIS FACILITY i428,500 CONTINGE0 8 20.001 $43.6000 MINE TOTAL 3KMOO FILE: S-A.UKI 5 tp FogF i S.U. 72 NO AUE.fO'ti IGGEPORT PREPARED BY: A NUT 11-Jun-SO PROJECT NO. 190206.01 SCHEME - 8 rfw~ ON MAIL LABOR LABOR UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION DIY iT COST MN' "S RATE COST COST BIUISI6N 2 EARTiRl6RK Mobilization 3 General Requirements : I LS $35.000 Traffic Control : I LS 53;,560 State Inprovm0t3 Excavaie Existing Shoulder - 3' 23386 Ci 0.0400 35116 $2.05 s4,8a2 Maui Excess Material to Stock Pile: 2366 Ci 0.0150 $82.78 Si.24 52,962 Dena a Remove Curb 8 Gutter : Sag LF 0.0200 $47.50 $0.95 aa5, Deno o Remove Concrete Sidewalk : 2320 SF 0.6I63 S47.56 Sam- $1,16Z Curb o Gutter SOO LF $3.31 0.0600 Si7.SO $6.16 93,573 Sidewalk 2320 Sr 30.8i 0.03SO 547.56 $2.47 551136 nsphalt Paummt 647 IN $25.00 6.0290 5243.74 $32.07 $20,742 Aggregate Base Cy $8.00 O.I000 $50.48 $13.05 $14629 ~ Signal Modification i LS 506,u00 Striping I LS SLS00 { STATE IMPRO W61 - SUBTOTAL S13i,660 c Scheme • a Inorovments = Clear 8 Grub = Z.% RC • $2,560.60 37,411 Excavate Existing Shoulder - 3' z 25237 Ci 0.0400 $51.16 $2.05 55I,644 Maui Excess Material to Stock Pile: 25237 Ci 0.0150 $82.78 3114 $31,336 Retaining gall -10' = 310 LF $80.00 2.6000 347.56 $175.60 354,256 r Deno 8 Remove Curb 8 Gutter 50 LF 8.026'11 $17.58 30.95 $is Ow B Renave Concrete Sidewalk : 200 Sr 0.0106 $47.50 $0.48 995 Curb 8 Gutter s 56 LF $3.31 0.0600 $47.58 3616 sm Sidewalk 3 200 Sr $6.81 0.0356 547.50 $2.47 5495 Asphalt Payment : 2197 TO $25.06 0.0290 524334 532.67 $70,969 aggregate One : 43,85 CY $8.00 6.1000 $50.48 $13.05 $57,216 Goad Rail Type ZA : IBM LF $18.00 $16,0 Roa W Islam! : 3 CA 31,5co.00 34,560 Signal 2 EA 3130,600.06 5268,600 Stripiq = I LS 9-(,500 : STATE IMPROVEMENT - SUBTOTAL 35.35,270 rr...~carrr6.wirr.wx~.wrwwarera;cvrr F 7k t tii S.U. r"2 No i;4'E.raHIUOC'P6RT FUPiHiED BY: A HGEFT II-lun-i0 y PRORECT NO. 19006.01 SCRU E - a ON MRIL LABGR LABOR UNIT TOTAL BESCRIPTIOH OTY IT Cos, HH'S RATE COST COST SUBTOTAL THIS FACILI- Si53,;uu CONTRACTORS GH a P H IO.uua" S-(S,gm SUBTOTAL THIS FACILITY S635.300 CGHTINGENCY 2 26.60s" SI62.200 ESTIMATE TOTAL S1.017.500 FILE: SCHEME-a.UKi i t 2 i i is i {r' G C: c S.G. 72 NO flUEARIDGE?OR, FREPBRED BY: R NET II-3un- 0 FROaECT NO. 1$0106.01 SCef9wE - C UB MIL LRBOR LEOR UNIT T01RL DESCRIPTION 0ri IT COST MN'S Rn1E COS, CGS, DIVISION 2 ERRIWORE M Mobilization O General Requirements : i LS Sas,000 Traffic Control 1 LS 3a~.i30 State Imurovenents Excavate Exiiting Shoulder - 3' 2386 CY B.OiGO 351.16 32.u5 $4,882 Maui ExCess Material to Stock File: 2386 C? 0.0150 $82.18 $1.2i sz.%Z Deno 8 Remove Curb 8 butter . SBD Lf 0.0200 $47.50 $0.55 $551 Deno 8 Remove Concrete Sidewalk : 2320 Si 0.0100 $47.50 50.i8 $1.102 Curb 3 Gutter 560 lF S3.31 0.060E1 547.50 S16.16 53,5733 f Sidewalk 2 2320 Sr $0.81 0.0356 S47.S0 $2.47 35,136 Ra*lt Pavement . 617 IN $25.00 0.0250 3243.74 a"32.07 $10.142 x flurepate Base 3 968 Cr $8.00 0.1000 $5038 3'13.05 $12,625 4 Signal Modification I LS $80,000 ' Striving 1 LS $2,500 STB,E IMPRGVE4iQNT - SUBTOTBL $134,660 Scheme - C Inorovenents Clear 9 Grub : 1.14 8C . $2.500.00 31,8i5 Excavate Existing Shoulder - 3' : i5611 CY 0.0im $51.16 $2.05 531,946 Haul Excess Material to Stock Pile: 15611 CY 0.0150 382.78 31.24 $19,384 Demo 8 Remove Curb 3 Gutter : S0 Lr 0.0200 $47.50 50.95 $48 Dema i Remove Concrete Sidewalk 200 SF 0.0100 547.50 30.48 $95 Curb 8 fatter 13 6 Lr 5331 DAM $47.50 3o.16 $7,700 Sidewalk 5000 Sr $6.61 0.0350 347.50 52.47 $14363 BsoWt Pavement : 2% TN $25.06 0.02290 314307i $32.07 $78,264 flWegste Base :5004 Ci $3.00 0.1000 VA AS $13.05 a'6S,Z88 Baphait Qverlar : 32BG SF 3050 0.00060 $243.74 50.65 520.900 Guard Rail Type 20 1450 Lr $10.00 $141Su0 Road+av fsland : 5 ER $1.560.00 $7,500 Signal 2 en 3130,000.00 326c'm 'atri~inp s 1 LS $7.000 STRTE IMPRDUKIT - SUBTOT& 3517,830 • x+c~:xr~war»r~3rr•;~r~crwwrrw:wwxs~si►w~w. . i S.G. 72 NO BOEARIO6EFORT FKEFRM BY: B WEFT II-Jun~O PROJECT HO. 130106.01 SCOE - C OH MRIL LBBOR LBBOR UNIT TOTBL DESCRIPTION OTY IT COST MIS ME COST COST SIUMOUL THIS fOCILITY 573O,fiw Cu"t1TOCTORS m 6 F R WAR $73,100 SBBTOTHL THIS FBCILITY 3BG3,70O Cu"14TIiCEIn Y d MAX $175,900 ESUMTE TOM 5373,IG0 FILE: SCHETtE-CAl ' i t S.N. 72 NO niiE.lBRi06EPORF PRiPRRcD 6Y= R NGu'i iI-lum-90 PROJECT W. 196 06.61 SCOE - 0 UN MIL LABOR Ln6GR UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION M IT COST TDi'S RATE COST COST OIUIS16N 2 ERRIMORK : mobilization 3 General Requirements = 1 LS $35,000 Traffic Control i LS M.%G State Inorovenento Excavate Existing Shoulder - 3' 2366 U 6.0400 SSi.i6 $2.05 $4,682 haul Excess material to Stock Rile: 2386 Ci 0.6156 562.78 SI.Zi $2.%2 Deno 6 Remove Curb 3 Gutter ' : SOD Lr 0.0200 Si7.50 $6.95 SSSi Deno 6 Remove Concrete Sidewalk : 1320 Sr 0.0100 W.50 $0.46 SWO1 Curb B Gutter 580 Lr $3.31 0.0660 S17.S0 $6.16 $3,3'7'0 Sidewalk 2320 Sr $0.81 0.0350 Si7.S0 SZ.i7 SS.-116 Rwholt Pavement 647 IN SZUM 0.62;6 $243.74 $32.07 SZ0.74Z Aggregate Bane 966 Ci $6.00 0.1060 550.48 $13.653 SILKS Sional modification 1 LS $60.000 Striping I LS 52400 STATE ItNPROUBW - SUBIOTRL S134,66D Scheme - 0 Tnorovenent3 = Clear 3 Grub s 1.61 RC S2,S00.03 $6,5Z5 Excavate Existing Shoulder - 3' = 23x'2 V 0.04DO SSi.i6 $2.65 546,136 Haul Excess material to Stock Pile: Z-BUn. Ci 0.0150 $02.76 S1.2i $29,2D"o Retaining Nail -10' 3 310 Lr $08.00 1.0000 $47.50 $175.10 3S4.ZSO Demo 6 Rowe Curb 6 Gutter I BO Lr O.D2ZM Si7.56 $0.90 S76 Demo 6 Remove Concrete Sidewalk 3ZD Sr 0.0160 547.S0 $0.48 5152 Curb a Gutter : BO Lr $3.31 6.0600 547.56 $6.16 5493 Sidewalk 320 Sr $0.01 0.0350 Si7.S0 $2.i7 $731 Rspheit Pavement : 2906 IN 325.00 8.6290 4243.74 Sac.67 393,19 Aggregate Sax 56ir U $8.00 6.1066 55638 S13.65 Sio.OTr Guard Rail Type 2B s I'm if $10.00 311,000 Roadway Tsland 4 ER 51,S60.G0 !61108 Signal : i ER 5150,000.06 S1SO.OOD Striping 1 LS 57.003 : STATE ImPROUE I - SUBTOTAL S48i'm _ : 5.9. is NO RVEJORIGGEPORT FURRED 67: R HOETT 11-;un~u PROJECT N0. 190100.661 SCOE - 0 ~YilllifW" ME*A"B ON IMIL L,ROOR LROOR OBIT TGi6L DESCRIPTION OTY IT COST MIS WE CST COT S06TOTRL THIS rOCILITY rooStlGG CGHURCTORS GH 3 P I 10.00: aoa'sm MOWN THIS FRCILITY 5753,600 COBTINmi a 20.00: 3I6~.iG0 E?TIBHTE TOTRL S9io.GO3 rILE: SC3icM-621 is i. s• f is ggc f' 8 A W s.m APPENDIX D Calculation summaries follow. A complete package of Passer-2 calculations is available upon request. z r'. f: L' C. rY P. i t e t E i { t EX/STING -FKAFr lC MARCH 1911o) : N r- tfl RM. ?E.< Houk 4;4s--S..45 P M. r ` ~l II a 194 1540 81t►oc,E t 1440 12 Slog N TcsrAL= 1953 uPt{ m N 0 290 SPACE! 104 TRIM Vr LOT 24 47 EMTEI~ IZ8 EXIT r- In 175 VPH ri N FUTURE TIZAFFIG (p,M, PEAK Howe) &AS rJ'OURC-E TRIP SENCRATION, ADDED TRAr-FIG @ tNTERSECTI ON 'AuRHAM EXTI✓NSIoN MEM. ANAUMIS a 1=OR WASH. doum-ry I 119 44(o) bi yi ? 24o VP)4 (NEW) TRIMET: PROPOSED }q,E,I, OBSER.VI~'RoNS 150 SPACE LOT OF E,(1 ST 1 NG L07- -7 ►1 ~ ~ -a t- 2S ETIi'ER ~i ? Tr 7 EXIT 105 VPH (New) GINGHAM SITE % M,E.L , TRAFFIC r-M, IMPAGr ANALYSIS 12A I .T. E . LAND USE CADES I ~ 12, 15-) 310 pct1D 820 r. (9). I l (lo P 1 C413 '14 WH(NE?w) N LV ?3S VPH (uEM (10RRERT IL ?DMIN14 PRISED C4 ZONE 11~T1=R S ~CTi ors! IMPACTS BY nD ER M OTT LD t=12 [300 N E K~1~ 2`ttz -5,W, 72h1» AV E DATE & 113 z9 n MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED JOB NO' 1 q01 DCo 1 0690S.W. BANCROFT STREET PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 (50) 224-9M SHT. OF P.O. BOX 69039 PORTLAND. OREGON 97201 FAX (503)228.1265 CORPOR 7969 ATED © ALL MACKENZIE TIGHS RESERVED i A.M. p~K HOOR CYC•lE PRo(.Ms N. ART~tAI. 72ND IN, S8 IN7K • N13 ,N'rC Mc72ND AVE, )N) T;<. AL, LENGTH E;::F4CtEAIC" RYE7'AGc `dlEST; `:NfJ Q.':c'=~ MAX We MItX . v/ c tNAX q jc INT't (SE: (Se~/~1~r!; rta ANY ovY F ter,^Pt:~ "Z Cvt-.H 1H `-)ToPS' \ >k>k 5.5 v O g? C.~l 2~;r(~ 0.609 0.;5 ►.2°1 0.85 4~G , =1/1 1=T. (N6 ~ ccT~ i i O ~ 72 * p.85 4J~ 4.z 32°•i:~ O 8>✓ G',IE* ?5,u 0.617 6),-75 p,aaX 0,:34= 957 f~ _ Lam'.' (tiETrRU = /I7 FT I ~3 ( 7Z 0. 4a 2(x.'1• 0.7/ 0,7& I 1,13 D,Sg~; -400 4,7-5vE4/ 1 ILAN (Na LE.FT) _ b& F T', No-,c, PA5Sc/ZZ-e-'r AKAL`SIS IS 1 5TOFS/HR x (r05 LANE LISE FAGTog) SASED UPOM FEAK IS ;`IitJ. L= X ZOI AVGCAR (CyG16~HRX2 [~4NE5~` VOLUMES, TNERSSC<.,Nv PEAIUNG F-Ac-,o2 IS usiP IN OUCU►NC, AUAv!SIS 'NOT!;- ; FP6--VI51Ch4 OF DUAL LZ-- , ?UL'.V 1 AW E ~tc,^,J-1 THE NGIZ:TNY30vNV -;FGAFwlP WCU L D 5l6N)FICA•N7L,,f I f PtoVe' THIS RAT, Q, IvOTGS 'G`Fr!GIE}•!C`~ iS JLA-f"- • AS SUH OF F-kNc> '.X' A'NC i:rt~:.^, W1Dir,' D U1D - A. C ! GvH!GL1 Croti';AIAJp I'`- /NTc7"•rc':: T'Oii A,7 S,W . TAP- COMP(JTER, V1 tWS THG 8- DAECTIOIJ ~'-AS -600NO) QA-NDwID7,1 As S5E oNDS . ' pv.5, TMIS k"riNG IS F-%I~%G'.-.~.~5 . ~tNG~;-►~T-' Ti2AF~IG /s~!/~~7~15 By 1~►0~-DATE r(O lr1MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED JOBNO.J 9o_1C~.01 0690 S.W. BANCROFT STREET PORTLANO.OREGON 97201(503) 224.9560 SHT OF P.O. BOX 69039 PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 FAX (503) 228.1285 © MACXVNZIE ENGINEERING R*HIRESERVED INCORPORATED 1989 P ,M. pE7~ck HOUR CYCLE PR04~55~b1 AX-FRIAL 72ND i se wry- NL INT`,4 m,MAN e ND IAVE. Il\1TC. LT. wfrs0VNo atvE~:f= LENGTH E,=FiCt~TiC( 14YER--46c ~Y MAX VIC MAX. V/c MAX V/ C INrx, 1 Sc~Al ~ -bft ANY FOR ANY FoR. AN. MAX `SIC STOPS QUEUE 1 SEC/ i / MoVEt-tE" T epvq-VJT A".9VEM.7:7 MoV 7'E.'3T ~vt=N~HR~ Lew6,TH 0 74 o,19 1q,7 o,-71 o;72. a"a Z 0,i? 52~ 5.-IveiXAm 114 FT O 73 0123 f 0,77 P, l4 d, Q :),-7 5. cvEHILANC 0 7(v ~j.;9 2;.7 ll,~o o,-7t 0,92- 0,7177 5?= . ttc~ F- i DD 73 0,23 z o, L 01-7 7 0,72 01 8 -7:~ p,i7 448 . 95 F7. Nom' PA=SMZ-&t- A.PQALY5i5 fs SToPS/NK x (I.C5 LANE u5E FACTVQ) 5A 6r--D UPCN FEAfc fS.LflAl. L= x Zo Ave".cpr„ VOLUM1531 t'flE2f3~feE,ND (G , CL6M/y2k2 LAN C5) iKAIC1NG t=ACip2 15 (.`SL? ~ iJCT~ ! F2: VIS►Ct~: CF ~VF::. Ly=i TVL',..V C.ANr..' ~E1°! Tr!~ rIC~C.TKC~•V111•i/~` ~F,~,E.-~W!P UXV = % 51 Ut4I F!-- A N I w PZOVC 'r fS RAT, Cf. A.-S sum of aA N : P. ~N C CAN p ' ~ W1D'". ~11J!CEr' IC:r 5`c A~ c A A > C , W H I C.L~ (2-:)Aj : F l,ll A AT, S;.v GJr~~Pv;~ V/E~/VS 7NC 8-~! i~v)v~ ~5A5 ~oU~tlD~ B~t~lUwlG' AS 5,z^at-1DS . T~zAp;=/C ANALYSIS By ~rrZ~~►D""'~ DATE /z JOB NO. J4C~Cw• n) MACKENZIE ENGINEERING INCORPORATED 0690 S.W. BANCROFT STREET PORTLAND. OREGON 97201(503) 220.9560 SHT. OF P.O. BOX 69039 PORTLAND. OREGON 97201 FAX (503) 228-1285 MACKENZIE ENGINEERING (NCCRPORA7E: C 1989 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - Planning Coammission Minutes - July 10, 1990 . Verbatim Transcription PUBLIC HEARING CClJSID Leverett: I don't have anything much to say right at the moment. I guess I don't really agree with uh, part of this statement that, uh we just focused on here just a little bit ago regarding the uh, less than parcels the industrial parcel less than 4 acres is not an economic unit principally, and I guess I don't agree with that. Um, at least right at the moment I'm more inclined to stay with the existing zoning cwnprehensive plan. I think, I don't know who all was on the coam fission when we had a project dawn there on 72nd, a ocanpleted project that was in dial zone and I think we left that in an industrial zone. That shopping complex, uh, Oh, that one that went into industrial park and ended up trying to be retail. Leverett: Right. That's a problem we've had with industrial park zone. Leverett: That's all, I'll probably have some more ccnm eats as we go on. That's all for right now. Mr. Peterson? Peterson: Well I think at this point in time I pretty much have to agree with staff's cmmnents. I do believe that uh, there's a lot of ground on the other side of the freeway and I really don't think that it influences uh, charge in the on this particular piece of ground. So I will support Staff's recommendation of denial. OK. Cmmdssioner Saporta? Saporta: Um, regarding the uh, the uh, traffic considerations, I don't think this project would uh, really adversely affect or impact existing conditions no matter what goes in there, we're going to have pretty much the same situation. This issue that I'm wrestling with is whether indeed there is a true change in circumstance which would grant the uh, zone change. Um, most of the commercial development is on the east side of the freeway, um, I view that as a barrier, not as a something that is invisible that can be gone over. It is a true barrier. On the other hand to the south there is quite a bit of ommnerci al develcpnent, but if you go to the north and possibly to the west, um, that still is light irxlustri.al. I just haven't made up my mind. I'd be interested in hearing what the other commissioners have to say. PLANNING - CMffSSION MEMIES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 1 ~J J a rs1 .a kr^•' J ro •J O r. K F,. N ti fi c~j3 k .5 M 0 . Y• h' ro ' (p ct Iro O tt Y M 7~ ro tt Q n ti pa p~ N• ~ ro ~ ro " C1' ~ ~ tt' ~ ~~tr 0 O 1 ~ N W tD tt rpt (D r -to 0 " ro O r• M 5 k :J Y' tj1 ~J 0 Aw Q -o r M O~ Zo roKn - iD r. N M • i C1 `G+ H N ~ifi r• a ~tjj' 90 r. g ,J ID- r•' ro O 7 ro F-+ .7s tD tt L~ - r Or R• A ' o W • di N " -j .0 (D (D a " ~ .J a ro ~ R+ ID 5 t~1 {y H . t9~ y~ tD F"' M ►i O _ ti N C D fl, 5- Wit ~,o M " H ro 0) N ~ o~ - ro F+~ fit' fl ro~ 'v M Ct bt M ~ ►J ~ ~ t G ID Y F'• N a O f t 0 t+ M ~j A rM,•i~NY 'Groff, Qt ~•O ato µ H2 N H s 0 Val w ID £ t7 iu 0 GN ,j O t4 p~ r' ►A ~r rt vt'5r 0 • • r rt - 0 ro 0. 010 ' tD fi M 15 Ct OK. Ah, Commissioner Barber? Barber: I agree that the ah, traffic issue has been beaten to death and probably there would not, that much more traffic with the ccunercial than with the industrial. It appears to me that if a hotel and other uses were allowed if the change were made to an in, industrial park, I don't see why there would be that much uhm, opposition to changing it to commercial. I'm not sure I have made up my mind yet. OK. Ah, Commissioner Boone? Boone: Well it appears that uh, to me as the newcranx, that we have a piece of industrial property surrounded by county pits and other municipalities that think this is a commercial area. As I look at it outside of freeways and the gravel pit, there's nothing but ocaamiercial. nie amount of traffic, I do not feel is a problem because there are many different types of industrial and many different types of commercial. Some generate more than others, I mean, I know, I've been involved in some of these things, and the amount of traffic varies considerably between similar things that are permitted in each zone. I realize it's on the edge of Tigard, but I don't if we should be looking at this as Tigard, ignoring what else Oswego and Tualatin does, or say hey, this is a whole area that normally will develop around an intersection off of a freeway. It happens all the time. We used to build things in strips, now we build them in circles around freeway access. And while it isn't good, it sure is handy. And I can not see a problem in doing edam rcial, except the fact it will probably make Bingham more money, and that I'd be against. But other than that... that's about it. Moen: Um, well I guess from my standpoint, looking at this, um, I think it's significant, a couple of things are significant, in looking at this property. One is that indeed, it, you know, I've driven down there many times, and uh, been in the stacking lane waiting to go to Costco like a lot of people, um, I, I think that the uh, I think it is significant, I don't think we can ignore the properties that have developed around there and the general change, I think there is a change in character of the area to a camnmae vial area. I think that the property itself is relatively isolated from out other industrial land. I think it is right on the edge of it. Um, I don't think it will greatly impact our, our available industrial land. Obviously, certain, x number of acres would go away from industrial land, but on the other hand I think, that uh, as a commercial development with its access to the, you know, the close proximity to the freeway, I think is kind of unique in that sense, and uh, there isn't too much properly left like that. I think we've got a very good, good significant size industrial development to the north, uh, a number of industrial developments. I initially was thinking about, well IP might be a good compromise but Commissioner Leverett reminded me, and it's PLANNING OMUSSION MIIQ[TI'F5 - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 3 true, that anytime we take an area that basically should be or very possibly could be strongly commercial and zone it IP, we end up handing the staff a whole bunch of problems because some guy develops, builds a commercial center on an'IP zone and then tries to fill it up with oonmaercial people and the staff is running around trying enforce, enforce the restrictions to an IP zone, and it doesn't work. As far as traffic goes, I think we should take into account traffic, I don't think was should necessarily stop doing things because we're going to impact traffic. Every time we put a subdivision in, we're going to impact traffic, and I think its been demonstrated, at least to my satisfaction from ODOT, that that can be, you know, that that's not, its certainly there, I don't see a significant different between each one, and that uh, MOT has a plan, and to, and feels a responsibility to mitigate that thing all the way out to 72nd Street, so I think there is something that's going to happen. So in that sense, I wold be in favor of uh, shorting the applicant's request for change to ea mm-vial, uh, however I would like to look, take some strong thoughts as far as the conditions which we might place on soaothing like that. So, any other cmmmits, Commissioners? Some of you folks heard everybody out, do you have anything else put forward? I'd be willing to entertain a motion to get things started. Leverett: Well, I'll make a motion. Moen: OK Leverett: I rave that we approve ecenparehensive, repo mend to the city Council for approval, is that what we're doing? Reoammend to the City council for approval Comprehensive Plan Amerrtment CPA 90-004 and same recommendation for zone change, 7AN 90-002, with, I don't have any conditions, I assume was should probably, I don't know, work on conditions. OK. I think the first thing we would have to address for the roe for approval would be uh, those uh, conditions in the staff report, the findings that were negative. I guess with respect to uh, goal 12. Do you want me to take a stab at that, or would you like to? No, I'll let you stab that. HUH. Let you stab that. I think Mr. Hathaway had some pretty good uh, covered sane of those pretty well OK, with respect to goal 12 and uh plan policy item 6, Plan Policy PLANWMG CM9SSION NIIN[TrFS - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 4 i i' i J 8.8.1, I guess I would make the cent that uh, we would find that the additional traffic impact uh, would not be significantly different in either case. Not have a significant impact of stacking or traffic in either case which is confirmed by the testimony by the gentleman from ODOT. Back to item 4, policy 5.1 we would find that um, economic diversity is not adversely affected by developing this particular parcel, coimnereial rather than industrial. I think those are the two, two main items. OK. I suggest we approve these conditions. OK. Arid then we had some conditions that were suggested to us by, on page 7 of the uh, additional traffic analysis. Um, 1-4 I guess, I think the only thing I would change is in item 4, I would say that the, it says, we say here the max m responsibility of site and the LID show a 9.3% of the improvement cost based on traffic impact, uh, I think that's a little premature, and matter of fact, I would say, I would like to ct a ge maxin u m to minimum, but I don't knave if that's fair to the applicant. Maybe we should r just strike that line altogether. (female): Negotiated between... } Well normally, that's what a IM is. It so I would just strike that last sentence altogether. OK, so that's the modifications and conditions, Commissioner Leverett, it's your motion. Do you concur? i How °s it looking? Looks good. Did I leave you much? I guess I'm suggesting those changes to the findings plus the addition of this, these four conditions suggested by the applicant with the exception of striking the last sentence of item 4. How was that bond figure established? In item #3? Well the bond figure is really, I think, scanething the applicant has volunteered as a good faith contribution. It isn't necessarily a minimum but it's a... that was arrived at by his analysis of the 9.3% which was feeling of a contribution of traffic to the intersection. And as far as that goes, that's just, you know, I think that's a good faith effort. I don't think we can play with that. I guess we can do anything we want but I don't think it's fair to do anything. He volunteered that amount of funds to the cause, it may cost him more with the LID, but that's something to be determined between himself and some other parties, not for us. Fier: I'll second that motion. PLANNING COM`USSION MINL= - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 5 OK. We have a motion that was made and seconded. Do you concur? Any other discussion? All those in favor of the motion that was made and seconded, signify by saying aye. Aye Opposed? Castile & Peterson: Nay. OK. Could we have a roll call please? That's the easy way to do it. Donald Moen? Moen: Aye Vlasta Barber? Barber: Aye James Castile? Castile: Nay Judy Fessler? Fessler: Aye Milt Fyre? Fyre: Aye Deane Leverett? Leverett: Aye- Dave Peterson? Peterson: Nay Harry Saporta? Saporta: Aye- ? Boone? Boone: Aye. PIANNINC= OCFMSSION DEDL M -JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 6 Moen: OK. My accOlMt says the motion carries 7 to 2? OK. Very good. I think its time for about a 10 minute recess. Back in ten minutes to carry on. rm\cm d-v\cpa9004 fL PLANNING OMUSSION MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 PAGE 7