The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 11/20/2002 ~.i t TIGA CITY-ZO CIL WOrK^HO i TI .t NOVEMBER 20, 2001 COUNCIL ETIN ILL T E TELEVISED. H:Voann[9tdocs%=pkt2 .a ~x tY }Y;'F~ kk~'dh -,M~r~,:4 izt""~ itiFt - ~ tr ~ il ~,~$t- { ' . 7 l _ 1 Y'4 vyq: ~,r'.~;,y+t ,4";f >•7' ti •5 .G3. 3 4 s ' CITY OF TIOARD PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503.639-4171, Ext. 309 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and ® Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead-time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date by calling. 503-639-4171, x309 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - November 20, 2001 page 1 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING November 20, 2001 6:30 PM 1. WORKSHOP MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 8t Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non Agenda Items 6:35 PM 2. DISCUSSION OF SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE ON MAJOR COLLECTORS a. Staff Report: Public Works Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Direction: Should staff continue to perform sidewalk maintenance adjacent to City properties only, or should sidewalk maintenance be expanded to include major collectors? 7:05 PM 3. PROGRESS REPORT ON THE NEW CITY WEB SITE a. Staff Report: Administration Staff b. Council Discussion 7:25 PM 4. UPDATE ON BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION STUDY a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion 7:50 PM 5. REVIEW THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion 8:35 PM 6. UPDATE ON THE TRI-MET ACTION PLAN a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion COUNCIL AGENDA - November 20, 2001 page 2 8:45 PM 7. REVIEW DRAFT AGREEMENTS FOR CITY-SPONSORED EVENTS FOR THE TIGARD FESTIVAL OF BALLOONS, TIGARD 4.. OF JULY, AND BROADWAY ROSE THEATER a. Staff Report: Administration Staff b. Council Discussion 9:05 PM 8. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 9:10 PM 9. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 9:20 PM 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identlfying the applicable statue. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discpssed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 9:30 PM 11. ADJOURNMENT UTIG3331USR%DEPTS%ADhACATHY%CCN,011120.DOC COUNCIL AGENDA - November 20, 2001 page 3 AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS FOR REVIEW NOVEMBER 20, 2001 The Study Session is held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. Enter at the back of Town Hall. The Council encourages Interested citizens to attend all or part of the meeting. If the number of attendees exceeds the capacity of the Conference Room, the Council may move the Study Session to the Town Hall. > EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may 4o into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced Identifying the applicable statue. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS Distributed Memorandum on Goal Setting Meeting - January 14, 2001, 1 p.m. In the Tigard Water Building Auditorium • November 15, 2001, letter from Metro regarding MPAC and the vote on the alternate member for the "Other Cities" Distributed Memorandum from Dennis Koellermeier to Bill Monahan regarding the Water Main Break Distributed Memorandum from Bill Monahan to the City Council regarding his schedule for next week. 11 pq Executive Session - The Public Meetings Law authorizes governing bodies to meet in executive session in certain limited situations (ORS 192.660). An "executive session" Is deflned as "any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body, which Is closed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.660 (1) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, if the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660 (1) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660 (1) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660 (1) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this Instance.) 192.660(l) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660(l) (f) - Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public inspection." These records are specifically Identified In the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660 (1) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660 (1) (h) - Legal counsel - Executive session are appropriate for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660 (1) (1) - To review and evaluate, pursuant to standards, criteria, and policy directives adopted by the governing body, the employment-related performance of the chief executive officer, a public officer, employee or staff member unless the affected person requests an open hearing. The standards, criteria and policy directives to be used In evaluating chief executive officers shall be adopted by the governing body in meetings open to the public in which there has been an opportunity for public comment. 192.660 (1) Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (1) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. Agenda Item No. Meeting of _ l a . Z MINUTES TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 20, 2001 1. WORKSHOP MEETING 1.1 Mayor Griffith called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1.2 Roll Call: Mayor Griffith and Councilors Dirksen, Moore, Patton and Scheckla were present. 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications az Liaison Reports: None 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Mon Agenda Items: City Manager Monahan noted that he would report on the recent water line break. 2. DISCUSSION OF SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE ON MAJOR COLLECTORS Public Works Director Wegner introduced this agenda topic and reviewed the history of this item. A copy of the staff report is on file in the City Recorder's office. Mr. Wegner reviewed the current policy on sidewalk maintenance: City crews maintain sidewalks on those sidewalks that are adjacent to City-owned property. If the City intends to assume responsibility for sidewalk maintenance for sidewalks adjacent to major collector streets, Mr. Wegner recommended certain procedures be followed (as outlined in the staff repori). Mr. Wegner noted that it would require more resources to maintain additional sidewalks. For example, ice removal on additional sidewalks would require extra effort during icy conditions when at the same time more crew members are called upon to keep the streets safe. Mr. Wegner referred to a map depicting the major collector streets located within the City. There are three key questions that need to be decided should major collector sidewalks be added to as a maintenance responsibility: 1. At what level would the City of Tigard accept responsibility - structural and/or maintenance? 2. Level of maintenance? 3. How would the City go about accepting segments of sidewalk for maintenance responsibility? In response to a question from Councilor Scheckla regarding why a property owner would be willing to accept a sidewalk because of liability, Mr. Wegner referred to COUNCIL MINUTES - November 20, 2001 page 1 i Tigard's Code requirements for sidewalk maintenance. Mr. Wegner noted that the only major collector completely constructed Is Durham Road. During discussion, City Manager Monahan noted that he believed it is common throughout the area that the adjoining property owner is responsible for sidewalk maintenance. Mr. Paul Owen, representing the Summerfield area, advised that the question of sidewalk maintenance and liability was posed about a year and a half ago. At that time Summerfield residents abutting Durham Road expressed concerns about whether it was fair that they be required to assume responsibility for property maintenance both in front and back of their properties. It is also difficult for the residents to access the property along Durham Road because of the wall that has been constructed along Durham Road. Mr. Owen distributed photographs of the area including utility trucks (non-City) parked on the sidewalk while workers were performing maintenance. He asked the City consider taking responsibility of the maintenance of the right of way, including the sidewalk and the landscaped area to the property line. He also would like the City to assume liability. A Summerfeld resident who lived adjacent to Sattler Street asked if Sattler Street was included in this discussion. Mr. Wegner explained that it had been decided to narrow the maintenance discussion to sidewalks adjacent to major collector streets; therefore, Sattler Street is not included. Discussion followed on a number of concerns and issues relating to this matter. During discussion, Councilor Moore noted that the Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force was considering a maintenance fee for right-of-way maintenance. In other cities, such a maintenance fee is paid as an item due on utility billings. The Council discussed the issue of whether to go forward with maintenance of the sidewalk along of Durham Road. The majority of Council member advised of concerns with equity for other City residents who are also required to maintain property adjacent to sidewalks. After discussion on financing options and equity issues, Council consensus was that the Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force's idea for a citywide street/sidewalk maintenance fee might be a way to address this issue. Mr. Owen (of Summerfeld) added that he thought this direction had merit. It is anticipated that a Task Force report could be presented to the City Council in January 2002. PION AGENDA Mr. Wegner updated the City Council on the water break that occurred on November 19 on Gaarde Street. A memorandum outlining the situation (from Dennis Koellermeir) is on file in the City Council packet and is available in the City Recorder's office. COUNCIL MINUTES - November 20, 2001 page 2 3. PROGRESS REPORT ON THE NEW CITY WEB SITE Web Administrator Victor Soares and Information Processing Technician Nancy Lof presented features of a proposed new web site for the City of Tigard. The site would be reconfigured and launched on January 2, 2002. After the presentation, several Council members noted the information appeared to be easy to read and navigate. Council meeting recessed: 8:10 p.m. Council meeting reconvened: 8:23 p.m. 4. UPDATE ON BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION STUDY Community Development Director Hendryx presented the staff report, which is on file with the City Recorder. In addition, a copy of the PowerPoint presentation outlining the highlights of Mr. Hendryx's address to the Council is on file with the City Recorder. There was discussion on the findings presented in the report. Financial implications of annexation were discussed. It was noted that System Development Charges (SDC) have not been collected to fund future parks in the area. The City has been attempting to persuade the County to start collecting funds for parks through an SDC assessment on new development. City efforts included a recent letter prepared and forwarded to the County Administrator by City Manager Monahan outlining the benefits of SDC revenue dedicated for parks. Much development has occurred in the Bull Mountain area without SDC funds collected that could have been used for parks. With regard to the information presented on the financial implications of annexing the area, there was discussion about the concern of financing capital improvement projects needed for the area. The study area has extensive capital needs. Capital costs for road and park improvements exceed the revenue projections for the area. Council members discussed concern with annexation because of the needs that are evident from the report findings. Mr. Monahan noted that County presented the Bull Mountain Plan in 1983. At that time, the City of Tigard noted (to LCDC) opposition to the Plan because no provision for parks had been made. Discussion followed on requests for individual annexation. Mr. Monahan outlined that perhaps the Council should only consider vacant land or, if the land was developed, people in the area acknowledge that funding is needed for parks. The staff will return to the City Council on November 27 with a formal presentation of the study. Once the study is accepted by the City Council, there will be a public outreach program to distribute the information to the area residents. Further discussion with the residents about the study will occur in January 2002. COUNCIL MINUTES - November 20, 2001 page 3 5. REVIEW THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN (TSP) Community Development Director Hendryx introduced this agenda item. DIES Associates Consultant Randy McCourt presented the TSP information. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation given to the City Council is on file in the City Recorder's office. The staff will return to the City Council on January 8, 2002, for a public hearing to consider the adoption of the TSP. 6. UPDATE ON THE TRI-MET ACTION PLAN Community Development Director Hendryx reviewed this agenda item. Staff presented a PowerPoint presentation, which is on file in the City Recorder's office. The presentation included an update on progress and an overview of the Tri-Met Action Plan. It was noted that the City Council would visit with Tri Met representatives in early spring 2002. 7. REVIEW DRAFT AGREEMENTS FOR CITY-SPONSORED EVENTS FOR THE TIGARD FESTIVAL OF BALLOONS, TIGARD 4T" OF JULY, AND BROADWAY ROSE THEATER City Recorder Catherine Wheatley presented the staff report, which is on file in the City Recorder's office. Also present for this agenda item were Dan Murphy of Broadway Rose Theater and Brace Ellis of the Tigard Festival of Balloons. Councilor Patton is a member of the Tigard 41 of July organization. After a review of the highlights of the agreements, the City Council and representatives for the City-sponsored event organizations agreed that the draft proposals were acceptable. A few questions were directed to Mr. Bruce Ellis regarding the Cook Park improvements and how this would affect the Balloon Festival. Mr. Ellis noted that he is aware of the park improvements and he has been working on a bus shuttle service for the event. Mr. Ellis noted safety issues and, to keep the event manageable, he has limited the number of balloons launched to 35. Council Patton noted that because of her involvement with the 4' of July event, she would not vote on the agreement when it is formally presented to the City Council for approval. - ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW: o City Manager Monahan reported that the Council goal setting meeting has been set for January 14, 2002. o There was brief discussion on the nominating process for the MPAC alternate position. o City Manager Monahan advised there would be no City Council newsletter distributed this week. COUNCIL MINUTES - November 20, 2001 page 4 IQPI~m 8. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS - None. 9. NON-AGENDA ITEMS - (Reviewed earlier in the meeting; see page 2). 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Cancelled. 11. ADJOURNMENT: 10:19 p.m. l~ rL?- Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Attest: ayo igard ate: , OOOQ \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADWI\CATHY\ CM\011120.DOC COUNCIL MINUTES - November 20, 2001 page 5 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TG: Honorable Mayor an~dA City Council Members FROM: Bill Monahan PpJ DATE: November 20, 2001 SUBJECT: Council Goal Setting - 2002 We have set the Council Goal Setting for Monday, January 14, 2002. The goal setting is tentatively set for the Water Building Auditorium. Last year the session began at 1:00 p.m. and concluded with a dinner at Cafe Allegro. I propose the same arrangements be made. Prior to the goal setting meeting, the city staff will be working on finalizing the update of the goal achievement for council goals set for the year 2001. In addition, I have asked members of the executive staff to propose draft language for council consideration for use in 2002. 1 expect that some draft goals will be continuations of those initiated in prior years and worked on in 2001 while other goals could be new goals proposed for 2002. If you have any concerns about the date, time, or content of the goal setting, please let me know. I: VU*A%MLWEW3WAV0R i CCCOAL SEfrM MZDW 6 0 0 N O R T H E A S T G R A N D A V E N U E I • O R T 6 A N 0, O R E G O N 9 II 12 2 7 3 6 T E L 5 0 3 7 9 7 1 7 0 0 F A X 5 0 3 7 9 7 1 1 9 7 V~ *0p i1zo . r •oT November 15, 2001 METRO NIS& The Honorable Jim Griffith City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mayor Griffith: The Washington County Other Cities Alternate position on the Metro Policy Advisory Committee (MPAC) is currently vacant. Recently, Rob Drake, Mayor of Beaverton solicited nominations from the Cities in Washington County to fill that position. The nominees are: Jim Griffith, Mayor of Tigard Angela Weeks, Sherwood City Councilor I would ask that at an upcoming Tigard City Council Meeting that the City Council indicate by vote who their selection would be to fill that position. If you would ask your Council Clerk to notify me of the selection after the vote, I would appreciate it very much. If there are questions, do not hesitate to contact me at (503) 797-1501. Sinc ely, Cathy Kirc r MPAC Staff ft.e7eled P.P.r www.roetro-region.org TOO 797 1804 Bill Monahan -11-19-01 water break memo.doc Pa e 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan FROM: Dennis Koellermeier RE: Water Main Break DATE: November 20, 2001 At approximately 1:30 am on November 19, 2001, City of Tigard Public Works staff received a call out (page) from the Tigard Police Department regarding the water line break on Gaarde Street. Ken Fisher and Rich Sattler (staff) arrived on site at 2:15 am. Police and TVFR had already closed the street due to the large volume of water cascading down 1191h Ave. and onto/across Gaarde Street. Due to the volume of water and proximity of the apparent break on site, staff began to isolate the water line break. Valving that was crucial to the water break was under water, requiring a large scale of shut down. Due to site conditions and the number of valves required to be shut off, a time frame of 1 %s hours was necessary to shut down water flow. Thirty to forty homes were without water. By 12:00 pm water was restored to all but two houses. The two remaining houses were provided temporary water connections by 2:30 pm. Water loss due to the break is estimated to be 1 %2 million gallons. The location of the main break undermined trees, flooded vaults and a back-up generator. A tree had to be removed to allow excavation of the repair site. City staff will be assessing the damage to City facilities following the repair of the broken water main and restoration of service to all customers. Gaarde Street was reopened for public use by 6AM. This incident attracted media attention and information was released through TVF&R, Tigard Police, and later on by Tigard Public Works Department staff. PGE was called in to pull fuses on transformers and isolate the site of electricity due to safety concerns for the repair staff. As of 2:00 pm, staff is aware of minor flood damage to three properties. One property Bill Monahan -11--19-01 water break memo.doc Pa e 2 was also affected by our need to remove fencing and hedge material to allow access for the repair. City Risk Management has assigned Pinnacle Risk Management Services to the incident. Pinnacle staff has established contact with each of those four properties. City staff is also assisting with the clean up of debris and water damage outside of these homes. Attached please find a collection of photographs that show the location, the magnitude of the event, and general conditions at the vicinity. Bill Monahan - 6 inch main break.j Pa e 1 1 _ Page fi,91111 Monahan - backhoe xin sam and mark.' 9 _ i ~ P~~L. .i' r r4Y 1 4'~ I !11 lj~ Pa e~ d6g$io~ a'P.~ 'than - WCV pe 4 f SRI f f Pane 1 Bill Monahan - bucket tn~ck and pump sta.jpg _ ~rtr { n+y 1 f mom- 4anc 1 t i 1 t i i 3 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Bill Monahan r lAk' DATE: November 20, 2001 SUBJECT: My Schedule During the next couple of weeks I will be out of the office and out of Tigard on occasion. I would like to provide you with my schedule and phone numbers in case you need to reach me. Friday, November 23 and Milton Freewater, OR Saturday, November 24 1 can be reached at my mother-in-law's: Ethel Sargeant 541-938-3481 Thursday, November 29 Pacific City Sunday, December 2 Phone 503-965-7823 I:%ACM0LLVACM0SNMY0R • CCRHAF*=rANO SCHEOIAEDOC. AGENDA ITEM # a FOR AGENDA OF November 20, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Discussion of Sidewalk Maintenance on Major gllectors PREPARED BY: Howard Gregory DEPT HEAD OK ~19 CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Discussion of sidewalk maintenance responsibility along major collectors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council direct staff to perfonn sidewalk maintenance adjacent to City properties. INFORMATION SUMMARY At the July 17, 2001 Council meeting staff was instructed to update the inventory of the sidewalks along the major collectors. Currently we have 121,133 feet or 22.94 miles of sidewalk along major collectors of which 62,450 feet are residential and 58,683 are commercial. There are 627 feet of residential and 1,418 feet of commercial sidewalks that require repairs. The City now has responsibility for 23,928 feet of sidewalk adjacent to City-owned property of which 440 feet need repair. If the City takes responsibility for the sidewalks along major collectors this will increase its responsibility to 145,061 feet or 27.47 miles. If the City intends to assume responsibility for maintenance of sidewalks along major collectors, we recommend the following procedure. • Only residential sidewalks • Sidewalks would be accepted only after they are inspected and found to meet City standards. • Property owners would be notified in writing of the necessary repairs. After repairs are complete, a re- inspection would be conducted prior to acceptance, to ensure that the sidewalk meets City standards. • The Engineering Department will perform initial inspections for acceptance. • Notification to the property owners would be made as their sidewalks are accepted. Notification would include the City's acceptance of maintenance responsibility for their sidewalk. Although the City would accept responsibility for structural maintenance, the property owner would remain responsible for keeping it clear of dirt, leaves, ice or any other hazard. The City Attorney's memorandum states that the City can assume some portion of the responsibility and liability. For example, it could assume responsibility and liability for repairs to damaged sidewalk without assuming responsibility or liability for keeping sidewalk free from obstruction, debris, ice, snow, etc. • All sidewalks accepted for City Maintenance would be inspected every two years by Public Works staff. Any sidewalks found to be in need of repairs would be prioritized according to the severity of the repairs required. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED • Reject the staff recommendation • Accept the maintenance responsibility for residential sidewalks along major collectors. o Give staff further instructions as to how to proceed. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Community character and quality of life. Community aesthetics No. 1 Develop strategies to balance needs of new and infill development with the need to provide protection of defined aesthetic qualities valued by those who already live and work in Tigard. ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Memorandum from Loreen Mills on sidewalk liability review. 2. Copy of City of Tigard codes 7.40.070 and 15.12.010. 3. Memorandum from the City Attorney. 4. Draft Council minutes from 7/17/01 FISCAL NOTES • If Council accepts staff recommendation there is no additional cost. • If Council chooses to accept maintenance responsibility for sidewalks along major collectors that meet City standards, the estimated annual increase to the budget will be $ 1,590.00 for 100 ;feet of repairs. 10 yards of concrete $790.00 Construction materials $500.00 Hand tools $300.00 I:WMPACKETMO1091 MIDEWALK AIS.DOC 1 0 H 1 i a~ i Sim His MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Counci! FROM: Howard Gregoryw, RE: Discussion of Sidewalk Maintenance on Major Collectors DATE: November 7, 2001 At the Council meeting on July 17, 2001, Council discussed the issue of sidewalk maintenance responsibility along major collectors. After discussion by Council, Mayor Griffith summarized the majority of Council direction with regard to the sidewalk issue which would be for the staff to review the cost of accepting the maintenance of sidewalks (once brought up to City standards). At the Council meeting on September 18, 2001, the issue was placed on the agenda for further discussion. Staff furnished the information regarding the inventory of sidewalks along the major collectors for Council review. The discussion on this issue was postponed at the request of Paul Owen, Summerfield Homeowner's Association representative. At this time, staff has received no requests for further information from the Council regarding the staffs recommendation. If you have further questions, let me know. Thanks! s' Attachment I MEMORANDUM TO: Ed Wegner, Director of Public VVorks J , FROM: Loreen Mills, Sr. Management Analys RE: Sidewalk Liability Review DATE: October 2, 2000 As part of Council's policy discussion about right-of-way maintenance, it is important to consider the liability associated with responsibility for sidewalk maintenance. In reviewing current case law, i don't see anything that would require sidewalk liability being moved away from the property owner/manager. Before a policy decision is made in this matter, let me identify what exposures come with the decision. In determining liability exposure and cost, one must first determine what sidewalks will be maintained. Ed Wegner has informed me that there are 85,000 lineal feet of sidewalks along collector streets and about another 45,000 lineal feet along the City's properties or rights-of-ways we need to maintain. Based on 130,000 lineal feet of sidewalk in a proposed maintenance program, our current carrier, City Council Insurance Services (CCIS) will not charge additional premium. Higher premium costs could be charged in the future if the City were to see much litigation over the sidewalk maintenance program. CCIS has informed me that they are only aware of one jurisdiction that current does sidewalk maintenance, the City of Salem. Concrete maintenance, managing vegetation around and over the sidewalk, proper drainage, and ice/snow removal as some areas of exposure in sidewalk maintenance programs. City of. Salem is currently experiencing many liability claims from large, older trees along their sidewalks and finding the repair of a sidewalk without removing the tree difficult at best. Identifying the issues facing Tigard before starting a program would be necessary to reduce liability. The usual type of risk in any maintenance program would be an increased exposure for workers comp claims if the City does the work in-house. Claims arising out of sidewalk ownership would be personal injury for trips and falls by pedestrians. Currently, Risk receives a few calls regarding sidewalk liability each month. The citizen is now referred to the adjacent property owner. If this were to change to a City program, Risk and Public Works staff would spend time in response. In order to have discretionary immunity as a defense in trip and fall claims, 1 would recommend the following be addressed before accepting maintenance responsibilities for sidewalks: Inventory current condition of the sidewalks (this would include ider-«Ifying hazards that may cause or result in accidents leading to injuries); ➢ Develop standards for preventive maintenance and emergency response for sidewalk repair, ➢ Provide for effective concrete repair (in-house or by contract); ➢ Establish the frequency and level of on-going inspection of sidewalks; Determine how and when the sidewalks will be brought up to meet ADA compliance standards (if they don't already); and ➢ Adopt a repair plan and budget authority to bring the sidewalks into compliance or up to standard prior to accepting the liability exposure. In any maintenance program, the City may receive a claim of negligence if the following are not in place: - Inspection Maintenance Response Documentation Trained staff will attend the Council Work Session on 10/17/00 for this discussion. c: Liz Newton lmftfdocsfinsurance/sidewaik liability.doc 1 Attachment 2 TIGAR]D MUNICIPAL CODE ARTICLE III. NUISANCES AFFECTING 7.40.060 Trees. PUBLIC SAFETY. (a) No owner or responsible party shall 7.40.050 Noxious vegetation. permit tree branches or bushes on the property to extend into a public street or public sidewalk in a (a) The term "noxious vegetation" does not manner which interferes with street or sidewalk include vegetation that constitutes an agricultural traffic. It shall be the duty of an owner or crop, unless that vegetation is a health hazard, a responsible party to keep all tree branches or fire hazard or a traffic hazard, and it is vegetation bushes on the premises which adjoin the public within the meaning of subsection (b) of this street or public sidewalk, including the adjoining section. parking strip, trimmed to a height of not less than eight feet above the sidewalk and not less than ten (b) The term "noxious vegetation" includes: feet above the street. (1) Weeds more than ten inches high; (b) No owner or responsible party shall allow to stand any dead or decaying tree that is in (2) Grass more than ten inches high danger of falling or otherwise constitutes a hazard and not within the exception stated in subsection to the public or to persons or property on or near (a) of this section; the property. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(2)(a) and (b)),1986). (3) Poison oak, poison ivy, or similar vegetation; 7.40.070 Streets and sidewalks. (4) Dead trees, dead bushes, stumps The owner or responsible party shall keep a and any other thing likely to cause fire; public street and/or sidewalk abutting their property free from earth, rock and other debris (5) Blackberry bushes that extend into and other objects that may obstruct or render the a public thoroughfare or across a property line; street or sidewalk unsafe for its intended use. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(2)(c)), 1986). (6) Vegetation that is a health hazard; 7.40.080 Vehicles not to drop material on (7) Vegetation that is a health hazard streets. because it impairs the view of a public thoroughfare or otherwise makes use of the The owner or operator of any vehicle thoroughfare hazardous. engaged in the transportation of excavation or construction materials shall be responsible for (c) No owner or responsible party shall keeping the public streets and sidewalks free from allow noxious vegetation to be on the property or such materials, including but not limited to, earth, in the right-of-way of a public thoroughfare rock and other debris that may obstruct or render abutting on the property. The owner or the street or sidewalk unsafe for its intended use. responsible party shall cut down or destroy grass, (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit C(5)(2)(d)), 1986). shrubbery, brush, bushes, weeds or other noxious vegetation as often as needed to prevent them 7.40.090 Greenway maintenance. from becoming unsightly or, in the case of weeds or other noxious vegetation, from maturing or (a) The owner or responsible party shall be from going to seed. (Ord. 86-20 §4(Exhibit responsible for the maintenance of the property, C(5)(1)),1986). subject to an easement to the city or to the public for greenway purposes. Except as otherwise 7-40-3 . 11 c6 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 15.12. SIDEWALKS 15.12.010 Maintenance and repair of public sidewalks. 15.12.010 Maintenance and repair of public sidewalks. It is the duty of all persons owning lots or land which have public sidewalks abutting the same, to maintain and keep in repair the sidewalks and not permit them to become or remain in a dangerous or unsafe condition. "Maintenance" includes, but is not limited to, the removal of snow and ice. Any owner of a lot or land who neglects to promptly comply with the provisions of this section is fully liable to any person injured by such negligence. The city shall be exempt from all liability, including but not limited to common-law liability, that it might otherwise incur to an injured party as a result of the city's negligent failure to maintain and repair public sidewalks. (Ord. 91-12 §l, 1991: Ord. 85-44 §3, 1985).! 15-12-1 Reformatted 1994 09/04/2001 16:13 FAX 5036847297 City.or Tigard . Public Works W002 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAM 503 243 2944' Sep 4.01 16:14 No.012 P.02 Attachment 3 _CEldw CC>a TQ&N & IBACHMCH u Pradi ng as }libbud Caldwell Echuhx inC)M-raty MEMORANDUM A'i`WMIMYS AT 1 AV 1929 N.W. HW B~ Pbrl4ald, Gnus W= (503) 22244M ties: (SM) 243-2914 TO: John Roy, city of Tigard PROM: Gary Firestone, City Attorney's Office. DATE: September 4, 2001 Rt.?; Sidewalk Responsibility and Unbility BACKGROUKD TMC 15. 12.010 currently makes the aching property owner responsible and liabla fbr all aspects of sidewalk maintenance and repair, The City has been eonsidwittg amraing responsibility and liability for at least some aspects of sidewalk nWntawnee and repair. ISSUES Could the City develop a scheme in which the City assumes responsibility and liability for repairs but leaves the adjoWng property owner responsible and liable fbr keeping the sidewalk f}es or debris, snow, ice, etc.? ANSWER The City can assume partial responsibility and liability. It is possible to have the City responsible for repairs for damage and have the adjoining property owner respowNe for keeping the sidewalk elsan and A= ofobstruction and debris. Ifthe City owmes responsibility for maintenance, it must also assume liability for improper mr3intwmnae. Howevw, &e at Wthe City doom assume responsibility and liability for repair, it would be entitled to discretionary finmunity if the City makes a discretionary policy choice adopting an inspection and repair progeam and fbtlows that prom. i ANALYSIS At common law, rho governmental entity that was responsiblefor the right. ofway was rosponsible tovluw 6VV1 LV: to rtAA JVYuom i L7// li1V.y Ul Alanl'U fLLVlal. 7 AO " VVY RRMIS CREW CORRIGAN 503 243 2944 Sep 4,01 16:14 Nc.012 P.03 71 Memorandum re: Sidewalk Respontibillty and Liability September 4, 2001 Page 2 and linable for damages caused as a twult of s Allure to properly maintain a sidewalk within the right of way. Sec McQuillan, 19 Municipal Corporations (3d ed) Chapter 54, However. courts have accepted that local governments may change the common law rifle by adopting coda that Imposes responsibility and liability on adjoini.Z property owners. McQuillan, Section 34. 03, Nbawn Y. 0ty of Po+rtland,161 Or 213, aS P2d SOS (1939).' Virmlly all local jurisdictions in Oregon Inipose responsibility and liability on the adjoining property owners, Because the transfer of responsibility and liability Room tho city to the 440ining property owners wag solely the result of City ordinance, the City retains the power to reassume any or all of the responelbility and liability for sidewalks in the right of way. The City has three basic choices, 1. It can keep the existing system, in which the adjoining property own" is responsible for all maintenance and repwirofthe sidewalk and keeping the sidewalk ft e from obstruction, debris, snow, ice, etc. 2. The City can assume all responsibility and liability. 3. The City can assume some portion ofthe responsibility and liability. For exampl% It could assume responsibility and liability fbr repairs to damaged sidewalk without assuming responsibility or liability forkeeping sidewalk free from obstruction, debris, ice„ snow, etc. In choosing between the options, the City needs to be swore ofthree things, First, the City cannot assume responsibility without assuming bability.r Attempts to avold all liability have been defeated by the courts, who have held that such attaupts violate Article I Section 10 of the Oregon constitution, which guarantees a remedy for Wurles. Mallsoar v. Astoria, 39 Or 577, 65 P 1066 (1901). 'There is some possibility that under the Tort Claimq Act, a City cannot avoid liability by transferring liability to adjoining property owners. Sao Michard v. t..Yly gfPortland, 98 Or App 226, 778 P2d 985 (1959) qrd on other 310 Or 235, 796 P2d 1154 (1990). If the Court of Lq Appeals position in thePrltchatW case is eventually upheld by the Supreme Court, ifa City attempts to avoid liability by transferring responsibility and liability to adjoining landowners, both the City and the adjoining landowners would be liable. However, we believe that the better rule Is that the City cannot transrer liability from itaclrwithout also transferring responsibility, but If the City transfers both responsibility and liability, the tmns%r is eftbative. =Under the Tort Claims Act, the City is neagonsible for its torts. If the City has the duty to repair, any breach of that duty is a tort. The City cannot have the responsibility without the liability. 09/04/2001 18:13 FAX 6U30847297 (:ity of -1'18ara ruD11C worxs WJUUa RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN 503 243 2944 Sep- 4.01 16:15 No.012 P.04 :V omrandum ro: Sidewalk Itasponcibilhy and (Liability September 4, 2001 Page 3 Second, the responsibility owed liability provided fbr in TMC 15.12.010 waumm no active wrongdoing by any party. If a third party damages or places obstructlons on the sideawwa&, that party is at least partially responsible for the cost of repair and liable for any damages to otharo. Even if the City assumes responsibility and liability for repairs to damaged sidewalks, if the act Wng property owner causes the damage, the adjoining property owner should be responoiblo fbr the repairs send liable for damages to third parties. Third. ifthe City makes an lnftn©d policy decision to adopt a program fbr sldowalk Inspection and rgmk, It can avoid liability by followbw the policy. Mile the Tort Claims Act has waived immunity fbr torts by governments, governnate retain immunity ttr discretionary declslons. ORS 30.265(3Xe). Adopting a program of sidewalk Inspection and repair is a discretioncry decision fbr which the City is immune under ORS 30.265(3)(c). RaxLW v City of i alem, 76 Or App 29,707 P2d 1295 (1985). To be entitled to Immunity, the decision must be made by a policy weaker with disondon. The City can consider its budget in adopting or amending its program. While the City may have iiaNky fbr flailing to follow its program. 7kow v troy gfBkgww, 115 Or App 464, 465, 338 I02d 1104 (1992). It would be Immune if it fbilows its program„ even if that proms does not avoid all possible harm. orrpawaw.~~+.~ lam SINCE Attachment 4 Excerpt Tigard City Council Minutes Agenda Item 3 July 17, 2001 3. REVIEW RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE Public Works Director Ed Wegner introduced this agenda item. Property Manager John Roy reviewed the history of the right-of-way maintenance program noting that maintenance had been addressed through a complaint-driven process over the years. A copy of the Staff Report is on file with the City Recorder. Mr. Wegner noted that there has been success with notifying property owners of their responsibilities with regard to maintenance of areas along the right of way. Recently, after notice was received, property owners resolved maintenance issues for rights of way along Hall Boulevard and Sattler Street. Mr. Wegner noted that staff was not opposed to providing maintenance along streets such as Durham Road and Sattler Street, but noted the need for consistency. He also said that, if the City maintains Durham Road right-of-way areas, this might trigger requests for maintenance for other streets. The current staff proposal for a City right-of-way maintenance program covers areas that are adjacent to City properties or properties that are adjacent to steep slopes, ditches, and state and railroad rights of way. The Budget Committee did not approve the proposal for an enhanced right-of-way maintenance program. City Manager Bill Monahan advised that, if an enhanced program is approved by the Council, then the Council would need to determine how the program would be funded. In response to an inquiry by Councilor Scheckla, Mr. Monahan noted that no agreement with Summerfield residents has been located regarding to maintenance responsibilities of rights of way. Councilor Dirksen commented that the right-of-way maintenance situation should be reviewed, noting there is no long-term funding for an enhanced right-of-way program within the City. In the shorter term he noted the Council needed to focus on what was affordable. Mr. Paul Owen, Surnmerfield Liaison; addressed the City Council. (A copy of Mr. Owen's letter dated July 17, 2001, is on file with the City Recorder.) Mr. Owen noted disappointment with the staff's recommendation, which dealt only with right- Excerpt of July 17, 2001 Minutes - Tigard City Council Meeting Page 1 of-way maintenance and not the liability concern with regard to the sidewalks. He noted the high use of the sidewalks because of the close proximity to the high school. Mr. Owen requested the City consider maintenance of right of way on fully improved collector streets. There was discussion on the liability issue with regard to sidewalks. The liability responsibility rests with the landowner abutting the sidewalk. Mr. Wegner referred to an earlier discussion with the City Council that included the proposal that if a sidewalk was brought up to standard, the City could accept the sidewalk and assume the liability and future repairs. This proposal was not pursued. City Council discussion followed. Councilor Patton noted she was opposed to continuing the complaint-driven maintenance program used in the past, which was inconsistent, piecemeal, and inequitable. She also opposed maintaining Durham Road specifically citing the need for equitable treatment for other areas in similar circumstances. She said she would have liked to support a citywide enhanced right- of-way maintenance program, but the City does not have the money to do this now given other funding needs and scarce resources. She recommended staff continue an aggressive education campaign advising property owners of their responsibilities to maintain adjacent rights of way. At this time, she said the City should "go back to basics" and to be consistent, which will mean that those who have received maintenance before, will not continue to receive this service. Councilor Scheckla noted that, in the past, exceptions have been made. He referred to SW North Dakota Street where traffic islands and diverters were constructed at the request of those who lived in that area. Councilor Scheckla noted that he liked the compromise position suggested by Paul Owen, which was to have the City recognize that the sidewalks, curbs, and streets, were designed and built by the City of Tigard and the City would therefore be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and liability for said improvements. If the 's City agreed to the above, then Summerfield would agree to maintain the 15-foot planter strip as it is now without liability. Councilor Dirksen noted that the maintenance of right of way is a luxury that the City could not afford at this time. He advised that he thinks the sidewalk issue is separate from the maintenance of the planting areas along the rights of way. He said he would be willing to consider the City taking over control of the sidewalks that meet City standards and to implement a citywide program for this. After discussion, it waJ clarified that the sidewalk maintenance Councilor Dirksen was referring to was for those sidewalks along major collectors only. Excerpt of ]uly 17, 2001 Minutes - Tigard City Council Meeting Page 2 Mayor Griffith noted that he, too, would have liked to see the enhanced right-of- way maintenance program implemented, but also agreed with the other Councilors that this was more than the City could afford. He concurred that maintenance of the sidewalks along major collectors, once brought up to standards, has some merit. He suggested that he would like to continue to review options about how an enhanced maintenance program could be implemented. There was discussion on a maintenance fee that might represent an alternative for funding and implementation of an enhanced right-of-way program. Councilor Patton advised she still had some concerns with providing service for only certain areas. Mayor Griffith summarized the majority of Council direction with regard to the sidewalk issue which would be for the staff to review the cost of accepting the maintenance of sidewalks (once brought up to City standards) for major collectors for non-commercial (residential areas). He clarified he did not expect staff to prepare a complete inventory of sidewalks Indicating those that need to be brought up to standard, but requested a "ballpark" figure about what It would cost the City to maintain sidewalks once they are accepted by the City. City Manager Monahan noted that It had been determined that Insurance (liability) costs would be negligible. Homeowners would maintain responsibility to keep sidewalks clear of debris, Ice, and snow. In response to a question from Summerfield resident Paul Hunt whether the City would consider providing maintenance on rights of way (plant areas), Mayor Griffith advised that this would be an item he would like to discuss with Mr. Hunt and Mr. Monahan at an upcoming meeting scheduled for the three of them. Mr. Monahan noted that the City provides contract service to help the City of Durham to maintain its parks, but this is one government entity providing assistance to another government entity. There are restrictions (Associated Oregon Industries) with regard to governments providing services to the private sector. Excerpt of July 17, 2001 Minutes - Tigard City Council Meeting Page 3 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 11/20/01 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE _ New City Web Site Progress Report PREPARED BY: Paul de Bruynr e4 ~ DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL For Information Only. This will be a progress report on the new Web Site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A INFORMATION SUMMARY Last year the City Council gave staff directions to hire a fulltime Web Administrator in Network Services, whose initial duties were to update our existing web site. Victor Soares will be introduced as our new Web Administrator and he will be demonstrating the initial steps he has taken towards this update process. This topic is a Progress Report to Council to insure we are producing the product the Council desires, and to obtain feedback from Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST N/A FISCAL NOTES N/A s ` - a Website Project November 20, 2001 CxV of Tgfd ay C~ U.M" A Id 100 • Website Project Strategy - Phase I - Phase II • Site Demo • Feedback - Comments - Suggestions CAyd TpN C-Y Co LMM Ada AO1. Audience Analysis 2. Design i 3. Programming 4. Pre-Test Production 5. Usability Testing 6. Production 7 7. Quality Assurance 8. Delivery Clyof Tq~ f]ly CaM ~W A~AOt 1 1 NOR mum 71. udience Analysis Who is our target audience? - What platforms are most common? - What browsers are most common? ayare.a an q 72Design reate information hierarchy & site map Create color scheme & style guide Create schematics GycfTpvd GW ~~U"^o 7-3. Programming Establish development infrastructure - Create HTML templates - Program navigation menus CGyci Tyra Gp ou~L " 2 74Preo-Tiest Production vop usage scenario questions - Create sufficient pages for testing rAVWTp.E c+yC-W M.Wtiq 7.5 Us-Ycenario que stions - Target groups of test users - Evaluate results & user feedback - Determine necessary modifications - Back to Step 2: Programming gY.f T-9-d 0,YC-~M".0 ■ M M 6. Production { - Convert old website pages to new format - Add new content i i 1 uyd% urcw,a .o .n 0 0.0' 0 7. Quality Assurance - Verify links work correctly - Check content for accuracy and typos - Verify content is up-to-date CJyof TVYO city G'. M"t" x.o,~aof 78Delivery h website: January 2002 Promote new website urorrvra cMy Gard Mw AIS ]UOf 1. Audience Analysis complete i 2. Design complete i 3. Programming complete 4. Pre-Test Production complete ' 5. Usability Testing in progress S. Production in progress 7. Quality Assurance Dec 20, 2001 8. Delivery Jan 2, 2002 GrofTpro uyCd.a MW,rp ».oxnf 4 B • Plan Development - Rrom eb Wish Lisr -Additional applications • Evaluate Post-Launch Feedback - Make necessary changes - Stay one step ahead of user demands • Maintain the Site - Add new content - Expand sections rlyornoea ar C..~\M'MW http•//dev.ci.tigard.or.us pyolTOrO C.y C~ Y-" 7-Does the strategy parallel the Council mbers' vision? - Comments - Suggestions Fm~-+ H U' uyolro.e arcwK.W.~u 5 • Than7vn,,7 CCy,9IV.C CKV C-.-#M."v AIbr A➢1 6 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 20, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Update on Bull Mountain Annexation Study PREPARED BY: Barbara Shields DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE OUNCIL Review the draft study and provide staff with any comments/suggestions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A. Review only. INFORMATION SUMMARY At the March 20, 2001 City Council work session, Council directed staff to review the possibilities of annexing the Bull Mountain area. Following the Council directive, staff prepared a study, which would be used to evaluate a range of policy recommendations related to the Bull Mountain area. Staff will provide Council a draft copy of "The Bull Mountain Annexation Study" and a draft copy of "The Bull Mountain Annexation Frequently Asked Questions" that will be briefly discussed at the November 13, 2001 study session meeting. Council will have an opportunity to review the materials and provide staff with comments and questions at the November 20, 2001 work session meeting. Staff will then come back to the Council meeting on November 27, 2001 with a final report, which will include Council's comments and suggestions. This document will serve as the basis for the public outreach component in December 2001. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Growth and Growth Management Goal #2, Urban services are provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth boundary and recipients of services pay their share. ATTACHMENT LIST None. FISCAL NOTES N/A \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLN\Barbara\ANNEXATION Final Report\11-2occreport.doc ❑ O O ❑ Bull Mountain 13 Annexation Study ❑ J o City Council Work Session o Nov. 20, 2001 ❑ ❑ The Bull Mountain Area °o ` It `'M •1,940 Acres of Land ❑ •7,300 Residents ❑ °o •Residentially Zoned ❑ :Mix of Development ❑ -Farms, Subdivisions o ^ ,w o ®BULL MOUNTAIN ❑ _ Sub Areas Rfa 11FF 0 k .~'i III 1 1Y I Ft y ~L. ❑ Fa may( j. .yrp1.:,. ~I A -r ❑ ❑ G7. G ❑ . ❑O ` 3Z t r li ❑ Pf 0 ❑ " . 1 lC3 Subarea Summary o ■ North and South are the most 11 populated and built-out 0 0 o South has the most existing homes o a East has the most potential for growth ❑ 13 13 Urban Services in the Study Area 0 Today, the City of Tigard Provides Bull o Mountain Residents With: *Community Development a Building Services o e Water (through a contract with the 0 Intergovernmental Water Board) ❑ ❑ 13 Urban Services in the Study Area o With Annexation, the City Would Provide: + ❑ + 0 • Police • Sanitary Sewer + 000 a Parks • Storm Sewer o e General Street • Street Light 0 Maintenance Maintenance ° • Garbage Collection • Library 10 1 2 IBM, 13 Urban Services in the Study Area 13 o What Service Changes Would Occur For o Area Residents with Annexation? o e Police ❑ *Additional .5 officer per 1,000 people s Parks ° ® General Road Maintenance o eCity standards include more services Three Scenarios ° ■ To Evaluate Current and Future Service °°o Needs for the Study Area, Three Growth and Development Scenarios a Were Created: 13 o .Scenario 1: Current 13 .Scenario 2: Buildout ❑ .Scenario 3: Moderate Growth 11 ❑ Scenario 1: Current ❑ o e Includes current dwellings and ° approved subdivisions i o 0 2,700 Housing Units 0 0 7,680 Residents 13 7 ❑ O ■ ❑ 3 ° Scenario 1: Issue Summary 13 ■ Operating costs are significantly less Cl o than revenues for all funds, except the o State Gas Tax Fund. o ■ Annexing creates a significant need for ❑ land and park improvements; projected - - - o park improvement (CIP) costs greatly o exceed projected revenue. ❑ 13 13 Scenario 1: Issue Summary ❑ 13 13 ■ Water system improvements are o o needed regardless of annexation; E3 sufficient revenue is projected to o address capital needs. 13 13 c 13 13 Scenario 1: Analysis The Most Critical Issue: a 13 arks Provision a o ❑ 13 Secondary Issue: 1 o o Transportation Capital Costs o *Transportation improvements will be needed, but Scenario 1 does not reflect o these capital Improvements. 13 O 4 Scenario 2: Buildout ❑ 13 o aBased on development of today's ❑ vacant and partially developed lands 0 m4,824 Housing Units 13 m12,905 Residents a aApproximately 1.5x Scenario 1 0 13 ❑ 10 ❑ Scenario 2: Issue Summary ❑ 13 13 o a Operating costs are significantly less than o revenues for all funds, except the State 0 Gas Tax Fund. ❑ ■ Compared to Scenario 1, operating costs 0 will more than double at buildout. ❑ ❑ 10 Scenario 2: Issue Summary e The significant need for road 11 o improvements and parks would be a o major consideration in annexation. o ■ The projected park and transportation 0 improvement (CIP) costs exceed 13 O projected revenue. 13 13 ❑ ❑ 5 ■ Scenario 2: Analysis ® Critical Issue: Provision of Parks and ❑ Road Improvements ❑ 0 ® Capital costs exceed associated o revenues O ❑0 Scenario 3: Moderate Growth ❑ O ❑ o ■ 50% of New Growth In Scenario 2 ❑ a ■ 3,755 Housing Units 0 a 10,235 Residents O a o Scenario 3: Issue Summary O ❑ 13 13 a Operating costs are significantly less 13 0 than revenues for all funds, except the 0 State Gas Tax Fund. 13 0 v The significant need for road 11 o improvements and parks would be 0 the major consideration in annexation. 13 ❑ 6 Scenario 3: Issue Summary ❑ ❑ 11 o ■ 't he projected park and transportation - o improvement (CIP) costs exceed the o projected revenue. ❑ 13 ■ 11 13 ❑ 13 Scenario 3: Analysis ❑ 01 o ■ Critical Issue: Provision of Parks o and Road Improvements 13 o ® Capital costs exceed associated revenues ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Study Conclusions o ■ With the exception of the East Subarea, o the majority of Bull Mountain is almost ❑ built out. ❑ 13 o ■ Assuming Scenario 2 buildout of o approximately 12,905 residents and 4,82 housing units, each subarea could reach buildout at different times. ❑ 10 ❑ I - 7 0 g Study Conclusions o m Revenue projections are mostly o dependent upon growth. Rate, amount 10° of growth determine revenue forecasts. 10 o m For a Bull Mountain home assessed at 0 $227, 755 (median), the net increase in 0 property taxes would be approximately ❑ $256.50 per year with annexation. ❑ ❑ Study Conclusions o m The Study Area has extensive o capital needs, mostly road and park o improvements. o m Capital costs for road Improvements a and park improvements exceed 00 revenue projections. 0 ❑ 0 0 ° Questions for Council ❑ o How do we fund Capital Improvements o In the area? o • Use a portion of the General Fund o # Washington County assistance i ❑ *Form LIDS j o -I 0 e Grants °0 • Delay Improvements until funding is 0 0 available °o • Park Levy o° s Special Districts ❑ 8 0 ❑ ° uestions for Council ❑ Are there advantages to a phased o annexation plan? How will this affect ❑ the funding of Capital Improvements? ❑ o Should the City consider only partial o annexation, leaving other subareas to o the County Indefinitely? ❑ 10 1 ❑ ° Questions for Council o Do we continue to allow incremental _ ❑ annexation of vacant or developed land o In the area? How do we Involve residents In this ❑ process? Should we create a task force a to identify resident needs and o preferences? 10 1 Questions for Council a Development will occur irregardless of o annexation. How do we work with o Washington County in the interim to ❑ capture park funding; i.e., SDCs? ❑ L 9 0 - - 13 issues for Consideration ° ° Annexation process has to be completed by March of a calendar year 0 for properties to be on the tax rolls ❑ July 1st. ❑ C3 The annexation process will require ❑ significant City resources, which will be ° determined by how Council wants to ° proceed. 0 0 10 1 C3 Issues for Consideration ❑ 0 C) n There are several annexation methods. ° ❑ Some require a vote, either by the area ❑ to be annexed or the entire City. ❑ *City Initiated 0 *Owner Initiated ° sIsland Annexation 0 0 13 0 10 Issues for Consideration ° The timing of capital improvements, ° such as parks, needs to be determined Cl with annexation. 0 ❑ 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 13 Next Steps 13 0 o November 27 - Finalized Report 13 ❑ ❑ ® Public Outreach ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ a i 11 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 20.2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Transportation System Plan PREPARED BY: Julia Haiduk DEPT HEAD OK Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Discuss and provide comments on the Transportation System Plan (TSP) that has been prepared by DKS and Associates. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review the TSP information, ask questions as needed and provide comment on the proposed plan and changes. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City of Tigard began the current Transportation System Plan update in 1999. With the help of a 12- member Task Force made up of the Planning Commission and 3 citizens, agencies, staff and the consulting firm DKS, a draft TSP was produced. The draft TSP takes into account existing traffic conditions in Tigard, community needs and goals and the anticipated future demands on the transportation system. The draft TSP was presented to the Citizen Involvement Team on November 3, 2000 and at a public meeting with the Planning Commission and TSP Task Force members on December 4, 2000. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 5, 2001 and voted to recommend approval of the TSP and proposed Comprehensive Plan changes. The Council was presented a copy of the Draft TSP at the meeting on October 17, 2000 and at a work session on March 20, 2001. At the March 20, 2001 work session, Council had several specific comments relating to Tri- met issues which have been reflected in the Final Draft TSP. At the March 20, 2001 work session, staff indicated that they would be back in approximately 2 months for Council to take action on the TSP. Due to the Measure 7 challenges, the TSP adoption was postponed after consultation with the City Council and City Attorney. Since that time, some case law and interpretation has been made and an Ordinance has been developed, with input from the City Attorney, which helps better protect the City from Measure 7 claims. Due to the amount of time that has transpired since the last work session with Council in March, 2001, there is a need for a final update session to: ■ review the key elements of the TSP, review the changes made in response to the last Council meeting in March, 2001; and provide an overview of major impacts of the proposed TSP on future development. Staff plans to return to the City Council on January 8, 2002 for the adoption hearing on the TSP. Staff is preparing a timeline for Development Code amendments to implement the transportation system plan and anticipates having a proposed amendment package in April, 2002. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Transportation and Traffic, Goal #2 - Improve traffic flow. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment: 1. Memo discussing major impacts of the proposed TSP and discussing issues raised at the March, 2001 Council meeting and 2. Final Draft TSP 3. Proposed Comprehensive Plan Changes 4. Comment log with all comments and responses to date (including revisions after the Planning Commission hearing and City Council work session) FISCAL NOTES N/A I:lrpln/julia/TSP/TSP worksession aisldoc 11/1/01 11:17 AM In I ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: City Council FROM: Julia Hajduk, Associate Planner Vfl DATE: November 5, 2001 SUBJECT: Transportation System Plan Update At the March, 2001 City Council work session meeting, staff and the consultant team presented the draft TSP and asked Council for their questions and comments. The final draft TSP being presented at the November 20, 2001 work session meeting incorporates Council's concerns regarding transit issues. Specifically, the future transit service map was amended to include Bonita, Durham, McDonald, Gaarde and Barrows. The Existing and Future Transit Coverage maps were also amended to show that, while some areas have transit service, not all are at high service levels. In addition, text was added that clarifies the strategy to provide more local transit service. The City Council also had questions regarding funding of the proposed TSP improvements. It should be noted that the TSP identifies potential funding sources but is not a funding document. Many improvements will be made as development occurs and the City will have to seek funding for additional improvements as they are needed. There was also some discussion about Measure 7 and the risk of Measure 7 claims if the TSP were adopted. After the March, 2001 work session, it was decided to postpone major legislative changes until the impact of ballot Measure 7 could be further evaluated and defined in the courts. Staff has met with the City Attorney to develop an Ordinance which helps better protect the City from Measure 7 claims. While there is still some risk in moving forward, the risk of NOT moving forward with the adoption is more critical at this time, for several reasons. First and foremost, the Engineering department needs the TSP to be amended to move forward with the CIP planning process, second, as development occurs there is the potential that we are missing out on opportunities to acquire necessary right of way improvements that are justified by the development, and lastly, we risk being out of compliance with Metro and DLCD requirements. I:lrplan/julia/TSP/worksession memo.doc ATTACHMENTI Staff would also like to provide an overview of the major impacts of the proposed TSP so that Council is aware of these issues prior to making their final decision. The major impacts identified by staff are discussed below: ■ Walnut/Ash Street Connection This is potentially controversial because it will create a new collector in the downtown area and there is a perceived impact on the downtown integrity. In addition, this connection will require the crossing of wetlands and Fanno Creek. Analysis was done, however, which indicates that this connection is key to contributing to resolving capacity issues on 99W. The analysis shows that with this connection removed, portions of 99W and Main Street go to level of service "F" or worse. Scholls Ferry Road Widening The TSP calls for Scholls Ferry Road to be widened to 7 lanes. There is concern that this will create a visual barrier between the City of Tigard and Beaverton as well as a physical barrier for pedestrians. This roadway, however, is identified in the Regional Transportation Plan as being a 7 lane facility in this area and is needed to accommodate the capacity. As development occurs, dedication of land will be acquired and, if justified by the impact of the development, improvements made. ■ Hall Boulevard Widening The TSP calls for Hall Boulevard to be widened to 4/5 lanes. This is consistent with the Washington Square Regional Center Plan. It should be noted, however, that residents in the Metzger area have been vocal about their opposition to this road being widened. All traffic modeling done, however, indicates that as capacity increases, Hall Boulevard will need to be widened to accommodate it. It should be understood that, in accordance with the recommendations of the Washington Square Regional Center Plan, widening of Hall should occur only if needed after other capacity improvements have been made. As development occurs, developers will be required to dedicate the land for the ultimate right of way (if justified). ■ Changes from Local Street Designation to Neighborhood Route Designation A new functional classification was added that is between a local street and a collector. The "Neighborhood Route" classification provides connectivity to collectors. They carry more traffic than a local streets but are not intended to serve citywide or large area traffic circulation. Because the traffic needs are greater, the TSP has identified that some traffic management measures may be needed to maintain the neighborhood character and livability. A list of these streets can be found on page 8-10 of the draft TSP. The change from local street to neighborhood route does not result in a larger right of way width requirement. It should be noted that this is a change from the current way we view streets in that the ADT does not in itself dictate the classification. Instead, and more accurately, we are identifying the traffic that streets are intended to handle. There are also many streets that are also being "down-graded" from a collector or minor collector to a neighborhood route. I:irplan/julia/TSP/worksession memo.doc i j Attachment 2 J l j t J i J J 1 1 • r: ion • a v . h L 1 l 194)00 0 *Gets *00 NEI DKS Associates 1400 SW 5"' Avenue. Suite 500 Portland, OR 97201 Phone: (503) 243-3500 Fax: (503) 243-1934 October 30, 2001 Julia Hajduk City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Subject: Final DRAFT Tigard TSP Update P99161x0 Dear Julia: DKS Associates is pleased to submit this Final Draft Transportation System Plan Update for the City of Tigard. This report reflects comments and revisions collected from the public, the Planning Commission and the City Council through workshops and open houses over the past year. The comment log that has been prepared provides additional detail in the response to questions which have been raised in review of the October 2000 draft of the TSP. It has been a pleasure assisting the City with the TSP project and we look forward to helping you with final adoption. Please call Julie Sosnovske, Chris Maciejewski or me with any questions regarding this report. Sincerely, C ~eta& s tes LUM ® t~ S. u P.E., P.T /gR .O.E Ex~ l2(31 10\ x:/projects/1999/P99161/report/october 2001 Final/covletter.doc attachment CITY OF YIGM1D OREGON TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: SUMMARY - TIGARD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN PowerPoint Presentation Slides ..................................................................................................1-1 CHAPTER 2: GOALS AND POLICIES Background Goals and Policies .......................................................................................................................2-3 Other Plans ..................................................................................................................................2-8 CHAPTER 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS Street Network ............................................................................................................................3-1 ® Traffic Speed and Volume ..........................................................................................................3-5 Collisions ,3-9 ® Schools Collisions .....................................................................................................................3-15 ® Traffic Control ..........................................................................................................................3-15 Travel Time Information ..........................................................................................................3-20 Traffic Performance on Key Streets .........................................................................................3-22 ® Average Vehicle Occupancy ....................................................................................................3-32 ® Access Issues .............................................................................................................................3-33 Land Use .:..:.::..:........................................................3-33 Transit , .............................................................3-35 Bicycles .....................................................................................................................................3-37 Pedestrian ..................................................................................................................................3-39 Trucks ....................................................................................................................................3-41 ® Rail ............................................................................................................................................3-41 ® Air ..............................................................................................................................................3.41 Water .........................................................................................................3-41 Pipeline......................... .......................................................................................................3-41 CHAPTER 4: FUTURE DEMAND AND LAND USE Projected Land Uses ...................................................................................................................4-1 Metro Area Traffic Model ..........................................................................................................4-9 Model Application to Tigard ....................................................................................................4-12 7 , i r CITY OF TIGARD OREGON CHAPTER 5: PEDESTRIANS Needs ...........................................................................................................................................5-1 Facilities ......................................................................................................................................5-2 Criteria .........................................................................................................................................5-3 Strategies .....................................................................................................................................5-4 Recommended Pedestrian Facility Plan .....................................................................................5-6 Potential Project List ...................................................................................................................5-8 Complementing Land Development Actions ...........................................................................5-12 Address Gaps in Pedestrian System .........................................................................................5-12 Parks and Trail Development ...................................................................................................5-13 Safety .........................................................................................................................................5-13 2040 Coordination ....................................................................................................................5-14 CHAPTER 6: BICYCLES Needs 6-1 Facilities ......................................................................................................................................6-2 Criteria .........................................................................................................................................6-3 Strategies .....................................................................................................................................6-3 Alternatives .................................................................................................................................6-7 Recommended Bikeway Facility Plan .......................................................................................6-7 Potential Project List ...................................................................................................................6-7 Complementing Land Development Actions ...........................................................................6-12 CHAPTER 7: TRANSIT Needs ...........................................................................................................................................7-1 Facilities ......................................................................................................................................7-3 Criteria .........................................................................................................................................7-3 FEW Strategies .....................................................................................................................................7-3 Recommended Transit Plan ........................................................................................................7-8 Recommended Land Use Actions ............................................................................................7-11 CHAPTER 8: MOTOR VEHICLES Criteria .........................................................................................................................................8-1 N Functional Classification ............................................................................................................8-4 Cross Sections ...........................................................................................................................8-14 N Connectivity/Local Street Plan .................................................................................................8-22 Circulation an d Capacity Needs ...............................................................................................8-29 a Recommended Improvements ..................................................................................................8-44 Safety .........................................................................................................................................8-54 W Access Management .................................................................................................................8-55 a Maintenance ..............................................................................................................................8-56 Neighborhood Traffic Management .........................................................................................8-60 Parking ......................................................................................................................................8-62 TSM/TTS ...................................................................................................................................8-63 Trucks ........................................................................................................................................8-63 ii Alk CITY OF TIGARD 49 OREGON CHAPTER 9: OTHER MODES Criteria 9-1 Recommended Facilities .............................................................................................................9-1 Air ................................................................................................................................................9-2 Water 9-2 Pipeline 9-2 CHAPTER 10: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT Background ...............................................................................................................................10-1 Criteria .....................................................10-3 Strategies ...................................................................................................................................10-4 ® Recommended Plan ..................................................................................................................10-4 CHAPTER 11: FUNDINGAMPLEMENTATION ® Funding 11-2 ® Costs ..........................................................................................................................................11-5 Financing Issues ......................................................................................................................11-14 iii CITY OF TICAR® OREWN LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2-1 Goals and Policy Relationship .......................................................................................2-2 FIGURE 2-2 Relationship of TSP to Regional Planning ....................................................................2-9 FIGURE 3-1 Existing Functional Classification 3-2 FIGURE 3-2 Roadways with More than Two Lanes ..........................................................................3-3 FIGURE 3-3 Existing Typical Street Cross Sections .....................................................•...................3-4 FIGURE 3-4 Existing Speed Zones .....................................................................................................3-6 FIGURE 3-5 Existing Traffic Volumes ...............................................................................................3-7 FIGURE 3-6 Traffic Volume Summaries ............................................................................................3-8 FIGURE 3-7 Hourly Traffic Variation in Tigard ..............................................................................3-10 FIGURE 3-8 Signalized Intersections ................................................................................................3-17 FIGURE 3-9 Travel Time Surveys (1994) ........................................................................................3-21 FIGURE 3-10 Travel Speed Profiles for ORE 217 .............................................................................3-22 FIGURE 3-11 Tigard Traffic % on ORE 99W ....................................................................................3-24 FIGURE 3-12 Average Vehicle Occupancies .....................................................................................3-32 FIGURE 3-13 Existing Land Use ........................................................................................................3-34 FIGURE 3-14 Transit Routes ...............................................................................................................3-36 FIGURE 3-15 Existing Bicycle Facilities 3-38 FIGURE 3-16 Existing Sidewalk Facilities 3-40 FIGURE 3-17 Existing Truck Routes ...................................................................................................3-42 FIGURE 3-18 Major Pipeline Routes ..................................................................................................3-43 FIGURE 4-1 Metro TAZs ..........................................................4-4 FIGURE 4-2 Disaggregated Tigard TAZs ............................:..............................................................4-5 FIGURE 4-3 Traffic Forecast Model Process ..................................................................................4-10 FIGURE 5-1 Pedestrian Master Plan 5-7 FIGURE 5-2 Pedestrian Action Plan 5-11 FIGURE 6-1 Bicycle Plan Alternative (all collectors and arterials) ...................................................6-8 FIGURE 6-2 Bicycle Master Plan (framework option), .6-9 FIGURE 6-3 Bicycle Action Plan ...........................................................6-10 i FIGURE 7-1 RTP Public Transportation System Classification ........................................................7-2 FIGURE 7-2 Existing Transit Coverage.... FIGURE 7-3 Future Transit Coverage .................................................................................................7-7 FIGURE 7-4 Future Transit Service ..................................................................................................7-10 FIGURE 8-1 Vehicular Elements of the Street Plan FIGURE 8-2 Street Function Relationship ..........................................................................................8-5 FIGURE 8-3 Proposed Functional Classification System ...................................................................8-7 FIGURE 8-4 Proposed Neighborhood Routes ....................................................................................8-11 FIGURE 8-5 Existing Typical Street Cross Sections ..........:.............................................................8-14 FIGURE 8-6 Washington County Arterial Typical Street Cross Sections ..................8-15 FIGURE 8-7 Washington County Typical Street Cross Sections ................8-16 FIGURE 8-8 Alley, Cul-de-sac and Local Street Cross Sections .....................................................8-17 FIGURE 8-9 Neighborhood Street Cross Sections ...........................................................................8-18 iv CITY OF TIGARD OREGON FIGURE 8-10 Arterial and Collector Street Cross Sections ..............................................................8-19 FIGURE 8-11 Future Streets Where ROW is Planned for More Than Two Lanes ...........................8-21 FIGURE 8-12 Local Street Connectivity: East Tigard .........,8-23 FIGURE 8-13 Local Street Connectivity: Metzger .•..•....,"...........................8-24 FIGURE 8-14 Local Street Connectivity: Central Tigard,,.,...,, ...........................8-25 FIGURE 8-15 Local Street Connectivity: North Dakota ....................................................................8-26 FIGURE 8-16 Local Street Connectivity: Southwest Tigard ..............................................................8-27 FIGURE 8-17 Local Street Connectivity: South Tigard .....................................................................8-28 FIGURE 8-18 RTP and C1P Planned Improvements ..........................................................................8-40 ® FIGURE 8-19 Street Improvement Plan ..............................................................................................8-47 FIGURE 8-20 Intersection Improvement Locations ........................................................................8-48 FIGURE 8-21 Traffic Signal Master Plan ...........................................................................................8-52 FIGURE 8-22 Pavement Life Cycle ....................................................................................................8-58 FIGURE 8-23 Pavement Condition on City Streets ............................................................................8-59 FIGURE 8-24 Traffic Calming Measures Inventory ...........................................................................8-61 FIGURE 8-25 Through Truck Routes ..................................................................................................8-65 FIGURE 9-1 Major Pipeline Routes ....................................................................................................9-3 a i i V IMMUNE 11 f CITY OF TIGARD OREGON LIST OF TABLES 3-13 TABLE 3-1 Washington County SPIS Listing TABLE 3-2 Tigard Signal System ........................................................................................................3-18 TABLE 3-3 Average Vehicle Occupancies in Tigard ..........................................................................3-33 TABLE 3-4 Daily Transit Ridership in Tigard (1990, 1994, 1999) ....................................................3-35 TABLE 4-1 Tigard Area Adjusted Land Use Summary ........................................................................4-2 TABLE 4-2 Forecasted Vehicle Trips in Tigard ....................................................................................4-3 TABLE 4-3 Tigard Land Use Summary .................................................................................................4-6 TABLE 4-4 Approximate Average PM Peak Hour Trip Rates used in Metro Model ........................4-11 TABLE 4-5 Existing and Future Projected External Trip Generation ................................................4-11 TABLE 5-1 Pedestrian Facility Strategies Comparisons .......................................................................5-6 TABLE 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects ..............................................................................................5-8 TABLE 6-1 Corridors in Proposed Bikeway Network ..........................................................................6-4 TABLE 6-2 Bicycle Connectivity to Adjacent Jurisdictions .................................................................6-4 TABLE 6-3 Bikeway Facility Strategies Comparisons ..........................................................................6-6 TABLE 6-4 Bicycle Project Priorities ..................................................................................................6-11 TABLE 7-1 Transit Strategies Comparisons ..........................................................................................7-8 TABLE 7-2 Potential Transit Projects ....................................................................................................7-9 TABLE 8-1 Proposed Changes to Existing Roadway Classification ....................................................8-9 TABLE 8-2 Proposed Street Characteristics ........................................................................................8-13 TABLE 8-3 Metro Regional Street Design and Motor Vehicle Designations ....................................8-20 TABLE 8-4 2015+ Intersection Level of Service - PM Peak Hour ....................................................8-30 TABLE 8-5 ORE 99W Alternatives Evaluation ..................................................................................8-35 TABLE 8-6 Proposed 20 Year Metro and Planned CIP Projects ........................................................8-41 TABLE 8-7 Future Street Improvements ..............................................................................................8-45 TABLE 8-8 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements : ..........................................................8-49 TABLE 8-9 Traffic Signal Warrants 8-53 TABLE 8-10 City of Tigard Street Maintenance Budget Summary ......................................................8-57 TABLE 8-11 NTM Performance ............................................................................................................8-62 TABLE 10-1 Transportation Demand Management Strategies.: ............................................................10-2 TABLE 11-1 Potential Transportation Revenue Sources ......................................................................11-3 TABLE 11-2 Sample TIF in the Region .................................................................................................11-4 TABLE 11-3 Issues With Non-Auto, Pedestrian and Bicycle Costs .....................................................11-6 TABLE 11-4 Pedestrian Action Plan Project List and Costs .................................................................11-7 TABLE 11-5 Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost .............................................................11-8 TABLE 11-61 Fuiure Street Improvements and Costs (with PTA" Cross Reference) .............................11-9 ~ TABLE 11-7 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements and Cost ..........................................11-11 TABLE 11-8 Costs for Tigard Transportation Plan over 20 years ......................................................11-14 TABLE 11-9 Funding Source by Project Type 11-15 TABLE 11-10 Estimation of Available Transportation Funding from Existing Sources 11-16 A A7mml CITY OF TIGMD OREGON LIST OF ACRONYMS A ABBREVIATIONS ° CBD - Central Business District ■ D/C - Demand to Capacity Ratio ■ DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Study ■ DEQ - Department of Environmental Quality ■ ECO - Employee Commute Options ■ FHWA - Federal Highway Administration ■ HCM - Highway Capacity Manual ■ ITS - Intelligent Transportation System ■ LID - Local Improvement Districts ■ LOS - Level of Service ■ LRT - Light Rail Transit ® MSTIP - Major Streets Transportation Improvement Projects ■ ODOT - Oregon Department of Transportation ■ OHP - Oregon Highway Plan ■ RLIS - Regional Land Information System ® ROW - Right of Way • RTP - Regional Transportation Plan ® • SDC - System Development Charges • SOV - Single Occupancy Vehicle ® SPIS - Safety Priority Indexing System ■ SPWF - Special Public Works Fund ■ TAC - Technical Advisory Committee ■ TAZ - Transportation Analysis Zone • TDM - Travel Demand Management ® TGM - Transportation and Growth Management ■ TIF - Traffic Impact Fee ° TPR - Transportation Planning Rule ■ TSM - Transportation System Management ■ TSP - Transportation System Plan ■ V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio ffm ■ VPD - Vehicles Per Day Kim ■ WACO - Washington County vii goose 00000 0000 0 04 ummte r~ chapIce Play o ~d Ira nsPo~atio~ SysM TIganext 20 year s master Plan for the 0~ -11GAR OREGON 01(s,46sociates Tigard Plan T~~S~rtation Sltstem gncano in IMIM oaisW IF W 000 060000 66699 IN! 060000 66699 66 ow- is a -T I AS P Tint for 'Transp~°`~ati o Blue Investnient to make prudent and o E nbles Ci ~ri►~1an d use effective c oOCes; vvith regional ar► e CoordinaflOn enc es P'TP nearby agencies andate (Goal 12) . V:Ulflls State and Future seeds . Addresses E%71st7mg DKS Associates Tigard plan 7ran5po~~on 511stem Coro FnGAao oaeW° kiljjlj,l lab see =Ah 0 0 0 * 0 0 (1) 0 0 ~41O~ do a pl'3n novv? why t ready for the future -a NOW . To ge ~ GrOvvth llirtg Forecasts call Units and 15,00 - for 6,000 more ~We n the next 20 years more employees i 2000 °T completed Ul plan ) MetrO R P ents (ne Whvvay 9 Sta p te ecluirerrt • ortunitees . mew I:unding OPP p~S Associates 7'egard Transportation System Plawl pHD ny C}Of a le 40 vort Of9ani-taxio" ICondiflOns and f orecasV109 Eldsleing POVICY eMand r.,ture ~ t~ t godal Chante'rs motor \je'°cdes s f r~►~S~`' it ~ree9h - pedestfl t ! lW 9 . en DeMand -,ransp®ri 'lA9n sys$e", plan .fransportat'® C91°+ AF ~Ge~® o NOW`-, go goo@ 0 ,t' Cond 12 000 E%J SU v City generates ,c1 try ® a VIM 000 1 daY W ► rn W traffic throe ~ 5000 o a00o much 2000 3 4 5 6 7® g 10 11 12 `turd ° 1000 101112 1 2 mutes t® 0 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 HCUf p(ypttlt~~ takes s-20 . ®t s Tigard get acres hasthe Pm IFervv osOUthbOUnd ® scholls . . on rating N 60 tilghest c1s, 0 _ ria 40 ons 30 c n r Ica in rs l ,o 22 te _ . peaty cap sAssocia ~a lac O OKS Tigard ~oa~ fransP®°tatiOn Sys$e COY of O ONOMMIM www - ConditiOns 5 zip cx qQ 0 Key bottlenecks todaYs Wald 09 sr all-Greenbur ~ ~ O~~ 1~ S ~SU►E - ~all~_ y ~~~na ~ 4~ryUdry FD - Scholls FerrY/Nlmbus - Scholls Ferr,Fall y all - I-5/Carman Interchange SIC 4ssociates Tigard ~ ~1~~ Tr~~so'rtati®~+ Sys$eCd Oncost) 00 0,9 0 0000 0000 00000, 066000 -,Maud= Ah 0000 9vy on ORE '9 VVIlere I)oes rjt%out,rigard, as ~yy $ Q .9W ® -Thro carries GPFF , jigard 217 bout hal through tr ct half try 21.' 1 `c gnd ~ '5 1► . ~I ®route son tnat~n9 dotr aev is The pear ed togs tes ffi ~ on ~W orrr r pu~ttAM f ocortPer~ to tote, t*a for C IrI9ar System of o 0 ~ VW *see meow- w BKO E%isting redes ® stre'n walk 'cant gaps on sidewalk cle SgnI ® ~cycles us netWork in system - No co Pew ntinuo inters®nne~ed ®ls, -Tigard line in the locations linking to on Peak bicycle v® e tail it parks, transit er hour ran9 re hour edestrian 10 to 15 p have r peak h® p along ®~E Most bicycle lanes to years last ~olun'~es heave been added in 99vN rain eak hour pedest - Most p Per hour volumes below 50 p LII(SASSOCiateS Tigard an Trangnowtablon System PI I OFn~~a OOGW plow gee x~- Sting Transit • Significant bus service in Tigard . 9,500 daily bus soma bus trips transit • Transit Centers are most acts stops in Tigard Western Tigard and nortqu eter mile area only areas without access to buses Tigard DKS Associates Transpo~t7lon System Phan cm orn~o OREWM TSP Task Force • Planning Commission • Business/Chamber * Bicycle/Transit involvement • Technical Advisory Committee with local jurisdictions Tigard DICE Associates cmoFncnrtu Transportation System Plan ox~e~ 0000 Transportation Goals • Livability • Balanced Transportation System • Safety * Performance * Accessibility * Goods Movement * Coordination Tigard DPCS Associates A~L - cmoFnwuRo Transportation System Plan aaEOOw -,sue Travel ~°recst future ~d~l~n9 on regional travei 2o2pforecasts . aased VP ~ear,~ 20%0 _ Assessed both 2015 and r into ed Ti9 ~ VSaqCjrecjat p,al~Sis Zones nsP on,t'on in ~►9~rd Tra c ecast o 1.00ke'D at btill ,►~d ~~15 for • le trip . Es '~~~iSlne d ~ greater02. that gesujt Tigard than generat:jon in associates gKS Tigard m plan Translw►~tion SY~ CIV of oaEOw TySTR~' LEGIBII'I 0000 moo r Stria rede TOP Strateci, tars, transit ® . in nebNerk ~Ctl~lit~l cen Flit in gaps arks► recreation, ~ . Link to schneis► 't rC Pedestfl IDIS .stabl*h Regional enter - -Town Centers r e feed ons Acti KjOwnum r v and Useb :ing comptnent L ri Ti9 Ystern Phan Tran~~~at~®n cmr of'nGAR D 0000000 000 0 000000000000000 MYOF ®KsAssodates tlattorTras® ~s;. S np PI n NOT .u?_riry '~.rZ:iG4 . a;• SystB TO SCALE 'MIST sr a ymaueaa N.g ail A J TMvtRD ? vex I + i 210, ~ • i i 1!~ rte' f ~ T i s° 4 A I F p'~ $ Figurs 5-2 a PEDES MN AMOK PLM Tigard Associates Transportation System plan Oft" Pedestrian Action Plan Project List To Cost Rank* Project From $230,000 !21° Avenue Greenburg Road H North Dakota Street Hall Boulevard $200,000 H McDonald Street ORE 99W $350,000 Walnut Street Greenburg Road H Tiedeman Avenue 80 Avenue $500,000 H. Oak Street (RTP 6014) Hall Boulevard $500,000 McDonald Street South City Limits H ORE 99W Beef Bend Road $1,200,000 M Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W $300,000 Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road M Roshak Road North Dakota Street $450,000 M 121" Avenue Gaarde Street $250,000 Hall Boulevard 72 Avenue M Hunziker Street $6,000,000 M Washington Square pedestrian Improvements (RTP 6022) Re ional Center 62 Avenue $1,000,000 L Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive $200,000 Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road L Washington Drive Subtotal $11,800,000 Sidewalks to be built with Street IrnprovementS $50,000 West of 72" Avenue 72 Avenue H. Bonita Road Tiedeman Avenue $570,000 H Walnut Street 135 Avenue $620,000 Walnut Street ORE99W H Gaarde Street Pfaffle Street $1,000,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road 68th Avenue $120,000 H. Dartmouth Street 72nd Main Street $350,000 H Tigard Street 115th Street $100,000 Main Street Hall Boulevard H Burnham Street 121st Avenue $250,000 H Former Street walnut Street $50,000 Main Street Lincoln Street H Commercial Street ORE 99W Bonita Road $1,200,000 M 72 Avenue $670,000 M Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits $1,000,000 ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road M Beef Bend Road Scholls Ferry Road (E) $950,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (W) $250,000 L 72 Avenue Carman/Upper BoonesFry. Durham Road $7,18(1,000 Subtotal for 20 years $1,000,0010 Annual Sidewalk Program at $50,000 per year Action Plan Total $19,360,000 Tigard K Associates ste CITY LD Transportation Sly, M Plan OREGM 01clycle Strategies ® Kev in bicycle network schools, parks Fill in gaps centers, ~ o key activity Connect t 0 - ]c t jurISCUCIons Coor6ijilted i it ork pter Selected V:lramev'j *T"Cllso MajOr tin~PoWer Fanno~u~►la Loop r Crossing Tuatatgn ~iVe overcr t ossing o I-,/ORF- 211 fates Link Tigard S ASSOCplan Tran-. on System maim Co o~~~~~ anew DKS Associates ` I rl CtyOF710n® ~ j ToS M.i Transportation systems Plan it f i r Legend t~ - z Sd an.aw[wr.aaP tun N e.ol UN Fps, i•~ wvOMN TNRtO 1-d- ;H n.ef sr ~ a[laan.m[w~w[.aww Vo_ W .,4 a~wmi J~ 1 1 ~ ~i ~ O , \ [[rr[rve^.~a~+a..onts..[[..a..•[.ar•a.rm • /V i ' \1 11=AL 4 r ~ < Figure 6 2 BICYCLE MASTER FLAN - (Framework Option) r r ~ 1 [ 1 Tigard /CS ASS®CiefeS Carr oI: LID Transportation System Plan ®ww 090696009 00000119100000 Bic I Action plan Im rovement List and Cost Cost From To RANK* Project $250,000 72 Avenue $50,000 Hall Boulevard H Hunziker Street 72ad Avenue West of 72°d Ave. $135,000 H Bonita Road Main Street Hall Boulevard $300,000 H Burnham Street Hall Boulevard 90 Avenue $275,000 H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Murdock Stret Durham Road $270,000 H 98` Avenue Cook Park Durham Road $250,000 H 92 Avenue Walnut Street 000 Greenbur Road $4000' de Street H Tiedeman Avenue Gaar walnut Street $500,000 M 121't Avenue Washin to Drive Cit Limits $100,000 L Ta lor's Fe Road Ball Boulevard Ta lor's Fe Rd $275,000 L Washin ton Drive Hall Boulevard $150,000 L O'Mara Street McDonald Street O'Mara Street ORE 99W Subtotal $2,955000 L Frewin Street $600,000 Walnut Street ORE 99W $500,000 H Gaarde Street Scholls Fe Road CLocustascade Street Avenue $300,000 H Hall Boulevard Halt Boulevard $1,300,000 H Greenhur Road East Cit Limits South Cit Limits $960,000 H ORE 99W South Cit Limits ORE 99W $550,000 M 72 Avenue pfaffle Street Bonita Road $200,000 M Hall Boulevard 1-5 Durham Road $1,400,000 M Carman Drive ORE 99W Barrows Road $900,000 M Walnut Street Scholls Fe r, Road (W) Scholls Fe Rd. $550,000 M Barrows Road 150 Avenue Beef Bend Road $1,600,000 L Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Scholls Fe - d- $8860000 L Beef Bend Road Subtotal $500,000 Multi- Use Pathwa S Linka a to use Wa Trail in Lake Oswe o $3600,00(1 H HunzikerLinktoL O 000 Tualatin River to Cit 11 Hall, ORE 99W to Ti ar 000'000 M Fanno Creek Trail Ad*acent to Cook Park fr pwerlines to Fanno $23'600, M Tualatin River Trail Near 108` Avenue $2,500,000 M Tualatin River Crossin Powerlines Corridor From Beaverton to Tualatin River Trail Subtotal $12 200,000 1- $24,015,000 Action Plan Total rftK Tigard Li S Associates 1`~ TransPrtat7l0n System Plan ctl44cw® OREGM 0000 is =OM I room fransit fey Strategies - Commuter Rail cent service more hours of day provide more freq - Express routes Circulator Service in Tigard SC~~~'~ Transit Amenities ~urray New °Traresit Center at e■ DurhaMl New SeiVice Coverag fall arrowSl Bonsta 1 Ca riled hand jjse Actions ~ COMPitment - Transit Center/Rail Station Develop DKS ASSOCi~tes Tigard Transporter°n system Phan cmosnGaro a sap see* 0 DKS Ass©CiateS t N I Transpoft ion Systems Plan MOT TO fGr<f P qt Legend I1NR.l C•MdR MffartR fINR.eUM.ia rlf !dues ttl.st Cmin ON°r~.b ® 1HRrUW~IIS.fN Q rer ru. uws•n 1 N E.a1of Tt,R,lf.r~• rwa 8 P ® Ml.Mf lutes. iteMtMfe1+r. red. 1 Na•tull•Mn Hln.Yfenk•Rwa r s» wr, Tu./rsar Propoad ATP Tnnfi Routs Dsu9^otnnc 0.NYnN f•~ 1ufwMlw no P 0 C er Figure 7.4 Future Transit service C 6 ~ 1 fl 1 m 11 ASSOCiates -Tigard plan Transportation System Ca ®Pr 11G~RD OREGON ® Goo - - 000000~01 000 A ide motor C o TI "D Trarnsportmtion c~,ystem an Figure 8-1 VEHICULAR ELEMENTS OF THE STREET PLAN K Associates Tagard Transportation System Plan CITY Of TIGARD qw 'W~ Sig gee LEGIBII'ITy STR~ lowk ccoo 0 @so to OEM a at ctl%p U FJAII IEXA~ ,CA '110ti -2 '0 1.5/onc C a ,a 00 r. 99vy free ' flats r rind l Arte ® Hall aln ® u`, inn Attu walnutvqaticins CollectOM 1 He7jgnborhood 0 Cui--de-sacsl streets ca1 redundant -Tigard y5teo► Play DI(S Associates ~ranSPo~at4o oeEow DKS Associates N NOT CITYOFMGARD TO aCALe OREGON t Transportation Systems Plan tr A Legend ' Functional CLTSSItiCallon rn,o...e rr...,v r..,.ne Conroy :ICI t , , q7 rn,•ue tw~pnsan.•e wN. 4 ' i ~~t ronn.e cer•m. --4 LT _ -t J f rr,n.•er.yte.A..aa•r. zi _ fv USi r..~3. h y%r t-1 ':.f~: rye.nal C•m•r. A.nGw,•r f.a 1•u ( :rF[ fa. ~ u ; I r 1~.~. t LA ,T,r Tronsporladonfacilities in the TrgardTrunIle MAJOR and Washington Square planning areas have •.j'i specRc design regulations and classifications that may slightly differ from those in the TSP for consistency purposes In these overlay areas. r{ ` there aro specific planning overlay documents for trenapodation design regulations. Note: The exact al gnment of dashed lines to address physical, access control, right-of-way MAL .x and environmental constraints in alignment day elopemeri. 3tf; ^~r Figure 8-3 x Proposed Functional t t c ! f , Classification System Tigard i Associates CITY OF MGAR® Transportation System Plan OREGON MOO- No G* -0006 0 KS- A p an 3~y Residential fir , RUN* 1,0*10, fl. s 1aw1 3*LW" RMI „,1eSrclasus4rtal s' Com l b i lio 4l~ 15 . mmor C°liec 8 6 w~ ,z 1 1 ,a , ,z y. 1bry1 ,z 1 7 1*xrw+ l2rf q c~,»1 pp ~1Q1° ye.,e,edd' S 0 Atk N 12 I co"ec NAZI°p .01 b6t SWC'No a» co r cores OpIlan p ~~a! p arm ^ S-io 1 PLE 00 so WEQU bco Saw cowto VA" TOO rr~►cps-S ~r cap )~'ssocjate ~ml . Min Tigard ~y~teer pia~► Tra.S~~at~Qn cn~ ogroD o DKS Associates NOT ~ 70 SCALE oRi~~/~a~ ovetl Transportation Systems Plan ;r Legend 1L, Planted Right of Wey e Lanes ®p~~O Added Person CaDacM Conldac• funs e Lanes M 5 Laos /V u5 Lanes L3 Lanes 4•' % tttTTT"". ~ ~ ~ ~ 3P^ ON I VALUT _ Corddot Alingment Study Area \ rr 'Assume eight lanes for setbacks -r ^ Preserve ROW for 5 lanes in Future - ` Nola: Al ArteriaVArtenal.Arlen&Mollector A and Collnclot/Coliector intersections should Wool plan for needed ROW for turn lanes within $ - 500 foot of the interaction r our 10 2/3 and 45. _ Two or four lanes may be used for segments where envnormantal constraints bmd roadway and access is controlled to ebminate left turn lane need. 7 Figure &11 C Future Streets Where ROW is Planned for a_ t t c f r More Than Two Lanes Tigard DIGS Associates CITY OFTIGARD Transportation System Plan OREGON #0 ~ lp III I Sim AM 0 P1 01 M ' w L oc I le F)(amlp Nort1h Dalota Ct" r-~ T an5p 31a+n VOASSO`~ 211 i/ t~ttC1( 1~;{ f1. r i. ; ills ~j "'A o T t j1 k4LT ~cWAi~~T_ U ~.SIJ~E~sued 4ssociates ped~tro~E~~ F.j4A - p,~tgcl5~e Tig and .'tem plan Trans POTta'C ~ CM oEnGAR° OOGW No= 00 capacity and Circulation fey Issues ORE 217 and le-5 are over CapaC serves ~►sare OitE 9V11 through Tigard traffic on f Un feature ORE 9 fails he traffic signalized intersetfion „ Ala' o t made fail an 20 years ass no e improvements ar [)KS Associates Tigard em Plan YransportaVIoe► Sys 6I11f QF71RiARD oatoou (boo (DOG Key Solution Concepts for wrigard - Enhancement c ► ►o C ec onn ►V ® wasWrIgton Square and Triangle T g and Western ~~g fast/west Improveme"IE ~ Traffic provement plan Street IM upgrades action capecstY Inters Associates T,on System plan Transp,®cata CCU' of t1GARD D Associbtes ~ of 11~ARD NOT r a u ORS PERRY RD Transportation Systems Plan LOGISi ` ST Ro w ~ -t~rsection4rprovat~' -sue rraaTt+ DUO s 217 pFAFqE sr •RSPPmje~l+st -C4 of Tod qP 210 r ~ .PfoaosaarsM Nib s /4,, D T r ~ ~ T w 9" G C 4 5 "a t SATT ER ST th w m DR U i Figure 8.18 o- R P AND VIP PLANNED PAPROVEMEM Tigard f ( Associates csty of nGARo Transpodation System plan DK9A%oabtes Wimb Irtwbk.em USWa Ar CT 1 MY of TIGM® 70 ~YIX- 'lE : 7 Transportation Systems Plan © -N mbaalrnes S ® -Fr"MW4Kq s r 217 ® -&,kmvf " 3 210 ` ` 0-Ireerdu~g~tnplwerwd e ~ 6 ®•AocessGol3d S 6 ®-AddedPM=C8p" 3 3 (a-P1atrumW14w4ylor7LMH 3 -Cxri6~rAiQnlariSGldikn 99W ...•t 3 1 3 6 € 3 i 4 ( RD 6 = 5 6 i Figum 8-19 sTREEr ' S Coffaw Wjamr,,p,. IMPRO ENT PLAN g` ra bmsb. ' a Ew;.. mitl~ W Wiwrn9e. Tigard KC Associates CM OF IGARD Transportation System Plan o !I ii Hill powww3w 0 of also* 000000 ow Of dates -'ranspo~tOn ` D/ TAYLOR o~ C RD systems Plan 1 T i J c T S S : a (V~y u P~~Spb6 217 e7 ~gY11gS~~~ 0 f G a T ,UiD / 'Pp T t 210 e r 5 a S ~ a L a ~p W i IM Ass®c'a.i Les Tigard tens plea TransPoltation Sy a~iga =AU =0 Recommendations in the following r la Traffic signals - Master Plan - Coordination - ITS Safety - Upgrade record keeping to focus on hot spots Access Management - ORE 99W - Beef Bend - 150th Tigard DKS ASSOCiates Transportation system P'ian crrr kmo ORESON see 0000 cle en, t4ore MOtO p,eCOMMehngillntellaMe ement System ~ Vement Manag continue Pa rid of pavement reconstru~~o~ba~) Fund Program to get ana erne 14 ~~Od rrZjffjC e1 Program d useiroad apProyals continue current city IncorP°rate IV'f~into newlan paru7ing adopted into code s already _ Metro Maximum 90n SysteMs Intelligent Tr2insport-a' Associates Tigard Plan TranspO~"'t+°n system ~voen~D oaeoo~ 000000020 Icie otor evi t4ore ndations Recomtne Trucws oute rnap n - 9 FrIendjy @g rata oil items Kev IMP% na; Spacing af~~C 5~9 s 5 acing, ~r - ACces p eve1®f Sew°Ce nneat;or►s Street spa~~ngl 1/a r ®od Impacc %e19hborh impact o1 Access imp s - 5c~o eterm,;n~►~ion ASSOC IDI(S fixed use ~ '~±9~r y~~e~ Plan ,~gg s 0thU Mmv,#%des in ® ail ® Air ® Water ® Pipeline e Freight Tigard DKS Associates CRY OF MGMID Transportation System Plan oe~ TUM V Coordinate i o programs Encourage the development speed communication residents and businesses Mixed s Park-and-ride Tigard DK Associates WN OF InGARD Transportation System Plan OREGON ISM •!~<l~O~~~~~A•~v~A~~a~~~~~~00.0~~~~~AeeO0 o10, Preliminary Cost Summary modes 20 Y ea.. . Costs vi~ ~ * ? 900 M MODOT $250 M Motor Vehicle: City X45 M Maintenance X75 M Commuter Rail X25 M Balcycle $13 pedestrian Tigard pKS Associates Transportation System Plan Ail cmortwaaa p Now- I 'M Abe ih 00 WW' y1 1 V yYs1 00000 JJPJ~'1'y~ 000 41 00 toot H-M tiNese est"Ist"ates so Why Sit %0 Commuter gall grew r ' ic 0 i Iht new ~ C r and topocjr r lanes 1nr nnct,n - %vav ,Oadvvay co ~Stabflsh S fincJs to Aden as a1w n -na1 need nd sloevv MaiOr ~e' Of C Of o,a yin in tvae vid"f" procjrams for IWOODM r Ord ,fir I ie °rr `c - Tigard Plan 'Trans~~atio►~ System G c oF 041 o~► FU° ~in9 otetial 'ransiportat, would ears current rover 20 Y ~5~~~ 000 tO r~9eo+~~~ only find all due Substantia' sh manta ,atre Of ltnP- f~nds: of future . K e sources Map, regional) needs ~SD~) Bond measures (local , fees commensurate Ott' Increase exist~~9 needs _ Focus on high Priority Exactions ~I(S aSSOCIateS Roadway pricing .rti9ard plan m TransportatonSYste CR'inG OWP-- =5 50fartoGe'x "ere Steps alken roved wfSP ISP V,Sjk force APP ring ~0on ~►Pp~ved ISP comofiss, M Plaffifinci - 2000 rater 2000 u , b1ec 0p~~ "ousesw NOV 2000, , CIT orksl~oP . CAS collnIL, November 2001 2o02 M.0 14arch 20 lon ax Counell pdoPILI Associates • Tigard plan teanspo~'Up° System Of ARD 0; il tl CTV of 00000 M- III - 000000 9969099W Can Your Comments be heard? liow Comment can specif c deta6ls of thesdraft plan and provide recornrnendat'o Attend hearings ci.tigard.or.us) tom. o Review repot on the web Call (639-479.), write or email the CRY ~s 3ulia lialduk (julia@d1stigardisormus) Gus Duenas (gus,ad.tigard.or.us) Tigard DK$ Associates Transportation SYstem Plan cm Of na+rtD -nom mammon DDS Associates Chapter 2 Goals and Policy CITE' OF TIGARD OREGON BACKGROUND These goals and policies have been developed to guide the City's twenty year vision of transportation system needs. They are intended to replace the current transportation related goals and policies in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan (these can be found in the appendix of this report). Additionally, they build upon material developed in the visioning process from January, 19981. State Transportation Planning Rule, Metro Functional Plan guidelines and the past comprehensive plan call for a more comprehensive and balanced approach to transportation policy, addressing walking, bicycling, transit, rail, truck and other modes as well as automobile travel. These goals and policies are a result of widespread technical work by staff, Tigard Planning ® Commission, a Technical Advisory Committee and the consultant. Using input from the Planning Commission regarding their likes/dislikes about transportation in Tigard, goals and policies were developed. ® The City of Tigard Draft Transportation System Plan (TSP) Goals and Policies consist of seven goals with related policies organized under each goal. The goals are simple, brief guiding statements which describe a desired result. The policies focus on how goals will be met by describing the types of actions that will contribute to achieving the goal. Figure 2-1 provides an outline of the relationship between goals, policies, actions and implementation. This Transportation System Plan addresses the top three elements identified in Figure 2-1. The existing City of Tigard goals in the Comprehensive Plan have been incorporated into these Goals and Policies, reflecting other regional policy from the state, region and adjacent jurisdictions. ® Below many of the policies, the italic text represents a detailed description about the intent of the policy. While the italics provide the intent of the policy, they are not implementable as a land use action without inclusion in land use regulations? The Draft TSP Goals and Policies are linked to mode maps provided in the City of Tigard TSP. The TSP includes master plan maps for motor vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, transit and other modes. In addition to the transportation related goals and policies, the goals & policies related to other elements of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan were reviewed in terms of both transportation and land use. Several modifications to these policies in other elements are also recommended. ® Tigard Beyond Tomorrow, Community Vision-181 Annual Report, January, 1998. 2 ORS 197.175(2); ORS 197.195(1). Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161xo Goals and Policies 2-1 October 30, 2001 CITE( OF TIGARD Transportation System Flan From Vision to Action Tigard Transportation System Plan Public Input t Goals • • ~o Fu+~ional Plan 'N ~hS~ i Pin Policy Action • e • ~p Design Manual Standard Drawings Development o • , e Code Figure 2-1 GOALS AND POLICIES RELATIONSHIP S Associates GOALS AND POLICIES Goal 1--Livability Plan, design and construct transportation facilities in a manner which enhances the livability of Tigard. Policy 1 Maintain the livability of Tigard through proper location and design of transportation facilities. ® Design streets and highways to respect the characteristics of the surrounding land uses, natural features, and other community amenities. Policy 2 Encourage pedestrian accessibility by providing safe, secure and ® desirable pedestrian routes. ® The City will develop and maintain a pedestrian plan in Tigard, outlining pedestrian routes. Sidewalk standards will be developed to define various widths, as necessary, for City street types. Policy 3 Address issues of excessive speeding and through traffic on local ® residential streets through a neighborhood traffic program. The ® program should address corrective measures for existing problems and ® assure that development incorporates traffic calming. ® Develop and maintain a program of street design standards and criteria for neighborhood traffic management (NTM) for use in new development and existing neighborhoods. Measures to be developed may include (but not limited to) narrower streets, speed humps, traffic circles, curb/sidewalk ® extensions, curving streets, diverters and/or other measures, as developed as part of a City NTM plan. Goal 2-Balanced Transportation System ® Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation (including motor vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian, transit and other modes). Policy 1 Develop and implement public street standards that recognize the multi-purpose nature of the street right-of-way for utility, pedestrian, bicycle, transit, truck and auto use. Develop and maintain a series of system maps and design standards for motor vehicles, bicycle, pedestrian, transit and truck facilities in Tigard. Policy 2 The City shall coordinate with T ri-Mei, arid/of any o►her transit providers serving Tigard, to improve transit service to Tigard. Fixed route transit will primarily use arterial and collector streets in Tigard. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Goals and Policies 2-3 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates Development adjacent to transit routes will provide direct pedestrian accessibility. The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Tri-Met service plans will be the guiding documents for development of Tigard's transit plan. The City should provide input to Tri-Met regarding their specific needs as they annually review their system. This input should focus on improving service (coverage and frequency) to underserved areas. New transit service should be considered concurrent to street improvements when significant street extensions are completed. The City should encourage land intensive uses to locate near transitways and require high intensity uses (i.e. large employment, commercial sites) to provide transit facilities When bus stops reach 75 boardings per day, bus shelters should be considered in development review. Sidewalks should be available within M mile from all transit routes and transit should be provided to schools and parks. Policy 3 Bicycle lanes must be constructed on all arterials and collectors within Tigard consistent with the Bicycle Master Plan (with construction or reconstruction projects). All schools, parks, public facilities and retail areas shall have direct access to a bikeway. The City will develop a bicycle plan which connects key activity centers (such as schools, parks, public 0 facilities and retail areas) with adjacent access. Standards for bicycle facilities within Tigard will be developed and maintained. Where activity centers are on local streets, connections to bicycle lanes shall be designated. 40 Policy 4 Sidewalks must be constructed on all streets within Tigard (with construction or reconstruction projects). All schools, parks, public facilities and retail areas shall have direct access to a sidewalk. The City will develop a pedestrian plan which connects key activity centers with adjacent access. Standards for pedestrian facilities within Tigard will be developed and maintained. Policy 5 Bicycle and pedestrian plans shall be developed which link to recreational trails. The bicycle and pedestrian plans will need to indicate linkages between recreational and basic pedestrian networks. A primary facility in Tigard should link together Fanno Creek, Tualatin River and the BPA right-of-way in the west of Tigard Design standards for recreational elements will need to be developed and maintained. Policy 6 Local streets shall be designed to encourage a reduction in trip length i by providing connectivity and limiting out-of-direction travel. Provide connectivity to activity centers and destinations with a priority for bicycle and pedestrian connections. 40 Emma 3 Planning and Design for Transit Handbook, Tri-Met, January, 1996. Trgarr/ Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Goals and Policies 2-4 October 30, 2001 DS Associates The purpose of this policy is to provide accessibility within Tigard, with a focus on pedestrian connectivity. Pedestrian connectivity can be provided via pedestrianlbike paths between cul-de-sacs and/or greenways where auto connectivity does not exist or is not feasible. Wherever necessary, new streets built to provide connectivity shall incorporate traffic management design elements, particularly those which inhibit speeding. As a planning standard, require local streets to have connections every 530 feet in planning local and neighborhood streets. Policy 7 Tigard will participate in vehicle trip reduction strategies developed regionally targeted to achieve non-single occupant vehicle levels outlined in Table 1.3 of the Regional Transportation Plan. DEQ and Metro have developed regional policies regarding trip reduction. Some of these policies are aimed at provision of parking and others are aimed at ridesharing (Employee Commute Options-ECO rules). Policy 8 Tigard will support the development of a commuter rail system as part of the regional transit network. Tigard will support development of a commuter rail system connecting the south Metro area to the Beaverton/Hillsboro area, with stop(s) in Tigard. Goal 3-Safety Strive to achieve a safe transportation system by developing street standards, access management policies and speed controls when constructing streets, by making street maintenance a priority and through a comprehensive program of engineering, education and enforcement. Policy 1 Design of streets should relate to their intended use. A functional classification system shall be developed for Tigard which meets the City's needs and respects needs of other agencies (Washington County, Metro, ODOT). Appropriate design standards for these roadways will be developed by the appropriate jurisdiction. Policy 2 Street maintenance shall be a priority to improve safety in Tigard. The City shall place a high priority on routine street maintenance to preserve its infrastructure investment. Policy 3 Safe and secure pedestrian and bikeways shall be designed between parks and other activity centers in Tigard. Policy 4 Safe and secure routes to schools shall be designated for each school and any new residential project shall identify the safe path to school for Ab children. lew Working with the school district, citizens, and developers, the City should undertake a process of defining school routes. Tigard ;'ransportation System Plan P99161 x0 Goals and Policies 2-5 October 30, 2001 M J Mill DKS Associates Policy 5 Access management standards for arterial and collector streets shall be developed to improve safety in Tigard. Guidelines will be developed to provide access control standards. These standards shall be applied to all new road construction and new development. For roadway reconstruction, existing driveways shall be compared with the standards and a reasonable attempt shall be made to comply (consolidating driveway accesses or relocating driveways to a lower classification street are examples). Policy 6 Establish a City monitoring system that regularly evaluates, prioritizes and mitigates high accident locations within the City. Review traffic accident information regularly to systematically identify, prioritize and remedy safety problems. Working with the County, develop a list of high collision sites and projects necessary to eliminate such problems. Require development applications to identify and mitigate for high collision locations if they generate 10% increase to existing traffic on an approach to a high collision intersection. Washington County's SPIS (Safety Priority Indexing System) could be used as a basis for determining high collision locations. Policy 7 New roadways shall meet appropriate Lighting Standards. Existing roadways shall be systematically retrofitted with roadway lighting. Priority locations for roadway lighting include paths to schools, parks, and town center areas. Local property owners fund lighting districts. Policy 8 New development shall be required to provide safe access and to gain access from a publicly dedicated street (i.e. dedicate right-of-way, if not already on a public street in rough proportionality to the development's impact) and provide safe access. Development will be required to provide right-of-way (if needed) and safe access as determined by application of the City's development code and standards for design. The minimum City standards must be met for half-street adjacent to developing property for a development to proceed. This policy applies to both pedestrians and motor vehicles. Goal 4--Performance Transportation performance measures shall be set and maintained by the City. i Policy 1 A minimum intersection level of service standard shall be set for the City of Tigard. All public facilities shall be designed to meet this i standard. i i Level of service E (and demand-to-capacity ratio of 1.0 or less), Highway Capacity Manual, Chapters 15, 16, and 17 (or subsequent updated references) is recommended to balance provision of roadway 1 capacity with level of service and funding. ODOT, Metro and Washington County performance standards should be considered on state or county facilities and for 2040 Concept Areas (as defined in Table 1.2 of the Regional Transportation Plan). Monitor Metro and Washington County's current work to develop a level of service standard.. The City will work to make the arterial & collector street system operate effectively to discourage "cut-through" traffic on neighborhood and local streats. Aft Tigard Transportation System Plan OctobeP991 1 61 x Goals and Policies 2-6 IBS Associates Policy 2 Parking ratios shall be set to provide adequate parking, while providing an incentive to limit the use of the single occupant vehicle. Parking standards shall be listed in the development code for the City of Tigard. DEQ and Metro Functional Plan Title 2 encourages lower parking ratios to encourage use of alternative modes (walking, biking, transit, carpooling, etc.). Policy 3 Work with other transportation providers in Washington County, ® including Tri-Met, Metro and ODOT to develop, operate and maintain intelligent transportation systems, including coordination of traffic signals. Goal 5-Accessibility ® Develop transportation facilities which are accessible to all members of the ® community and minimize out of direction travel. Policy 1 Design and construct transportation facilities to meet the requirements ® of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Policy 2 Develop neighborhood and local connections to provide adequate ® circulation in and out of the neighborhoods. Work toward the eventual connection of streets identified on the plan as development occurs, as funds are available and opportunities arise. As a planning guideline, require residential streets to have connections every 530 feet for local and neighborhood streets. Policy 3 Work with Washington County and ODOT to develop an efficient arterial grid system that provides access within the City, and serves through City traffic. As outlined in Title 6 of the Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, access connection standards will be developed. The arterial street system should facilitate street and pedestrian ® connectivity. Goal 6-Goods Movement Provide for efficient movement of goods and services. Policy 1 Design arterial routes, highway access and adjacent land uses in ways that facilitate the efficient movement of goods and services. Policy 2 Require safe routing of hazardous materials consistent with federal and ® state guidelines. Work with federal agencies, the Public Utility Commission, the Oregon Department of Energy and ODOT to assure consistent laws and regulations for the transport of hazardous materials. Tigard Transportation system Plan P99161x0 Goals and Pollcles 2-7 October 30, 2001 Aft DKS Associates Goal 7-Coordination Implement the Transportation System Plan (TSP) in a coordinated manner. Policy 1 Coordinate and cooperate with adjacent agencies (including Washington County, Beaverton, Tualatin, Lake Oswego, City of Portland, Tri-Met, Metro and ODOT) when necessary to develop transportation projects which benefit the region as a whole in addition to the City of Tigard. Maintain plan and policy conformance to the Regional Transportation Plan and Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012). Seek compatibility with all adjacent county and city jurisdiction plans. OTHER PLANS The relationship of the TSP to other regional planning documents can be puzzle of acronyms, activities and plans. Figure 2-2 summarizes the transportation planning puzzle, identifying where the Tigard TSP fits within the on-going regional context of planning. Many of the most common planning initiatives and terms are reduced to acronyms, which are summarized below: TPR - Transportation Planning Rule, Statewide Planning Goal 12 developed by Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to guide transportation planning in Oregon. OTP - Oregon Transportation Plan, a federally mandated plan developed by Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to guide statewide transportation development. Consists of several modal plans, developed separately. OHP - 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, defines policies and investment strategies for Oregon's state highway system for the next 20 years. It further refines the goals and policies of the Oregon Transportation Plan and is part of Oregon's Statewide Transportation Plan. Standards for access management on state highways is clearly defined as adopted May 1999. RTP - Regional Transportation Plan, developed by metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) to guide regional transportation investment, required to secure federal funding. In Portland this task is performed by Metro (Metropolitan Service District). Adopted August 10, 2000. TSP - Transportation System Plan, a requirement of the TPR for cities and counties in Oregon to guide local transportation decisions and investments. (ORS 660-012-0015(3)). Corridor Plan - ODOT transportation plans which focus on state transportation corridors to specifically outline needs, modes, strategies and effective investment. Access Management - Methods to address improved safety and performance of state highways through control of access commensurate with facility needs. regard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Goals and Policies 2-8 October 30, 2001 - RTP ~+lanage+non ECo Regional. C .-:~rS Ce t . Pian • 2040 0 . ~ TJr,~ 3 , ~ _ it y y ~ :%iXFY>:Ua< ~4'• ~`v r~. v.:t~^,.-; ~ c.. c L- y^4 ~ i ~a • ~ t ~)y~r~3Y,~E~~~13y~&~~/~• FK,~~,~j?wI"~ i ak•, t~ ' .{.,a ~lrlyµ'•(,x `t ~c.~`.''a••', ?;•r ~4~)~^::'i~ ~~rK,a p~p~~~ . i??``~bt k',1' s~- ''.~iiF'.1 YT•{ < it f't7en°' 1 6 iA ni c yw.f:,~ CfTP, a -,~,^,"•y~ -.0 once C19" 77. ` ' 1 ill •~L~.'~',..' yy•,i uL' t.lfiwC' i e~~'_ t,, i- ~~s . p•~'~ r' , s< } !Y'Y~ r f y 7,ri:q c 7 Sthlci(~ 9 w f' p • / t 1 ~ ,'At. je M n7+St ^ ,f X ~y Ki S 3 y dX t~ A~yu'va ~Q tv X ~¢,f :g. ®s.s. " '~'2 S12' "`x~ ,Ze•+.^ •c 'yr ~ ,yam ~r y.~~~:t: ~r.• Z.y' r ~g u' TDfl~ A ,`IY1 '.7,,Qi~ fen (~"^'s'{ 1. }F~yty J Z y yti ` a,.4t .n"L`,.`~• y" Q r. ,~y ~ 'i'i s/~~(t f p•. 7n ErwV4 2.w 5t Y i32 F4, t~~ T zt 4~.ti,.L Y~T~ i~~' f. ~}~J1~t.sFYftjY~ 4~ + 1 rjc t ..r• rim, ~„{r4T ti}i~ 3 S~~'•7 '3~` '.cyta •iyg +~.`4' - ~ rc w cv e~ ♦ . ~tk~• ° Fi ure 2 S 141p GI°~SP NG ~I REREGIONAL PLAN or' D Associates ER D KS Associates 4 ITS - Intelligent Transportation Systems. Use of advancing technology to improve movement of people and goods safely. TDM. - Transportation Demand Management. An element of the TSP, that includes a series of actions to reduce transportation demand during peak periods. 0 ECO - Employee Commute Options. An urban area TDM program required by Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) of employers of 50 or more persons to reduce vehicle trips. Functional Plan - A Metro adopted plan (November 21, 1996, updated September, 1998) which outlines mandatory criteria for evaluating transportation systems and land use, translating state and regional policy to local requirements necessary to implement the 2040 planning effort. Title 2 and Title 6 require that the City adopt changes to its land use regulations to address parking ratios, connectivity and level of service. Superceded by the Regional Transportation Plan. Tigard Comprehensive Plan - This plan is a strategy to guide the City in the conservation, protection and development of the City of Tigard. 2040 - A long range effort directed by Metro to explore the choices for growth in the next 50 years and defining performance standards for local government to implement the regional growth concept. It defines several development types which will create higher density population and employment centers in the region. They are as follows: • Regional Center: Compact centers of employment and housing served by high quality transit. They will become the focus of transit and highway improvements. Washington Square is identified as a regional center. • Town Center: Provides for localized services within a 2-3 mile radius, with a community identity. There is a town center identified in the Main Street area and another identified near the intersection of ORE 99W and Durham Road. • Station Areas: Development centered on LRT or high capacity transit, accessible by all modes. • Main Street: Similar to town centers, an area with a traditional commercial identity, but smaller in scale, along a street with good transit services • Corridors: Development along a primary and frequent transit corridor that encourages mixed use and pedestrian access to transit. ORE 99W, Scholls Ferry Road and Hall Boulevard have been identified as corridors in Tigard. 0 0 Tigard Transponation System Plan P99161 x0 Goals and Policies 2-10 October 30, 2001 -M N DKS Associates Chapter 3 Existing Conditions CITY OFTIGARD ® OREGON This chapter summarizes existing traffic and transportation conditions in the City of Tigard. The focus is on motor vehicle, transit, pedestrian, bicycle and truck facilities. To understand existing travel patterns and conditions, a variety of aspects of the city's transportation system were considered. In the fall of 1994, an inventory of traffic conditions in Tigard was undertaken to establish a base year for all subsequent analysis. ® As refinements have been made to the regional land use forecasts over the past five years, conditions have changed. Current, up-to-date counts were conducted in 1997 and again in 1999 at. many of the same intersections and at some additional intersections. This data collection update provides a unique opportunity to look at intersection level growth trends within the City over a period of approximately five years. Updated counts were conducted only at intersections, however, the remaining data summarized in this chapter would still apply to current conditions, including relative variation among routes, peaking characteristics, speed zones, high accident locations, bus routes, etc. ® The following sections briefly describe existing roadway functions, circulation, traffic speeds and volumes and levels of service in the Tigard transportation system as well as existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. STREET NETWORK The Transportation Planning Rule requires that classification of streets within the City be provided. r The classification must be consistent with state and regional transportation plans for continuity between adjacent jurisdictions. The City of Tigard has an existing street classification system. This system is shown in ® Figure 3-1 2 The number of lanes on roadways in Tigard are shown in Figure 3-2. Existing typical street cross-sections are shown in Figure 3-3. Transportation Planning Rule, State of Oregon, Department of Land Conscrva:ion and Development, Section 660-12-020(2)(b), May 1991 (updated November, 1998). Z Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Map, City of Tigard, Ordinance No. ORD-91-13, Map adopted June 11, 1991. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-1 October 30, 2001 u .a9 cri of on Ro 'TransP ~ plan Systems ~ iates 4 ~ ~ T ' ~ ~ LECtOR W . MiNORCOII~~OR QQ Y®p 7 217 Y R ~ i G QQ S1 210 R c 941 ►YY a SUMM NOW CA 00 GVN of GA Xta~lo C systems p4a~ S As~4 i,,3tes ~1 iFYDR a z S i T 1 T S sB,rw - 512 (1CS 4 w ~ 217 T m TA ST o > F~ pRD Q 5l ~R 210 G t',~~ W 4q+td ~ sf BP~Ro ~ ~ wr T N q ~ 5 ~ OU t R6 D~ 4 SUMNE IEID Vol flout's w ~~p~1~iAYS p Tgt ACS Asso ates Local Street a Residential 2.5' 5 24'-37 2.5' rt' (m' R/W 36-50' lml T V Local Street Commercial & Industrial S' 34' (m) 2.5' m R/W50'tml m mi O~ Minor Collector 2.5' S' . 40 5 2.5' I IM) A R/W 60' tm1 - Iml 1~ Major Collector b Center Turn Lane or Median 6' 16' 12' 16' 6' 1.5' m' m R/W 60'- 80, m , m' O Arterial ~ Center Turn Lane or Median (r8i 14' 17 17 17 14' 8~ 1T R/W 60'- 90' (m) - Minimum Required width' Figure 3-3 EXISTING TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTIONS ACS Associates Washington County roadway classifications are generally consistent with City of Tigard designations. The following table shows roadway segments where the classification differs between the two jurisdictions. A table summarizing functional classification of Tigard streets by other jurisdictions is shown in the appendix of this report. Functional Classi cation Differences Roadway Tigard Washington County Greenburg Road Major Collector Minor Arterial Scholls Ferry Road Arterial Major Collector ODOT and Metro only classify roads that are of statewide or regional significance, respectively. These classifications are compatible with Tigard classifications, although the specific titles differ to some degree. ODOT and Metro classifications can be found in the Roadway Functional Classification According to Jurisdiction table in the appendix of this report. TRAFFIC SPEED AND VOLUME Speed zones on arterials and collectors within the City of Tigard are summarized in Figure 3-4. Speed zones are set by the Oregon's State Speed Control Board (SSCB). The SSCB is an independent board who sets speed zones for city streets, county roads and state highways passing through cities. The SSCB considers any factors such as roadway width, surface, lanes, shoulders, signals, intersections, roadside ® development, parking, accidents and 85th percentile speed. A decision made by the SSCB is not arbitrary or political, and is based on the considerations described above. Speed zones are set by the State of Oregon using an analysis process which considers the measured 85th percentile speed of traffic on a given roadway. Speed zones are not set arbitrarily or as part of a political decision s ® Vehicle speeds on several collector and residential streets are a concern for the community. As examples, streets such as Watkins and Bull Mountain Road are locations mentioned in discussions with the community. In most cases, speeding becomes very noticeable when it is above 35 miles per hour. Speeding can usually be expected on local streets which are wide and straight for long stretches or where downhill grades are extended. A complete inventory of peak traffic conditions was performed in the fall of 1994 as part of the Tigard Transportation System Plan. The traffic counts conducted as part of this inventory provide the basis for analyzing existing problem areas as well as establishing a base condition for future monitoring. The City of Tigard conducted evening (4-6 PM) peak period turning movement counts at 30 locations to determine intersection operating conditions. Updated counts have been conducted in 1997 and in 1999 at many of these locations, plus a few additional locations, for a total of 62 intersections. Figure 3-5 shows the existing average daily and peak hour traffic volumes on several key routes in Tigard. On a typical day, ORE 99W is the most heavily traveled street in Tigard. The segment near the ORE 217 ramps carries about 46,000 vehicles per day (two-way). Figure 3-6 shows average daily traffic (ADT) on several routes in Tigard and a comparison of traffic volumes on several routes over the period between 1994 and 1999. 3 Speed Zoning; Who Decides, State Speed Control Board, April, 1992. Tigard Transportatlon System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-5 October 30, 2001 LEC~IB~'~T gTR~ Cw 2w kov, ® IrainsiportOxorx Plan TAY RS ,KS ASSOclaltes t z 4~ 35 34 ~ T 35 K 35 30 40 a0 ~ 2~1 35 sr a5 ou OTA T 35 c s a0 F~~R~ 35 ~ T a5 30 ~ 0 5 30 ~ Q4 fi 2~o q0 ~ 30 35 35 30 ~ 35 a5 0 5 Z w rN-35 35 35 J Q a4 35 35 u ~ a su ~ 35 ~ ~ U w 35 G ~p Z®~~. go, A% 0,00 Uff DKSAssociates CITY OF TIG.A,RD TDCALE Transportation ~50 TAYLORSAY RD Systems Plan 0 a° N W T Sr Legend W a o 1900 r 0000 • Peak Hour Volume O ho ' I I 1 1 1 -ADTVolume 3~0 Q NDRn+ DAKOr5400 ry 217 - 0000 Way Volumes from Previous Counts ~~~~•l 0 c Q P G,gFF R ~ (1993.1994) (F F G s 210 o N+ r ~a 3.~g5 ` o: ST a ' $ Peak Hour 4 WAN,~~5 Street Volume Dartmouth Street 1,000 0 72nd Avenue QO _ scuth of Dartmouth 950 Hall Boulevard ggyy - north of Durham 1,375 GAAR M N T SF Durham Road 300 `r" east of Hall 2,050 BULL NTAIN Bonita Road 1500 2600 1200 McDonald Stye 975 RD 1 11 ' 5 N 9500 SAM-ER r 2 RD sullen IELD DR m DURHAM a 500 BEEF BEND 19,100 8 n o- o W Figure 3.5 FASTING m8 TRAFFIC VOLUMES Ociates OK Ass TIS°rd Htstoric°17rahie Volump1 01994 s,99r 0,999 soon 4500 4000 T 3100 2500 20~ ~ 1500 , _ ~ is ,000 _ 500 yid $ y~j f 0 A; Uv, xy~+ ~yS ~ ~ r- Inlstssadon '.34 Trattle V ariati0n In Tigard 11994) 34,300 26,300 11,500 10,100 9,300 "SS0 880 3,g00 3,300 ,100 Q~ Y' +a~ -'~'O d n' ~e ~,4c cp~~ 14RiS q Y c~ O~ CC0` < y°~~~ ~ Qo hoc= ~ e0 rho Figure 3-6 Volume Summaries 1c vafii Pg`~161 XA pctober 30, 200 g stem Plan 3-8 ortation Tigard TConsd Lions Existing K Associates ® Traffic data collected over the course of this study illustrate the typical fluctuations of traffic over the course of a day (Figure 3-7). In particular, Figure 3-7a shows traffic volumes on ORE 99W, both at the south City Limits and near downtown Tigard. This figure demonstrates that morning and evening peak periods have similar characteristics in both locations, but that there is much more midday traffic in downtown than at the ® south City Limits. In Figure 3-7b, traffic volumes are shown for streets near retail areas of Tigard. These graphs show that traffic volumes generally tend to increase over the course of the day (through the evening ® peak period). In Figure 3-7c, streets showing typical residential and employment areas are shown. These streets generally tend to peak in the morning and evening peak (commute) hours. COLLISIONS Both the regional highway and regional retail facilities in Tigard tend to generate significant traffic incidents to which the police department routinely responds. The following four areas are all regional in nature and have the highest accident rates in the City: O ORE 99W - In particular, the segment between Hall Boulevard and ORE 217. Many of the ® accidents are due to access issues or turning traffic (many driveways). o ORE 217 - In particular, the segment between ORE 99W and I-5. Many of the problems here are related to merging traffic and rear-end accidents the end of the traffic queue. ■ Washington Square - In particular, on Greenburg Road between Locust Street and the ORE 217 ramps due to the large volume of vehicles, weaving and turning vehicles. The large number of people from outside the area traveling to shopping areas increases the number of system users who are not familiar with the circulation. Tigard Triangle (bounded by ORE 99W, I-5, ORE 217) - This is developing as a regional retail ® center, thereby increasing vehicle trips in the area. It is now experiencing similar "out of area" drivers to the Washington Square area. The accident rate has increased by 50 percent in the last two years.° Recent accident data on state highways in Tigard was obtained from ODOT. This data indicates the following: Route 1996 1997 1998 Total 1996-1998 ORE 99W 323 276 284 883 I-5 47 57 71 175 Hall Boulevard 87 93 115 295 Scholls Ferry Road 9 32 22 63 ORE 217 165 141 132 438 ® 4 Per meeting with Tigard Police Chief Ron Goodpaster, February 14, 1995. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-9 October 30, 2001 s Associates ORE 99W North of Tualatin River 0 3500 PM Peak s 3000 R 2500 0> 2000 aSouthbound 1500 ®Northbound 1000 500 'pp` Opp App <opp ~o O~ a~ O~ ~ O~ ~ Op V+ Time of Day ORE 99W !Nest of ORE 217 Ramps PM Peak co 3500 E 3000 2500 0 2000 ®Westbound 1500 ® Eastbound 1000 500 0 Opp` Co 00~ Vp~ Qp~ Op eve X00, v O 1 1 1 Time of Day Figure 3-7a ORE 99W (Hourly Traff ic Variation in Tigard) Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-10 October 30, 2001 1;1,1 pill oil ® ~vvvvs~~Qv Upper Boones Ferry Road South of Durham Road PM Peak at 1400 E 1200 0 1000 1 I= W Southbound ® V 400 ® Northbound 200 ICI O < t; ~O 00~~ v00 f> O~~ ~0 10~; -i SAO` ~O0 Time of Day Bonita Road West of 1-5 1200 PM Peak ~ 1000 0 800 ®Westbound > 600 400 ® Eastbound 200 0 ~O X00 Time of Day Figure 3-7b Retail Areas (Hourly Traffic Variation in Tigard) 40 Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-11 October 30, 2001 -0 LFAZi Associates Bull Mountain Road West of 150th Avenue 450 PM Peak ~ 350 250 m Westbound U 150 M Eastbound 50-- IN ~01,141116 ` < =~O ~o \ cO~o cV OO~Rt v'4:~~ A4~", co 1O~` ti. 4;§ ~ -,C0 Time of Day Mall Boulevard South of ORE 217 PM Peak w 1200 1000 600 ®Southbound 400 ®Northbound 0 200 i.. 0 V. CO CO Time of Day Figure 3-7c nesidentiai and tmpioyment Areas (Hourly Traff ic Variation in Tigard) Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 X0 Existing Conditions 3-12 October 30, 2001 D Associates Washington County maintains a safety priority index system (SPIS) listing that ranks the high accident locations county-wide. SPIS number and rank are based upon the number, rate and severity of accidents at a particular location. The 1997-1999 is the most current listing. Table 3-1 lists the existing hazard locations as defined by the SPIS value for locations in Tigard for the last three SPIS periods (1994-1996, 1996-1998 and 1997-1999). Fourteen intersections have SPIS values above the threshold identifying existing hazard locations for the 1997-1999 listing produced by Washington County. Table 3-1 Washington County SPIS Listing 1997-1999 RANK type LOCATION INTERSECTING ROAD ADT SPIS #ACC 9 co/city Nimbus Ave/Dr Scholls Ferry Rd 57877 99.42 50 33 co/state Bull Mountain Rd Highway 99w 45568 71.15 51 36 co/state Beef Bend Rd Highway 99w 45460 69.06 20 52 co/city Boones Bend Dr/121 st Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 36158 60.39 30 74 co/city Barrows Road (E) Scholls Ferry Rd 31305 50.40 19 77 co/city 135th Avenue Scholls Ferry Rd 30654 49.74 28 92 co!city Greenburg Rd Locust Street 15358 46.48 15 94 co/state Greenberg/Oleson Hall Blvd 34761 45.03 35 ® 139 co/city North Dakota St/125th Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 34907 37.08 31 143 co/city Conestoga Drive Scholls Ferry Rd 38496 36.31 17 185 co/city Taylors Ferry Rd 70th Ave 5957 29.96 3 ® 191 co/state Oak Street Hall Blvd 16338 29.45 10 208 co/state Locust Street Hall Blvd 15195 27.82 11 218 co/city 130th Avenue Scholls Ferry Rd 34773 26.92 10 SPIS Listing 1996-1998 ® RANK type LOCATION INTERSECTING ROAD ADT SPIS #ACC 3 co/state Hall Blvd Scholls Ferry Rd 45790 141.95 92 10 co/city Nimbus Ave/Dr Scholls Ferry Rd 52239 105.59 53 31 co/state Beef Bend Rd Highway 099w 45460 74.69 22 34 co/state Bull Mountain Rd Highway 099w 45840 73.00 52 38 co/city Boones Bend Dr/121 st Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 36158 68.80 35 48 co/city Scholls Ferry Rd 135th Ave 30654 65.79 30 84 co/state Greenburg Rd/Oleson Rd Hall Blvd 34761 51.36 39 124 co/state Garland Rd Highway 099W 34200 41.33 3 142 co/state Fischer Rd Highway 099w 38825 37.42 24 155 co/city North Dakota St/125th Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 34907 35.55 28 159 co/co Old Scholls Ferry Rd (092 Ave) Scholls Ferry Rd 16462 35.00 18 171 co/co Beef Bend Rd Bull Mountain Rd 12128 33.47 11 173 co/co Old Scholls Ferry Rd 092nd Ave 620 33.39 4 184 co/city Walnut St 124th Ave 9618 32.06 4 192 co/state Boones Ferry Rd Bridgeport Rd 23155 31.25 6 203 co/co Scholls Ferry Rd Scholls Sherwood Rd 8780 30.17 3 206 co/stato !-fall Blvd Locust St 15195 29.32 11 221 co/city Scholls Ferry Rd Springwood Dr 46757 27.76 10 ® 249 co/city Scholls Ferry Rd 130th Ave 34773 24.52 9 Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-13 October 30, 2001 KS Associates 252 co/state Hall Blvd Oak St 16338 24.23 8 261 co/co Walnut St 121 st Ave 17165 23.24 10 262 co/co Cedarcrest St 080th Ave 5295 23.24 5 264 co/city Bridgeport Rd/Lwr Boones 072nd Ave 37023 23.10 11 267 co/city Greenburg Rd Mapleleaf SVWashSq Dr 24645 22.83 11 271 co/co Beef Bend Rd Elsner Rd 6710 22.37 6 288 co/city Greenburg Rd Locust St 14035 20.71 11 291 co/co Barrows Rd Roshak Rd 7108 20.57 6 339 co/co Elsner Rd Scholls Sherwood Rd 9315 17.56 5 342 co/co Taylors Ferry Rd 080th Ave 10665 17.17 7 388 co/co Scholls Ferry Rd 175th Ave 13375 14.79 5 400 co/co Locust St 080th Ave 7445 14.17 3 i 427 co/co Old Scholls Ferry Rd (GC) Scholls Ferry Rd 16144 12.64 4 481 co/city Walnut St 132nd Ave 11484 9.98 3 483 co/state Highway 099w Pacific Dr (s) 35782 9.79 3 Washington County SPIS Listing 1994-1996 3 YEAR TOTALS TYPE LOCATION INTERSECTING ROAD ADT SPIS RANK •ACC #VEH F A 8 C co/state Hall Blvd Scholls Ferry Rd 44690 56.48 12 61 130 0 0 7 37 co/city Nimbus Dr Scholls Ferry Rd 41990 47.57 35 40 84 0 1 1 28 co/cO Beef Bend Rd Scholls Ferry Rd 14495 46.73 42 21 39 0 3 5 4 co/city Boones Bend Dr/121st Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 36158 45.81 45 27 51 1 2 4 13 co/city 135 Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 30654 44.66 54 25 53 0 3 2 9 co/city Barrows Rd Scholls Ferry Rd 15600 43.53 65 18 39 0 0 0 11 co/state Bull Mountain Rd Hwy 99W 41790 42.93 73 32 72 0 0 4 19 co/city North Dakota St/125th Ave Scholls Ferry Rd 34907 42.55 79 22 48 1 2 1 10 co/city Greenburg Rd Locust St 10690 42.27 83 11 23 0 1 2 1 co/co Walnut St 121st Ave 14950 41.48 89 15 31 0 0 2 10 co/city Greenburg Rd Mapleleaf St/WashSq Dr 24645 39.85 104 21 43 0 0 1 10 CO/c0 Beef Bend Rd Bull Mtn Rd 7320 38.15 122 9 19 0 0 3 11 co/state Greenburg Rd/Oleson Rd Hall Blvd 25650 35.39 155 16 35 0 0 2 10 co/CO Locust St 72nd Ave 2506 34.83 163 3 6 0 0 0 2 co/co Locust St 80th Ave 7445 32.75 189 4 9--o 0 4 0 co/State Beef Bend Rd Hwy 99W 40260 32.54 193 16 33 0 0 5 9 Source: Washington County. R&O 86-95 defines determines existing hazard locations to be SPIS greater than 32.24. Key: SPIS = Safety Priority Index System, ADT = Average Daily Traffic, Rank = ranking of Countywide SPIS, #Acc = total collisions, #veh = total vehicles, F = fatalities, A = severe injuries, B = moderate injuries, C = minor injuries Rip Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-14 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates SCHOOLS There are a number of schools in Tigard where the surrounding roadways create barriers for access due to limited width and pedestrian facilities. In conversations with the Tigard-Tualatin School District, the following issues were noted by school site:5 ■ Metzger Elementary: Adequacy of walking paths and adjacent street width ■ Mary Woodword School: Difficult for traffic circulation due to congestion ■ Fowler Intermediate School: Access from both Walnut Street and Tiedeman Avenue ■ Durham Elementary School: Adequacy of Durham Road width, walking paths, turn lanes ® ■ Tigard High School: Driveway spacing conflicts ■ Templeton Elementary School: Adequacy of sidewalks TRAFFIC CONTROL. Tigard has 66 signalized intersections, with the majority on arterial streets. A summary of the ownership of these signals as well as who operates and maintains them is shown in Table 3-2. There are five key coordinated systems within the City. These include: ■ ORE 99W a 72nd Avenue between ORE 217 southbound ramps and Hampton Street • Scholls Ferry Road ® ■ Greenburg Road between ORE 217 southbound ramps and Locust Street ■ 72nd Avenue between ORE 217 southbound ramps and Hampton Street Of the 66 signals in the City of Tigard, 11 are owned by the City of Tigard, 11 are owned by Washington County and 44 are owned by ODOT. Most signals do not need upgrade or modernization. The signal at Main Street/Scoffins Street is the oldest in the City and would be the most likely candidate for upgrade. The signal at 72nd Avenue/Bonita Road has recently been upgraded to include protective/permissive left turn phasing on all approaches. The signals at Durham/Upper Boones Ferry Road, 72nd Avenue/Boones Ferry Road and 72nd Avenue/Carman Drive should eventually be intertied. Figure 3-8 shows the signalized locations. Traffic signals are valuable devices for the control of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. Traffic control signals, properly located and operated, can have one or more of the following advantages: ■ They provide for the orderly movement of traffic Where pioper physical layouts and contro! measures are used, they can increase the traffic handling capacity of the intersection 5 Per conversation with Dr. Joki, Superintendent, Tigard-Tualatin School District, February 22, 1995. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-15 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates ■ They reduce the frequency of certain types of accidents, especially right angle type ■ Under favorable conditions, they can be coordinated to provide continuous or nearly continuous movement of traffic at a definite speed along a given route ■ They permit minor street traffic, vehicular or pedestrian, to enter or cross continuous traffic on the major street • Improper or unwarranted signal installations may cause: ■ Excessive delay ■ Disobedience of signal indications ■ Circuitous travel of alternative routes ■ Increased accident frequency, particularly rear-end type Consequently, it is important that the consideration of a signal installation and the selection of equipment be preceded by a thorough study and be based on consistent criteria. The study must identify the need for left turn phasing, lanes and phase type. The justification for the installation of a traffic signal at an intersection should be based upon the warrants stated in the Manual on Uniforms Traffic Control Device? (MUTCD). The MUTCD has been adopted by the state of Oregon and is used throughout the nation. The same conditions hold true for installation of stop sign traffic controls. Specific warrants identify conditions which may warrant two-way or multi-way stop sign installations. A stop sign is not a cure- all and is not a substitute for other traffic control devices. Guidelines and warrants for stop sign installations are outlined in the MUTCD. e Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1988, pages 4CI 4C12. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-16 October 30, 2001 see* 000 ® so* ~GAY des ® ~s Sys [ 81~ Le98nd tt T ~ -Sxu~a m s K 217 o > T a~ G F" 4 ~ r 210 5 5 ~ h 2 MALI N 4 5 L' slu 6 U w ~1~ i "~~~~®~o7 ru 8 ja i . . . DKS Associates Table 3-2 Tigard Signal System Intersection Ownership Agency O eratin Agency Mainainin Scholls erry Road Barrows Road (West) WA Count WA Count WA Count Barrows Road (East) WA Count WA Count Beaverton Murray Boulevard WA Count WA Count Beaverton 130 Avenue WA Count WA Count Beaverton 125 Avenue WA Count WA Count Beaverton 1215` Avenue WA Count WA Count Beaverton Conestoga Drive WA Count WA Count Beaverton Nimbus Avenue WA Count WA Count Beaverton Cascade Avenue ODOT Beaverton Beaverton ORE 217 SB Rams ODOT Beaverton Beaverton 40 ORE 217 NB On/WA S uare ODOT Beaverton Beaverton Hall Boulevard ODOT Beaverton Beaverton Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road ODOT Beaverton Beaverton Embassy Suites Driveway ODOT ODOT ODOT Target Driveway ODOT ODOT ODOT Circuit City/US Bank Dw s ODOT ODOT ODOT Greenbur Road/Oleson Road ODOT ODOT ODOT Locust Street ODOT ODOT ODOT Oak Street ODOT ODOT ODOT ORE99W ODOT ODOT ODOT Hunziker Street ODOT ODOT ODOT Burnham Street ODOT ODOT ODOT McDonald Street MOT MOT ODOT Bonita Road ODOT ODOT MOT Durham Road ODOT MOT ODOT ORE 99W ODOT Durham Road MOT ODOT Summerfield Drive Tigard Tigard WA Count 92 Avenue Tigard Ti and WA Count Hall Boulevard MOT ODOT ODOT U peer Boones Ferry Road ODOT MOT MOT 72 Avenue Tigard Tigard WA County 40. w 72 Avenue Durham Road' Tigard Tigard WA Count Upper Boones Ferry Road -Tigard Tigard WA Count Carman Drive Tigard Tigard WA Count Bonita Road Tigard Tigard WA Count Varns /ORE 217 SB Rams ODOT ODOT ODOT Hunziker Street ODOT ODOT ODOT ORE 217 NB Rams MOT ODOT ODOT Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-18 October 30, 2001 KS Associates Intersection Ownership Agency Operating A enc Mainainin Hampton Street Tigard Tigard WA Count ORE 99W MOT ODOT ODOT ORE 99W 68 Avenue/69 Avenue ODOT ODOT ODOT 72" Avenue ODOT ODOT ODOT Tigard Cinemas ODOT ODOT ODOT Dartmouth Street ODOT ODOT MOT ORE 217 NB Rams ODOT ODOT ODOT ® ORE 217 SB Rams ODOT MOT ODOT Hall Boulevard ODOT ODOT ODOT ® Greenbur Road ODOT ODOT ODOT Johnson Street/Main Street ODOT ODOT ODOT Walnut Place ODOT ODOT ODOT Garrett Street ODOT ODOT ODOT Park Street ODOT ODOT ODOT Tigard Marketplace ODOT ODOT ODOT Gaarde/McDonald Street ODOT ODOT ODOT Canterbury Lane ODOT ODOT MOT Bull Mountain Road ODOT ODOT MOT Beef Bend Road ODOT ODOT ODOT ® Royalty Parkway ODOT MOT ODOT Durham Road ODOT ODOT ODOT Fischer Road MOT ODOT ODOT Greenbur Road ORE 99W ODOT MOT ODOT Tiedeman Avenue Tigard Tigard WA Count Cascade Boulevard Tigard Tigard WA Count ® ORE 217 SB Rams ODOT ODOT ODOT ORE 217 NB Rams ODOT ODOT ODOT Washington Square Road WA Count WA Count WA Count Locust Street WA Count WA Count WA Count Hall Boulevard/Oleson Road ODOT MOT ODOT ® Carman Drive I-5 SB Rams ODOT ODOT ODOT i I-5 NB Rams ODOT ODOT ODOT a Sequoia Parkway Ti and Ti and WA Count { U er Boones Ferry Road Bridgeport Road ODOT ODOT ODOT ' Durham Road ODOT ODOT MOT P ~ Main Street j Scoffins Street Tigard Tigard WA Count Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-19 October 30, 2001 'KS Associates TRAVEL. TIME INFORMATION Travel time information was collected to provide a gauge of roadway system performance. Travel time runs were conducted on several key routes in Tigard. These travel time runs measured the length of time it took to travel from a starting point to and end point of each key route (typically, a mile or more in length) during various time periods during the week. The key routes surveyed were-ORE 99W, Hall Boulevard, 72nd Avenue, Main Street/Greenburg Road and Durham Road. The time periods observed were weekday morning peal:, weekday midday, weekday evening peak and Saturday midday. The most significant delays were generally observed in the PM peak hour. However, on two routes which are heavily influenced by retail activity, delays were significant at other times (ORE 99W Saturday and Greenburg midday). The results of these travel time runs are shown in Figure 3-9. Travel times from various time periods are shown for comparison. 72nd Avenue shows significant delay both northbound and southbound in the PM peak hour. Since 1994, new signal timings were installed at four intersections near ORE 217 and the four intersections linked via interconnect. Delays through these four intersections were initially reduced by more than 40% in both the northbound and southbound directions as a result of this improvement. Since the initial delay reduction a few years ago, the route has attracted additional demand and at least 70-100 additional northbound and about 200-300 additional southbound vehicles now use this route in the evening peak hour, which has increased delays on the route. Travel time data on ORE 217 indicates that some of the slowest travel speed on the facility occurs in Tigard. Floating car surveys were conducted on ORE 217 during the morning and evening peak periods (see appendix for data summaries). Travel time data were collected along the entire length of ORE 217 at various times through the peak period. The average travel speed for the entire corridor drops to between 30 and 40 miles per hour (mph) during periods of time in both the morning and evening peak representing level of service F conditions for those time segments. Figure 3-10 summarizes the peak travel speeds over the length of ORE 217. Tigard Transportation System Plan p99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-20 October 30, 2001 D .Assc~c/ates CITY OF TICARD NOT TOWAIE renoRS RD Transportation ~ Systems Plan g Legend ao ST T z Hall Boulevard ~ X T D I D > z ~ NB 10:26 11:48 EERR~ 211 SB 9:0412:58 AK a ST e~ ¢ Q~ cREf T ® ° ® ° 72nd Avenue 210 PM 5 l Study- ~~o NIB 7:41 15:37113:25 T s Q SIB 6:42 9:10 8:49 w Main q-/Gmenburg Rd. vow . • • D I' yti EIB - NB 10:22 9:22 SB - WB 9:35 9:26 GnnRD Durham Road eeeeoeeD• e D U DU iN EB 4:15 4:21 4:24 RD WB 4:25 6:57 4:56 x Q S ORE NW e • D Ro suru~ oR EB 10.27 13:32 13:47 1922 BEND W/B 11:12 12:39 15:59 11:25 B EF MID -MIDDAY 1:00pm - 3:00pm PM - PM PEAK, 4.00M - 6:00pm Signal Timing Change 12194 ap - Sections with D, E or F - LOS Figum 3.9 T fd~~ 9994 TRAVEL TIME SURVEYS (Except where Noted) KS Associates Figure 3-10 'ravel Speed Profiles for ORE 217 April/May 1999 For Critical (slowest) Time Slice 70 Northbound 4 PM 60 - U 5 0 ca a 40 E 30 N 20 E 10 rn 0 cbe 1< 1§1 00 70 Southbound 4 C 60 50 AMe' E 30 20 Ln 10 in 0 Source: ORE 217 Corridor Study Initial Improvement Concepts Draft, ODOT. February 2000. TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE ON KEY STREETS The following sections review the performance of various key routes in Tigard in terms of volumes, capacity, accidents, adjacent land use (including schools), intersection level of service, arterial level of service and general observations. The key routes include ORE 99W, Scholls Ferry Road, Hall Boulevard, Greenburg Road, 72nd Avenue and Durham Road/Boones Ferry Road/Carman Drive. Each route evaluation is organized to provide a description in terms of functional classification, number of lanes, existing traffic volumes, accident locations and a summary of PM peak hour operating conditions. The 1994 calculations were based on the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. Since then, the Highway Capacity Manual has been updated twice and the 1997 calculations are based on the 1991 Highway Capacity Manual and the 1999 calculations are based on the 1997 Highway Capacity Manual. While there are some subtle distinctions in the methodologies used, the results produced are comparable. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-22 October 30, 2001 DK$ Associates In general, intersection level of service in Tigard has either remained the same or degraded slightly over the past three years. As regional growth has occurred, traffic volumes around the City have increased. In 1999, most intersections in Tigard operate at level of service D or better, with some exceptions. The intersections which are operating at conditions below level of service D in 1999 are discussed in the following sections. Travel time runs (which provided the data for the arterial level of service analysis) are shown graphically in Figure 3-9. Areas where arterial level of service is D or worse are identified on these figures. Arterial level of service was calculated according to the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual? A majority of these runs were conducted in 1994, with updated runs on ORE 99W conducted in 1997. Overall, average evening peak hour ® travel time along ORE 99W westbound (between 68th Avenue (near I-5) and Fischer Road, west of the City ® limits) has increased by about three minutes. Travel time in the opposite direction (eastbound) has remained approximately the same. More information on level of service descriptions and calculations (both ® arterial and intersection) as well as travel time methodology, can be found in the appendix. ORE 99W 0 ORE 99W provides regional access to the City of Tigard, but also serves a large percentage of local traffic. ORE 99W , ® connects Tigard with cities to the south and west and eventually to the Oregon Coast. To the east, ORE 99W becomes Barbur Boulevard, a key route in Portland, ® providing access to downtown Portland. Tigard classifies ORE 99W as an arterial while Washington County and Metro designate it a Major Arterial. ODOT's designation is a Statewide Highway as part of the National Highway System. Portland designates Barbur Boulevard as a regional 4w trafficway. ® ORE 99W carries approximately 33,300 vehicles per day t (ADT - Average Daily Traffic) near the south Tigard city % limits and approximately 45,900 ADT near downtown. ORE 99W is a five lane roadway throughout Tigard. Figure 3-11 shows the percentage of vehicles which are local for various segments.8 The percentage of local trips on ORE 99W is much higher near downtown Tigard than at either end. ® The table below summarizes level of service for a number of signalized intersections along ORE 99W ® during the weekday evening peak hour. Of the 16 intersections analyzed, all but one intersection performs at level of service D or above. This is generally considered to be acceptable operating performance for a signalized intersection. There are five intersections which operate at level of service D, ORE 99W/Durham Road, ORE 99W/Walnut Street, ORE 99W/Greenburg Road/Main Street, ORE 99W/Hall Boulevard, and ORE 99W/72nd Avenue. If additional traffic is added to these intersections, it is possible that they may decline to an unacceptable level of service. One intersection, ORE 99W/McDonald Street/Gaarde Street, 7 1994 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 1994, Chapter 11. s Data provided to the City of Tigard by Metro, December 1992. A plot was generated showing trips on Ultl; 99W with either an origin or destination in a Tigard traffic analysis zone. This plot was then related to a plot showing all trips on ORE 99W. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-23 October 30, 2001 ACS Associates currently operates at level of service E. This intersection is already operating at unacceptable levels of service and long queues tend to form on various legs of the Nor intersection. Sometimes these queues extend to other rope b~\ - j~ intersections, creating unnecessary operating problems 1 7 there as well. A long queue (greater than 20 vehicles) forms for about 15-20 minutes in the PM peak hour at the intersection at 68th Parkway/69th Avenue. Over the course of the entire peak hour, this intersection performs ~Qn acceptably. It should be noted that the 1997 and 1999 LOS ~epena* _ 30-4 calculations at Hall Boulevard/ORE 99W reflect a lane sox »40% configuration change in the northbound direction, *"M AD al,P.«do resulting in a slightly improved level of service over 1994 ca parW ttotal 4k on ORE 99W. conditions. 40 TIGARD TRAFFIC z; ON ORE 99W Figure 3-11 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersections Along ORE 99W Signalized 1994* 1997* 1999* Intersections LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay WC LOS Delay WC Durham Road D 27.9 0.77 D 48.7 0.88 Beef Bend Road B 12.1 0.86 B 11.1 0.80 Bull Mtn Road B 8.3 0.67 40 Canterbury Lane B 9.8 0.74 McDonald/Gaarde D 33.0 0.93 E 50.5 1.0 E 58.9 1.0 Tigard Mkt lace B 12.4 0.60 Park Street A 4.8 0.58 Walnut Street D 27.2 0.89 D 31.8 0.95 Main/Johnson B 12.6 0.62 B 13.2 0.70 Greenbur ain E 43.1 0.97 D 30.3 0.85 D 43.9 0.85 Hall Boulevard E 46.3 0.99 D 34.5 0.91 D 49.2 0.87 ORE 217 SB Rams C 19.2 0.75 C 21.6 0.83 ORE 217 NB Rams B 5.5 0.65 B 6.5 0.75 78 Ave/Dartmouth C 19.7 0.81 C 24.3 0.89 D 35.5 0.86 72 Avenue B 14.7 0.75 D 25.6 0.93 C 32.9 0.86 68 /69 Avenues C 16.0 0.87 * For analysis purposes the capacity calculation methodology has changed twice over the past six years. 40 The level of service analysis was conducted using the following methodology: 1994 Calculations use 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology 1997 Calculations use 1994 HCM Methodology 1999 Calculations use 1997 HCM Methodology 9 10,94 ccunts conducted nripr to opening of Costco on Dartmouth Street, therefore, counts may be lower than normal. r dh 10 1994 counts conducted during Fred Meyer Strike (August, 1994) and may therefore be lower than normal. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-24 October 30, 2001 ®K"S Associates ® The 1994 arterial level of service along ORE 99W tends to mimic that at the signalized intersections. ORE 99W generally flows at a level of service between A and C except in certain areas. These areas generally correspond to areas where intersection level of service is poor. Segments experiencing levels of service D or worse include, ORE 99W northbound between Main Street/Johnson Street and ORE 217 southbound ramps, and southbound from I-5 to 72nd Avenue, from ORE 217 northbound ramps to Hall Boulevard and from Main Street/Johnson Street to Walnut Street. It should be noted that, since ORE 99W is congested between Main Street/Johnson Street and ORE 217, it is unable to deliver as much traffic as is demanded at specific intersections. Because of this, intersection level of service does not appear as poor as arterial level of service, which is more reflective of route (rather than intersection) congestion. Scholls Ferry Road Scholls Ferry Road is an east-west roadway that serves as the north city limits for much of Tigard. It is five ® lanes from Murray Boulevard to Hall Boulevard. It carries approximately 30,000 to 45,000 ADT through Tigard. It has recently w~ been transferred to Washington County, except the portion in the 0 interchange area near ORE 217. It is classified by Metro and Washington an Major Arterial to the west of ORE 217 and as a Minor Arterial to the east of ORE 217. The City of Tigard and Beaverton both classify it as an Arterial for its length within the city f+ ' limits. Scholls Ferry Road serves local traffic, but also provides regional access to Beaverton, ORE 217 and cities to the west of ® Tigard. Arterial level of service was not analyzed for Scholls Ferry Road and intersection level of service was only analyzed for 1999 volumes. Scholls Ferry Road serves as a border between Tigard and Beaverton and is under the jurisdiction of ODOT and Washington County. Although it provides access to Tigard, it is not integral to the internal street network of Tigard. PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersections Along Scholls Ferry Road 4 Signalized 1999* i ® Intersections LOS Delay V/C ® Beef Bend Road C 25.5 0.84 Barrows Road (West) B 8.3 0.54 Murray Boulevard C 29.8 0.79 ® Barrows Road (Fast) B 15.0 0.57 ® North Dakota/125 D 42.9 0.95 Nimbus Avenue D 47.0 0.98 * 1999 Calculations use 1997 HCM Methodology Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-25 October 30, 2001 ®KS Associates Hall Boulevard Hall Boulevard is a north-south roadway that predominantly serves local Tigard traffic, but also provides access to Beaverton to the north. It is classified by Metro and Washington County as a Minor Arterial and by the City of Tigard and Beaverton as an arterial. ODOT classifies Hall as a District Highway. It carries approximately 12,000 to 23,000 ADT through' Tigard. It is generally two lanes, with occasional left turn lanes, from Durham Road to Greenburg Road. It is three lanes between Durham Road ' y o217 and just south of Sattler Street, between ORE 99W and Pfaffle Street and between just north of Spruce Street and just north of Locust Street, and five } lanes from Greenburg Road to Scholls Ferry Road. There are I 1 traffic signals at intersections on Hall Boulevard. It has many driveways connecting directly to the roadway, serving mostly commercial and residential land uses. - A driveway survey was conducted along Hall Boulevard and can be found in° the appendix of this report." The table below summarizes level of service for a number of intersections on Hall Boulevard. Of the seven intersections analyzed, four perform at level of service D. Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street and Hall Boulevard/Durham Road have long queues on some approaches. The queues at Hall Boulevard/McDonald street are on the northbound left and southbound approaches and the queues at the Hall Boulevard/Durham Road intersection are on the southbound and westbound through approaches. These queues generally tend to clear during each signal cycle, but both intersections are virtually at capacity. 1994 arterial level of service along Hall Boulevard shows levels of service C and above are experienced everywhere along Hall Boulevard, except at ORE 99W, where level of service D is experienced both northbound and southbound. PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersections Along Hall Boulevard 40 Signalized 1994* 1997* 1999* 40 Intersections LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C 0 Locust Street B 12.7 0.55 C 19.8 0.86 40 ORE 99W E 46.3 0.99 D 34.5 0.91 D 49.2 0.87 Hunziker Street B 14.0 0.62 0 Burnham Street B 13.0 0.54 McDonald Street C 20.7 0.99 E 52.7 1.0 D 38.0 0.93 Bonita Road C 16.8 0.68 C 21.0 0.97 D 47.7 0.90 Durham Road C 24.1_0.83 E 48.1 1.0 D 45.1 0.86 * 1994 Calculations use 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology 1997 Calculations use 1994 HCM Methodology 1999 Calculations use 1997 HCM Methodology ~t Driveway survey, conducted by DKS Associates, September, 1994. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-26 October 30, 2001 Associates Greenburg Road Greenburg Road is a north-south street connecting downtown ® Tigard to the Washington Square area. It provides direct access to both ORE 99W and ORE 217. At Hall Boulevard, Greenburg Road ® becomes Oleson Road as it proceeds north into Portland. Greenburg Road, is classified by Metro as a Major Arterial and by T Washington County as a Minor Arterial north of ORE 217 and as a ~ . aux Si _ TO SWCITLE ® Major Collector south of ORE 217. It is classified, for its length, by Tigard as a Major Collector. The City of Portland designates ® 217 Oleson as a Neighborhood Collector. It is three lanes between OIKOTA ST c, uq~~ ORE 99W and Hall Boulevard, except between ORE 217 and Locust Street and just south of Hall Boulevard where it is five a lanes. The table below summarizes level of service for four signalized vvw ,vY' S~ ® intersections on Greenburg Road. Of these four intersections, two operate acceptably at level of service C and the others, Greenburg Road/Main Sreet/ORE 99W and Greenburg Road/Oleson Road/Hall Boulevard operate at level of service D. Long queues form in the eastbound direction on ORE 99W in the PM peak hour, with vehicles waiting through multiple cycles to ® clear the intersection. Some of this queuing may be caused by unacceptable operating conditions at Hall Boulevard, where the queue spills back to the Greenburg Road/Main Street/ORE 99W intersection. ® Arterial level of service along Greenburg Road/Main Street is above level of service C for most of the length of the route. Locations experiencing levels of service D and lower include northbound Main Street between Scoffins and ORE 99W, northbound Greenburg Road between ORE 217 northbound ramps and Washington ® Square Road, southbound Greenburg Road between Locust Street and Cascade Boulevard and between ® Center Street and ORE 99W. The arterial level of service on this route is comparable to intersection level of service, especially since arterial level of service near ORE 99W is poor, where the intersection operates at level of service E. PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service ® Signalized Intersections Along Greenburg Road Signalized 1994* 1997* 1999* Intersections LOS Delay WC LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C ® ORE 99W/Main E 43.1 0.97 D 30.3 0.85 D 43.9 0.85 ® Tiedeman Ave C 19.0 0.77 Wash Square Rd C 23.3 0.73 Oleson/Hall Blvd D 34.3 0.95 * 1994 Calculations use 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology 1997 Calculations use 1994 HCM Methodology 1999 Calculations use 1997 HCM Methodology Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-27 October 30, 2001 ITi W.oP% A n /ia ®o ~°~aa~a~~~✓OCldt"o~ 72nd Avenue 72nd Avenue is a north-south roadway serving mostly local traffic in Tigard. It serves industrial traffic from land uses along its frontages, but also provides connections to ORE 99W, ORE 217, I-5 and Tualatin to 99W the south. It is a three lane roadway between Bridgeport Road and the p"`~~~~ ORE 217 ramps. North of there, it is a two lane roadway with occasional left turn lanes. 72nd Avenue is classified as a Major Collector by the 2" City of Tigard and as a Minor Arterial by Metro. It is not classified by Q Sr Washington County. 72nd Avenue carries approximately 16,000 ADT. The table below summarizes level of service for several signalized intersections on 72nd Avenue. Of the 10 signalized intersections, five perform at level of service C or above (generally considered acceptable operating conditions). The five remaining intersections, 72nd NOT Avenue/ORE 99W, 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 Northbound Ramps, 72nd TO SCALE Avenue/ORE 217 Southbound Ramps/Varns Street, 72nd Avenue/Bonita Road and 72nd Avenue/Carman Drive operate at level of service D. w~ Several of these intersections have been improved in the past few years. 72nd Avenue/Bonita Road was changed from protected left turn phasing on all approaches to protected/permissive phasing on all approaches. 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 Northbound Ramps and 72nd Avenue/ORE 217 Southbound Ramps/Varns Street were part of an overall signal timing/coordination project along 72nd Avenue between Varns Street/ORE 217 Southbound Ramps and Hampton Street. While these intersections operate at a better level of service as a result of these improvements, the 72°d Avenue has become a more desirable route, attracting at least 70-100 additional northbound vehicles and approximately 200-300 additional southbound vehicles between Hampton Street and the ORE 217 Southbound Ramps/Varns Street intersections. Arterial level of service along 72nd Avenue is poor (level of service D or lower) for a significant portion of its length. In particular level of service is poor northbound from Upper Boones Ferry Road to the ORE 217 southbound ramps. In the southbound direction, level of service is poor between Hampton Street and the ORE 217 southbound ramps, between Sandburg Street and Bonita Road and between Carman Drive and Upper Boones Ferry Road. This is fairly consistent with the intersection operating conditions, which are mostly at level of service D in these areas. In this case, arterial level of service is poor, while intersection r level of service may not look so bad since a number of closely spaced signals were not interconnected i when the travel time runs were made. Since these signals were not interconnected, additional delay was introduced from uncoordinated signal timing. These signals have since been retimed and the arterial level of service is much improved, however increased traffic volumes create increased delay. PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersections Along 72nd Avenue Signalized 1994* 1997* 1999* Intersections LOS Dela V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C ORE 99W B 14.7 0.75 D 25.6 0.93 Hampton Street B 11.5 0.43 Ak ORE 217 NB Rams B 10.9 0.48 D 29.6 0.99 Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-28 October 30, 2001 -0-0 DKs Associates ® Signalized 1994* 1997* 1999* ® Intersections LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay WC ® Hunziker Street C 16.3 0.84 C 22.7 0.93 ORE 217 SBNarns E 40.7 1.00 D 36.2 0.99 Bonita Road E 48.2 0.95 D 37.9 0.89 D 47.7 0.90 ® Carman Drive C 24.8 0.79 D 29.4 0.88 Upper Boones Ferry B 12.0 0.67 B 17.6 0.65 Durham Road B 8.7 0.31 Bridgeport Road B 12.5 0.54 * 1994 Calculations use 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology ® 1997 Calculations use 1994 HCM Methodology 1999 Calculations use 1997 HCM Methodology ® Durham Road/Roones Ferry Road/Carman Drive ® Durham Road is an east-west roadway that serves the southern part of Tigard. It is three lanes for its length. Durham Road is ° classified by Metro as a Minor Arterial, by Washington f ' County as a study area west of Hall and as a Minor Arterial east of Hall, and as an Arterial by the City of Tigard east of ® Hall Boulevard. West of Hall Boulevard, it is classified by the City of Tigard as a Major Collector. Lake Oswego designates .u~ Carman Drive as a Major Collector. The route provides predominantly local access, but also serves vehicles traveling to ORE 99W or I-5 via Boones Ferry Road and Carman Drive and through traffic between King City and I-5. The table below summarizes level of service conditions along Durham RoadBoones Ferry Road/Carman E~ Drive. Five of the six intersections perform at level of service D or above. ORE 99W/Durham Road, Hall Boulevard/Durham Road, Upper Boones Ferry Road/Durham Road and I-5 northbound ramps/Carman Drive all operate at level of service D. I-5 southbound ramps/Carman Drive operates at level of service E and is just about at capacity. Queues tend to form westbound and southbound at ORE 99W/Durham Road, with some vehicles waiting through more than one signal cycle. The same is true at Hall Boulevard/Durham Road. PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Signalized Intersections on Durham Road 1 Signalized 1994* 1997* 1999* Intersections LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C LOS Delay V/C ORE 99W D 27.9 0.77 D 48.7 0.88 Hall Boulevard C 24.1 0.83 E 48.1 1.0 D 45.1 0.86 f Upper Boones Ferry C 22.0 0.79 D 32.2 0.97 D 52.0 0.98 72 /Upper Boones B 12.0 0.67 I-5 SB/Carman Dr D 34.2 0.83 E 42.6 1.0 I A% I-5 NBO/Carman Dr D 25.9 0.89 D 31.5 0.96 * 1994 Calculations use 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology 1997 Calculations use 1994 HCM Methodology 1999 Calculations use 1997 HCM Methodology Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-29 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates Unsignalized Intersections In addition to the signalized intersections along Tigard's key routes, there are a number of Unsignalized intersections which are important to traffic operations in Tigard. The table below summarizes the capacity analysis for evening peak conditions at 11 unsignalized intersections in Tigard. These additional intersections, combined with the signalized intersections mentioned above, represent the key study intersections identified by City staff for analysis in this study. 12 Unsignalized intersections are subject to a separate capacity analysis methodology which is described in the appendix of this report. Of the 11 unsignalized intersections, six are all-way stop controlled and five have one or more approaches which are uncontrolled. The methodology used for each of these cases is different and results are reported slightly differently (please see Appendix for more detail). PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Unsignalized Intersections 1994 1997 1999 Intersection LOS* LOS* LOS* Walnut Street/135 Avenue A/A A/B Walnut Street/12131 Avenue C D Walnut/Tiedemart/Fonner B D Main Street/Burnham Street A/C 68 Parkwa /Atlanta/Haines C D 72 Avenue/Dartmouth Street F F D McDonald Street/97 Avenue A/B 68 Avenue/Dartmouth Street D Hall/Sattler/Ross B/E Greenbur Road/Oak Street B/C 121" Avenue/North Dakota Street F * 1994 Calculations use 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Methodology 1997 and 1999 Calculations use 1994 HCM Methodology Most of the unsignalized intersections that were analyzed operate acceptably at level of service D or above. However, three intersections are shown as level of service E or F. Often poor levels of service at unsignalized intersections affect only a small number of vehicles, since a majority of the vehicles (on the main street) are uncontrolled and flow freely at level of service A or B. Other Key Routes In Tigard Interstate 5 is the west coast's major north-south corridor and it provides regional and interstate access directly to the City of Tigard. I-5 connects Tigard with adjoining cities in the Portland Metropolitan Region as well as with cities further south in Oregon such as Salem and Eugene. I-5 also provides access to other states such as Washington and California. ODOT classifies I-5 as an Interstate Highway as part of the National Highway System. For access management it is designated a Freeway. 12 Per discussions with Laurie Nicholson, City of Tigard staff, December, 1996 and spring 1999. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-30 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates ORE 217 provides regional access to the City of Tigard. ORE 217 connects Tigard with Beaverton and Lake Oswego and provides access to US 26 and I-5. US 26 is a major route leading to the Oregon Coast to the west and to eastern Oregon. ODOT classifies ORE 217 as a Statewide Highway as part of the ® National Highway System. For access management it is designated an Expressway. Gaarde Street is an east-west Major Collector providing local access to residential streets in Tigard. It is two lanes and, in conjunction with 121st Avenue, connects ORE 99W and Scholls Ferry Road via Walnut Street. Main Street is an east-west Major Collector serving the commercial downtown core of Tigard. It ® parallels ORE 99W from Johnson Street to Greenburg Road. ® Bull Mountain Road serves residential and rural traffic west of Tigard as a Major Collector. This area ® is developing rapidly and, besides Beef Bend Road, Bull Mountain Road is one of the only roadways accessing this area. In addition, as ORE 99W becomes more congested, both Bull Mountain Road and Beef Bend Road are becoming part of an alternate route to rural areas to the west of Tigard. McDonald Street is an east-west Major Collector which runs between Hall Boulevard and ORE 99W. It serves predominantly residential traffic, although, as areas to the west in Tigard develop, it is being ® used more and more as a cut-through route. ® 121st Avenue is a north-south Major Collector which runs through mostly residential areas in Tigard. ® In conjunction with Gaarde Street, it connects Scholls Ferry Road with ORE 99W. North Dakota Street is an east-west Minor Collector which runs through mostly residential areas in Tigard. It connects Scholls Ferry Road to Greenburg Road and generally runs parallel to Scholls Ferry Road. Beef Bend Road is parallel to, and south of, Bull Mountain Road. It is classified as a Major Collector and functions in a similar way as Bull Mountain Road as growth occurs in the area to the west of Tigard. Walnut Street is an east-west Major Collector serving primarily residential traffic in Tigard. In conjunction with 135th Avenue, and with a short jog at Tiedeman Avenue, it provides a connection ® from ORE 99W to Scholls Ferry Road. Hunziker Street is an east-west Major Collector connecting Hall Boulevard with 72nd Avenue near the ORE 217 ramps. This street serves both commercial and residential traffic and is increasingly being used as a cue-through route across Tigard. Dartmouth Street is a relatively new Major Collector in Tigard. It is five lanes at its west end and three at its east end. It serves the new Cub Foods and Costco developments and provides direct access to ORE 99W and 1-5. Bonita Road is an east-west Major Collector which connects Hall Boulevard with Lake Oswego (via Bangy ® Road) and 1-5 (via 72nd Avenue and Carman Drive or via Bangy Road and Kruse Way). N Locust Street is an east-west Major Collector which provides access to local neighborhood streets and between Hall Boulevard and Greenburg Road. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-31 October 30, 2001 KS Associates Upper Boones Ferry Road is a north-south Arterial which connects Durham Road with I-5 and Tualatin. Since there is very limited access to Tualatin due to the Tualatin River, much of the traffic between Tigard and Tualatin uses this route. Taylors Ferry Road is a Major Collector that serves as the northern boundary of the Tigard planning area. This route provides a link between the Metzger area and I-5 and Portland to the east. AVERAGE VEHICLE OCCUPANCY Average vehicle occupancy (AVO) was measured at two locations in Tigard. 13 These locations were at ORE 99W west of Hall Boulevard, and on Hall Boulevard south of ORE 99W. Overall AVO measured in Tigard (between the two locations, over all time periods) was 1.21. This rate is somewhat lower than observed typical ranges for auto occupancy (over all time periods and trip purposes) which range from about 1.31 to 1.54. 14 A breakdown by time period and location is shown in Table 3-3 and the percentage of vehicles by number of passengers and location is shown in Figure 3-12. Figure 3-12 Average Vehicle Occupancies Average Vehicle Occupancy Average Vehicle Occupancy ORE 99W West of Halt Boulevard Hall Boulevard South of ORE 99W Throe >Throe Throe 1% y i 1 TWO TWO 17% 14% sl" skpM al% e1% 13 Counts conducted for DKS Associates on September 28 through October 6, 1994. 14 Calibration and Adjustment of System Planning Models, U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration, December, 1990, and Quick-Response Urban Travel Estimation Techniques and Transferable Parameters: User's Guide, NCHRP Report 187, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1978. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-32 October 30, 2001 KS Associates ® Table 3-3 Average Vehicle Occupancy in Tigard ® Time Period ORE 99W Hall Blvd Overall Weekday 7:00-9:00 AM Morning 1.13 1.14 1.13 11:30 AM-1:30 PM Midday 1.23 1.24 1.23 ® 4:00-6:00 PM Evening 1.27 1.24 1.26 Overall 1.21 1.21 1.21 Saturday 1:00-3:00 PM Midday 1.58 1.54 1.57 ORE 217 Weekday Northbound Southbound 7:00-9:00 AM Morning 1.08 1.08 4:00-6:00 PM Evening 1.16 1.12 Source: DKS Associates surveys - Tigard Streets 1994, ORE 217 1999. ACCESS ISSUES Two major corridors in Tigard are key locations where some form of access management may be applied. These corridors are ORE 99W, which has a significant portion of its frontage occupied by commercial land uses, and Hall Boulevard, which has a large number of access locations for such a major route. An inventory of driveway conditions along Hall Boulevard was conducted as part of this study. The results of this inventory indicate that access conditions vary greatly along Hall Boulevard. In some segments there are as many as 15 driveways between street intersections. Other segments have as few as zero driveways between street intersections. When adjacent land use was considered, a combination of residential and commercial tended to have the highest number of driveways between streets. A summary of the driveway inventory can be found in the appendix of this report. LAND USE Existing land use in Tigard is shown in Fi ure 3-13. In general, most retail activity in Tigard is located on arterial and major collector roadways.' Although residential development is found on arterial and major collector roadways, much of the residential land uses in Tigard generally have access to minor collector or local streets. The transportation system is most impacted by changes in land use. Trip generation from added land use has and will create needs for new transportation facilities. The most significant changes in land use which have occurred recently are occurring in the area west of Tigard, in the Tigard Triangle and in the southern and western areas of Tigard. is Tigard City Code requires retail development to gain access from arterial or collector streets. Tigard Transportatlon System Plan P99161x0 ® Existing Conditions 3-33 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates t Q M rapsportabon T ~ TOSCJUS it • } ~ Systems Plan a ~ . - Legend Xz e m 10, Existing Land Use tmk= C ! ! i :,1 tytultE rw* ReOdandW Pubk r.n.. '`{l iL V d&-FamdY R8S1a" w. 7'" • 1,^~: r 5~d' Vacant land r r i r 1 r; i a J« r , ` 3 RUS QatsbM Matto Some _ ~ ~ ~ • :~-``c F~ ` ~ ~ k 'r`c`: • ,y~~,. `e.t.a ~ ~ ......•~wq ~ y....-Aa.'>, t eft . ; t t° t F k Figure 343 a:. .t~ Use Existing Land Il ~ 4 .'t`wJr4y, .l `ti . DKS Associates TRANSIT Transit service is provided to the general population of the City of Tigard by Tri-Met. Figure 3-14 shows the routes passing through Tigard. There are two transit centers and two express routes serving Tigard. There are two express routes which have a limited number of stops. Coming from Portland, route 95X stops only at the Tigard Cinemas before it begins making regular stops at Walnut/ORE 99W. Also coming from Portland, route 92X does not stop before reaching the Progress Park & Ride station, where it begins making regular stops. Other routes have stops approximately every 200 feet within Tigard. A comparison of 1990, 1994 and 1999 transit ridership in Tigard is summarized in Table 3-4. No data was available for 1994 for route 38 or for 1990 for route 95. More complete data from 1999 indicates appoximately 9,500 daily transit riders in Tigard 16. ® Table 3-4 Daily Transit Ridership in Tigard 1990, 1994 and 1999 1990 1994 1999 Route Dir Ons Offs Tot Ons Offs Tot Ons Offs Tot 12 Barbur Out 152 683 835 316 941 1257 386 1017 1403 12 Barbur In 691 160 851 900 254 1154 894 389 1283 38 Boones Fe SB 34 33 67 9 37 46 38 Boones Ferry NB 30 17 47 29 16 45 43 Taylors Ferry WB 24 110 134 24 127 151 20 158 178 43 Taylors Ferry EB 109 19 128 109 19 128 148 24 172 44 Kin City Out 110 84 194 44 Kin City In 19 45 64 45 Garden Home WB 48 209 257 65 241 306 65 252 317 45 Garden Home EB 220 47 267 199 66 265 235 71 306 56 Scholls Ferry SB 1 241 242 3 306 309 3 300 303 56 Scholls Ferry NB 253 4 257 261 40 301 303 2 305 62 Murray Blvd EB 24 93 117 43 214 257 94 430 524 62 Murray Blvd WB 67 24 91 200 58 258 418 107 525 64X Mar uam-Ti Out 4 36 40 64X Mar uam Ti in 41 1 42 76 Ti -Tual SB 377 530 907 76 Ti -Tual NB 552 357 909 78 Beav-LO SB 224 442 666 275 580 855 252 498 750 78 Beav-LO NB 434 219 653 562 285 847 419 225 644 92X S. Beav Ex WB 13 103 116 92X S. Beav Ex EB 138 10 148 95 Ti 1-5 Ex WB 3 84 87 12 117 129 95 Ti 1-5 Ex EB 64 1 65 104 2 106 TOTAL 4645 4811 9456 SOURCE: Tri-Met Passenger Census, ons and offs occurring in Tigard. 16 Route Level Passenger Census, Tri-Met, Spring 1999. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-35 October 30, 2001 y~ 4p f i1 ~ ~ 1~~ 1 u ARID 11W Of MR OSLO 6 T~an s pIaT, ~y~te D ~.Gad'Homa ~,gsFem o trams 217 ~,pcSrS~A e e 210 ~o ar P h ~ ~ d w GAM 5 uRt► RA '~i~l 6 .sa~e~a ~51~ R~ t~'.GacdenH~1e ® ~y .s ~ keos~ seep lS Associates BICYCLES Existing bike lanes and off-street multi-use paths are shown in Figure 3-15. While there is significant inventory of bicycle lanes, most existing lanes are only for short segments. Except for I-5 and ORE 217, bicycles are permitted on all roadways in Tigard. However, because there are few continous and interconnected bikeways in the City, bicycle use is relatively low. Bicycle use in Tigard is generally used for recreational, school and commuting purposes. Bicycle counts at study intersections indicate fewer than 10 bicycle trips at each intersection over a two-hour period of time (either 7-9 AM or 4-6 PM), except at the following intersections, which had between 10 and 15 bicycles in the two hour period: ® Hall Boulevard/McDonald Street (AM peak period) A Upper Boones Ferry Road/Durham Road (AM and PM peak period) Metro identifies the following facilities as part of the Regional Bicycle System: ® Regional Access Regional Corridor Community Regional Corridor Off Street on-street Connector • Hall to Greenberg • Walnut Street • 7Vd Avenue ® Fanno Creek to Main to • Scholls Ferry Rd • Bonita-McDonald • Tualatin River ® Hunziker o Hall Boulevard a Carman-Durham • Powerlines O ORE 99W • Hunziker to LO through Y Hall-Durham- I-5/ORE 217 Boones The adjacent jurisdictions have adopted bicycle maps that provide the opportunity for interconnection between jurisdictions. The Washington County Transportation Plan shows on-street bicycle routes on ORE 99W, Scholls Ferry Road, Hall Boulevard, Greenberg Road, Durham Road, Walnut/Gaarde/McDonald, Oak ® Street and Locust Street. The County Plan also shows an on-street bicycle route on ORE 217 and I-5 in Tigard (which would be inconsistent with ODOT policy). The powerlines off-street route is the only off- street route shown in Tigard. Using the Transportation Planning Rule criteria, all arterial and collector streets would require bikeways. The City of Portland designates Oleson Road and Barber Boulevard as City Bikeways (which would connect in Tigard to Greenberg Road and ORE 99W). The City of Lake Oswego designates Bonita Road, Carman Drive and Kruse Way as bike lanes or pathways. These routes would link in Tigard to Bonita/McDonald, Carman/Durham and Hunziker (via the ORE 217/1-5 interchange). The City of Beaverton designates Murray Boulevard (which would link to Walnut), Scholls Ferry Road, Barrows Road, 125s Avenue (which would link to North Dakota Street), Nimbus Avenue and Cascade Avenue as bike lanes/bikeways. Tlgarc! Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-37 October 30, 2001 C ®fGAR® -i'rans1~station plan DKS 1R s Systemss a ax -Pam pTA ST o > • a rc~ ' 21 ST • ° R G f 5 a IELD < ~ ~ ~~ge~t~ x.15 B ■ . ~y /O~,p ~e V lei 00 go 00 -Aft IAA 06 DKS Associates PEDESTRIANS Existing sidewalks are shown in Figure 3-16. A majority of arterial and collector streets in Tigard do not have sidewalks on either side of the street. Connectivity and pedestrian linkages are generally fair to poor on the arterial and collector street system. Although sidewalk availability on the arterial and collector system is poor, many residential streets do have sidewalks, especially in areas developed within the past ten to fifteen years. Pedestrian counts were conducted during the evening peak period (4:00-6:00 PM) at several key intersections in Tigard. A majority of these intersections had fewer than 10 ?edestrians in the PM peak hour. However, there were more than 10 pedestrians at many intersections' , including the following: • Hall Boulevard/Sattler Street 11 pedestrians • ORE 217 NB Ramps/ORE 99W 12 pedestrians ® ORE 217 SB Ramps/ORE 99W 13 pedestrians • 72°d Avenue/Upper Boones Ferry Road 13 pedestrians • Main Street/Johnson Street/ORE 99W 14 pedestrians • Hall Boulevard/ORE 99W 15 pedestrians • Hall Boulevard/Bonita Road 18 pedestrians • 72"d Avenue/Bonita Road 18 pedestrians • Dartmouth Street/ORE 99W 19 pedestrians • Hall Boulevard/Locust Street 21 pedestrians ® Greenburg Road/Washington Square Road 23 pedestrians • 72"d Avneue/Varns Street/ORE 217 SB 26 pedestrians • ORE 99W/Gaarde Street 37 pedestrians • ORE 99W/Walnut Street 50 pedestrians • ORE 99W/Greenburg Road/Main Street 54 pedestrians Sidewalks at least five feet wide are required in all new developments and many new local streets do have sidewalks in the City. Metro has classified several routes in Tigard as part of its Regional Pedestrian System18: Transit/Mixed-Use Multi-use Facility with Pedestrian Districts Corridors Pedestrian Function Y ORE 99W • Fanno Creek ® Washington Square Regional Center • Hall Boulevard i Tualatin River v Tigard Downtown Town Center ® Scholls Ferry Road 6 Powerlines ® Murray/Scholls Town Center • Hunziker Street a Hunziker to LO a Kin Cit Town Center n Pedestrian volumes represent the number of crossings on all crosswalks combined. is Metro's Regional Pedestrian System map, draft Regional Transportation Plan, 2000. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161x0 Existing Conditions 3-39 October 30, 2001 GO 4oo ARID 'Ceansp plan FtD Syste TA ORS 6C1~ ~gratle~ > ~ T .~~~eet t~T T TO~~ y 211 t y e t 210 5 h w r y Rn < 1 ~.qs I feg~ v F~CILIt~ 000 r6 _ ~ AM rim s Associates TRUCKS Principal truck routes in Tigard (as identified by Washington County) include I-5, ORE 217, ORE 99W and some arterial streets. This system provides connections with truck routes serving areas within and outside of Tigard making efficient truck movement and the delivery of raw materials, goods, services and finished products possible. These routes are generally found in and serve areas where there are concentrations of commercial and/or industrial land uses. Figure 3-17 shows truck routes within Tigard. In general, trucks make up about 2-5 percent of the overall traffic at a majority of intersections in Tigard. RAIL Railroad tracks traverse Tigard from its northern boundary to the southeast. There are two adjacent but separate tracks south from north of North Dakota Street to Bonita Road. South of Bonita Road, one set of tracks crosses the Tualatin River to Tualatin and the other set of tracks turns east to Lake Oswego. They are both owned by Portland & Western (P&W), a sister company of Willamette & Pacific (W&P) Railroad. AIR Tigard is served by the Portland International Airport, located in Northeast Portland on the Columbia River. The Portland International Airport is a major air transportation and freight facility, which serves Oregon and Southwest Washington. It provides a base for over twenty commercial airlines and air freight operations. The Port of Portland reported that 12.6 million passengers were served at the Portland International Airport in 1997. Tigard is also served by the Portland-Hillsboro Airport, a general aviation facility located in the north central portion of the City. The airport facility is owned and operated by the Port of Portland as part of the Port's general aviation reliever system of airports. The Port of Portland maintains a Master Plan for this facility which was most recently updated in October, 1996. WATER The Tualatin River is located along the southern border of Tigard. It is used primarily for recreational purposes. No policies or recommendations in this area of transportation are provided. PIPELINE There are high pressure natural gas feeder lines owned and operated by Northwest Natural Gas Company along several routes in Tigard. Figure 3-18 shows the feeder line routes for Tigard. 19. 19 Based on the Portland Area Distribution System Map (Dated September. 1998) received from Northwest Natural Gas Company. ® Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 x0 Existing Conditions 3-41 October 30, 2001 WIL ARO ~o SYSte~S TA5 KS~~,~at~ 4 o yiySttKkRO tbDT m t 217 TA t R G~ RG ~ 2}0 V ~ w n 5 ao a~ sum URA 4 W SUB DES is 0 6-o 110 66960000609600 0000 so 00000000091 DKS Associates ` I l cny OF IG►AR® N j COx Transp®rtatiorl ~owALE a Systems, Plan Legend q ~ ~g►~0, P,e~te cas wAUW Al sw ll 1 a axu►w Figure 348 MAJOR PIPEUME Rouw-.s t LBWS /`1a70Vcir a.6ey Chapter 4 tur CITY OF TIGARD Fu Demand and OREGON Land Use This chapter summarizes the methodology used to obtain future year forecasts for various modes in the City of Tigard. The plan for street improvements within Tigard depends on determining existing needs and needs of future growth. As a first step in assessing future needs, Metro's urban area traffic forecast model and land use forecast for 2015 was identified as a source for determining future traffic volumes in Tigard. This traffic forecast model translates land uses into roadway volume projections. These traffic volume projections form the basis for identifying potential roadway deficiencies and for evaluating alternative circulation improvements. This section describes the forecasting process, including key assumptions and the analysis of the land use scenario developed from the current Comprehensive Plan development designations and allowed densities. Future change of these variables could significantly change the future travel forecast. The 2015 forecast was refined to include detailed information about Tigard buildout. This 2015 forecast was used for detailed operational analysis'. The refined 2015 forecast was used in concert with the updated 2020 Metro forecasts. This chapter compares the land use inputs between refined 2015 and 2020. PROJECTED LAND USES Land use is a key factor in how the transportation system operates. The amount of land that is developed, the type of land uses and how the land uses are mixed together have a direct relationship to expected demands on the transportation system. Understanding the amount and type of land use is critical to taking actions to maintain or enhance transportation system operation. Projected land uses were developed for all areas within the urban growth boundary reflecting the comprehensive plan and Metro's land use assumptions for year 2015. Complete land use data sets were developed for the following conditions: ■ Existing Base 1994 Conditions Year 2015 The base year model is updated every few years. For this study effort, the available base model provided by Metro was for 1994. Land uses were inventoried throughout Tigard (and the adjacent jurisdictions) by Metro and then again by the City of Tigard (the City conducted a detailed inventory of commercial uses ' All references to 2015 in this document refer to the refined Tigard land use 2015 model and its co-use with updated 2020 forecasts. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 ® Future Demand and Land Use 4-1 October 30, 2001 nvc A 0enf%1atoC in three key areas: Tigard Triangle, ORE 99W, Sequoia Parkway area). This land use database includes the number of dwelling units, number of retail employees and number of other employees and is based on Metro's data and was adjusted to reflect the results of the City's inventory. Table 4-1 summarizes the adjusted land uses for existing conditions and the future scenario in the Tigard area.Z A detailed summary of the land uses for each Transportation Analysis Zone (for both the 1994 and 2015 model years) is included in the appendix. As the land use data is updated in the future, TSP updates can reflect current conditions and new forecasts. Table 4-1 Tigard Area Adjusted Land Use Summary Percent Land Use 1994 Modified Growth increase 2015 Households 21,765 32,481 10,716 +49% Retail Employees 9,152 13,257 4,105 +45% Other Employees 33,553 50,382 16,829 +50% Source: Metro/City of Tigard The land use for 2015 used in this study was refined from the base Metro 2015 data. Year 2020 land uses and trip generation were compared to the modified 2015 information. Table 4-2 summarizes the vehicle trip generation for the base 1994 forecast, future 2015 Metro forecast, modified 2015 Tigard forecast and the Metro 2020 forecast. The modified 2015 forecast generated the greatest number of vehicle trips and was used for the TSP. For the detailed study of Tigard streets, the modified 2015 forecast represented near build out, worst case conditions and provides a reasonable assessment of motor vehicle needs within the city (which the forecast was primarily used to determine). More detailed forecasting of the 2020 for regional conditions could be undertaken following this TSP analysis, but it is unlikely (based upon the trip generation) to generate substantially different needs. This would best be undertaken following Metro's adoption of the RTP, and would be a minor update to this TSP. 2 Based on Metro's 2015 land use forecasts. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-2 October 30, 2001 ® Table 4-2 Forecasted Vehicle Trips in Tigard PM Peak Dour Scenario Pear Hour Vehicle Trips 1994 Base Model 34,500 2015 Metro Model 46,000 2020 Metro Model 48,500 2015 Modified Tigard Model 52,600 If land uses are significantly changed in proportion to each other (i.e. there is a significant increase in retail employment relative to households), there will be a shift in the overall operation of the transportation system. Retail land uses generate significantly higher numbers of trips than do households and other land uses. The location and design of retail land uses in a community can greatly affect transportation system operation. Additionally, if a community is homogeneous in land use character (i.e. all employment, all residential), the system must support export of trip making. Typically, there should be both residential type land uses as well as employment type land uses so that some residents may work locally, reducing the need for residents to commute long distances to work. Tigard has a mix of land uses, however, many residents must travel outside the City for employment opportunities. Table 4-1 indicates that a significant amount of growth is expected in Tigard area in the coming years. These land use quantities should be monitored to make sure that Tigard is working to achieve a balance of land use that is compatible with the available transportation system. This TSP balances transportation ®j needs with the forecasted 2015 land uses. ® Transportation Analysis Zones: For traffic forecasting, the land use data is stratified into geographical areas called traffic analysis zones (TAZ's) which represent the sources of vehicle trip generation. There ® are about 30-40 Metro TAZ's which represent Tigard and its vicinity (Figure 4-1). These 30-40 TAZ's were disaggregated, as part of this plan, into about 130-140 TAZ's to more specifically represent land use in and around Tigard. The original Metro and disaggregated model zone boundaries for Tigard are shown in Figure 4-2. Metro uses BMIMM, a computer based program for transportation planning, to process the large amounts of data for the Portland Metropolitan area. Land uses were inventoried throughout Tigard by Metro and adjusted to reflect Tigard's more detailed land use inventory in 2015. The adjustments reflected what was termed to be "near buildout". This land use data base includes the number of dwelling units, number of retail employees and number of other employees. Table 4-3 summarizes the land uses for existing conditions and the future scenario by transportation analysis zones (TAZ's). Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-3 October 30, 2001 Associates 0 log CITYOFTIGARD NOT TO AE Transportation System Plan 92 89 317 31 310 309 30 315 217 210 339 319 311 340 3 318 313 -338 337 312 403 341 335 322 5 vsw 342 334 394 343 344 345 348 Figure 4-1 METRO TZ AOL N ® ®C i~ 41 r~ wR 0 CL a ~C>+ N uj ca an"i~ A►~ri ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a co g \ry'`) tl O UNA V ®~F KS Associates Table 4-3 Tigard Land Use Summa Households Retail Employees Other Employees TAZ 1994 2015 1994 2015 1994 2015 67 888 958 3 3 61 76 89 191 217 0 0 17 23 90 299 409 3 4 261 489 92 0 9 143 207 273 519 308 185 195 28 28 21 27 309 77 78 1 1 9 11 310 69 96 2 11 4 22 311 33 37 0 400 58 58 312 0 22 12 12 1,193 1,363 313 3 32 62 51 1,208 1,306 314 160 184 24 24 117 147 315 624 825 212 293 647 1,165 316 77 76 22 24 64 91 317 683 705 161 141 955 1,096 318 303 321 0 0 28 33 319 58 68 0 0 7 16 320 225 251 72 72 100 491 321 120 251 0 0 406 416 322 324 158 0 0 433 518 332 0 1 18 18 422 600 333 125 243 0 5 3 42 334 223 262 43 59 69 166 335 86 167 0 1 2 21 336 170 201 63 70 152 219 337 11 206 0 0 7 40 338 66 163 0 0 4 11 339 66 254 1 2 11 46 340 239 309 0 1 0 139 341 199 294 0 0 27 40 342 269 390 6 5 45 60 343 105 265 0 0 0 102 344 92 260 4 15 19 101 345 223 368 331 397 111 174 394 25 26 0 0 17 20 403 81 231 0 1 17 53 932 0 10 42 42 399 941 933 5 9 92 137 40 78 1511 61 194 0 2 0 104 1512 207 374 0 6 0 331 1513 45 130 0 0 0 24 1514 26 503 0 3 0 167 1515 33 178 1 5 41 298 1526 364 517 0 0 39 91 Tigard Transportation System Plan P 2 01 , , 2001 Future Demand and Land Use 4-0 October 30 WKS"' Associates Households Retail Employees Other Employees TAZ 1994 2015 1994 2015 1994 2015 1527 412 487 1 1 87 104 1528 92 130 0 0 12 22 1530 54 146 5 5 496 653 1537 8 115 1,406 2,064 2,686 5,167 1538 97 103 153 149 292 373 1539 0 0 164 142 314 355 1540 25 44 316 418 604 1,048 1541 6 20 78 143 149 357 1542 30 42 152 186 290 467 ® 1543 1 3 52 57 99 144 1605 24 31 1,226 1,084 2,343 2,715 1606 188 241 109 135 80 129 1607 2 10 97 102 71 97 ® 1608 4 22 0 242 168 231 1609 198 236 349 363 110 156 1610 2 18 24 54 18 51 ® 1611 1 29 95 139 70 132 1612 2 45 0 298 170 285 ® 1613 86 93 1 2 8 24 1614 269 308 2 4 26 59 ® 1615 61 92 25 86 38 170 ® 1616 39 63 9 34 14 66 1617 43 61 0 100 188 286 1618 7 37 0 600 41 41 1619 7 13 0 0 116 300 1620 11 16 202 278 44 78 1621 39 77 0 0 165 180 1622 1 16 161 200 54 137 ® 1623 221 323 12 12 2,130 2,800 1624 32 76 61 101 1,189 1,326 ® 1625 206 315 400 500 270 400 1626 269 324 147 250 716 1,019 1627 299 334 36 45 176 283 1628 255 330 20 41 62 162 1629 0 6 73 72 312 368 1630 29 27 131 218 377 830 1631 635 689 89 74 529 573 1632 194 230 22 20 137 162 1633 588 607 0 0 60 64 1634 250 354 0 0 14 46 1635 24 117 0 0 1 27 1636 192 480 0 0 10 93 1637 45 43 1 1 186 182 1638 119 137 0 0 94 131 1639 485 511 283 350 296 375 Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-7 October 30, 2001 MEN" DKS Associates Households Retail Employees Other Employees TAZ 19,94 2015 1994 2015 1994 2015 1640 29 102 0 0 24 101 1641 209 358 0 0 85 141 1642 317 533 0 0 .60 407 1643 0 5 42 42 422 502 1644 1 3 26 26 466 466 1645 1 9 113 113 3,001 3,552 1646 2 15 129 129 2,999 3,986 1647 4 11 149 149 500 617 1648 1 26 312 433 317 843 1649 40 75 11 20 76 20 1650 62 112 11 10 76 10 1651 394 521 2 12 14 12 1652 548 655 5 8 26 8 1653 259 446 18 247 95 127 1654 432 467 4 4 19 27 1655 472 520 7 7 33 45 1656 316 402 0 1 5 28 1657 261 404 3 3 53 89 1658 451 584 74 83 177 261 1659 148 172 224 224 128 128 1660 258 310 0 0 96 104 1661 15 106 0 0 3 13 1662 127 466 0 0 4 45 1663 526 689 2 4 32 81 1664 379 522 4 4 56 86 1665 116 277 0 0 22 45 1666 60 312 0 0 11 47 1667 73 112 0 0 9 14 1668 180 307 0 0 24 42 1669 53 259 0 0 2 32 1670 60 114 0 0 11 18 1671 38 362 1 5 12 54 1672 74 223 0 0 18 111 1673 548 645 8 13 39 89 1674 1,717 1,903 186 186 444 489 1675 116 155 13 17 4 7 1676 392 468 23 33 8 14 1677 28 29 0 0 16 18 1678 55 57 0 0 25 29 1679 21 349 0 1 1 69 1680 54 182 0 1 13 46 1681 92 299 0 1 20 71 1682 6 28 35 35 247 600 1683 10 20 60 60 426 569 1684 4 12 29 29 208 241 Tigard Transportation System Plan 899161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-8 October 30, 2001 KS Associates Households Retail Employees Other Employees TAZ 1994 2015 1994 2015 1994 2015 1685 1 27 64 64 455 700 1686 9 20 257 335 113 191 1687 10 15 87 300 38 69 1688 115 296 2 49 4 82 ® 1689 89 389 0 0 18 248 Total 21,765 32,481 9,152 13,257 33,553 50,382 ® Source: MetrolCity of Tigard A comparison of the modified 2015 land use assumptions to 2020 land use assumptions indicates that the ® 2020 forecast assumes more households, more retail employees and fewer other employees than the modified 2015 forecast. Key areas where discrepancies occurred were the Washington Square area (more retail employees and fewer other employees in 2020), Downtown (more "other" employees in 2020), Sequoia Parkway area (significantly fewer `other" employees in 2020) and Tigard Triangle (significantly fewer "other" employees in 2020). Detail regarding the trip generation by TAZ is provided in the ® appendix. ® METRO AREA TRAFFIC MODEL The development of future traffic system needs for Tigard depends on the ability to accurately forecast travel demand resulting from estimates of future population and employment for the City. The objective of the transportation planning process is to provide the information necessary for making decisions on when and where improvements should be made in the transportation system to meet travel demands. Metro has developed an urban area travel demand model as part of the Regional Transportation Plan Update process to help identify street and roadway needs. Traffic forecasting can be divided into several distinct but integrated components that represent the logical sequence of travel behavior (Figure 4-3). These components and their general order in the traffic forecasting process follow: ® ■ Trip Generation Trip Distribution ■ Mode Choice n Traffic Assignment The initial roadway network used in the traffic model was the existing streets and roadways. Future land use scenarios were tested and roadway improvements were added in to mitigate traffic conditions, using programmed improvements as a starting basis. Forecasts of PM peak hour traffic flows were produced for every major roadway segment within the Tigard area. Traffic volumes are projected on most arterials and collector streets. Some local streets are included in the model, but many are represented by centroid connectors in the model process. Trip Generation. The trip generation process translates land use quantities (in numbers of dwelling units and retail and other employment) into vehicle trip ends (number of vehicles entering or leaving a TAZ) ® using trip generation rates established during the model verification process. The trip rates were based upon Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-9 October 30, 2001 ASSOCIatGS INPUTS PROCESS OUTPUTS 0 Road Network : , - Data o - Land Uses L ip Generation Rates 0 Traffic Volume Projections Loaded Levels ~f Road Network Ser~rlce I Transportation System Wasures h1c 0muts Figure 4-3 op TRAFFIC FORECASTING MODEL PROCESS 46 DKS Associates Institute of Transportation Engineers research3 and documentation and adjusted to suit the Portland area in the calibration process. PM peak hour trip rates used in the Metro model are summarized in Table 4-4. Table 4-4 Approximate Average PM Peak Hour Trip Rates Used in Metro Model Average Trip Rate/Unit Unit In Out Total Household 0.43 0.19 0.62 Retail Employee 0.78 0.69 1.47 Other Employee 0.07 0.29 0.36 Source: Metro ® Table 4-5 illustrates the estimated growth in daily vehicle trips generated within the Tigard, between 1994 and 2015. It indicates that vehicle trip generation in Tigard would grow by approximately 50 percent between 1994 and 2015 if the land develops according to the assumptions made. Assuming a 20 year time horizon to the 2015 scenario, this represents a growth rate of about 2 percent per year. Table 4-5 ® Existing and Future Projected External Trip Generation* PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips Modified 2015M -1994 Percent ® Trips 1994 2015 2020 Growth Increase ® Tigard Area 34,447 52,606 48,518 18,159 +53% Source: Metro/City of Tigard NOTE: * - External trips refer to model trips that exit a Tigard centroid Trip Distribution. This step estimates how many trips travel from one zone in the model to any other ®1 zone. The distribution is based on the number of trip ends generated in each zone pair, and on factors that relate the likelihood of travel between any two zones to the travel time between the zones. In projecting long-range future traffic volumes, it is important to consider potential changes in regional travel patterns. Although the locations and amounts ofdraffic generation in Tigard are essentially a function of future land use in the city, the distribution of trips is influenced by growth in neighboring areas such as Portland, Beaverton, Lake Oswego, Tualatin, etc. External trips (trips which have either an origin or destination in Tigard and the other trip end outside Tigard) and through trips (trips which pass through Tigard and have neither an origin nor a destination there) were projected using trip distribution patterns based upon census data and traffic counts performed at gateways into the Metro area UGB. Mode Choice. This is the step where it is determined how many trips will be by single-occupant vehicle, transit or carpool. The 1994 mode splits would be incorporated into the base model and adjustments to that mode split may be made for the future scenario, depending on any expected changes in transit or carpool use. These considerations are built into the forecasts used for 2015. In the Tigard area, the 2015 model assumes approximately two percent would use transit and average vehicle occupancy would be about 1.24 passengers during the evening peak period. ® 3 Trip Generation Manual, Institute of Transportation Engineers. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-11 October 30, 2001 loft DfCS Associates Traffic Assignment. In this process, trips from one zone to another are assigned to specific travel routes in the roadway network, and resulting trip volumes are accumulated on links of the network until all trips are assigned. Different models are actually used for auto assignment versus transit assignment. Various techniques exist for auto assignment, such as all-or-nothing, stochastic, incremental capacity restraint and equilibrium capacity restraint. The EMIVIE//2 package, among others, uses the equilibrium capacity restraint technique, which is considered to produce the most realistic network traffic loading of all the techniques. With this technique, the auto trips are assigned iteratively to the network in such a way that the final traffic loading will closely approximate the true network "equilibrium." Network equilibrium is defined as the condition where no traveler can achieve additional travel time savings by switching routes. Between iterations, network travel times are updated to reflect the congestion effects of the traffic assigned in the previous iteration. Congested travel times are estimated using what are called "volume-delay functions" in ENIME/2. There are different forms of volumeldelay functions, all of which attempt to simulate the capacity restraint effect of how travel times increase with increasing traffic volumes. The volume-delay functions take into account the specific characteristics of each roadway link, such as capacity, speed, and facility type. Model Verification. The base 1994 modeled traffic volumes were compared against actual traffic counts across screenlines, on key arterials and at key intersections. Most arterial traffic volumes are closely replicated, even down to turn movements by the model based upon detailed calibration. Based on this performance, the model was used for future forecasting and assessment of circulation changes. MODEL APPLICATION TO TIGARD Intersection turn movements were extracted from the model at key intersections for both year 1994 and future scenarios. These intersection turn movements were not used directly, but the increment of the future year turn movements over the year 1994 turn movements was applied (added) to existing (actual 1994/1997/1999) turn movement counts in Tigard. Actual turn movement volumes used for future year intersection analysis can be found in the appendix (Level of Service Calculations). 1 TJgard Transportation System Plan P99161 Future Demand and Land Use 4-12 October 30, 2001 KS Associates Chapter 5 CITY OF TIGARD Pedestrians OREGON ® This chapter summarizes existing and future pedestrian needs in the City of Tigard, outlines the criteria to be used in evaluating these needs, provides a number of strategies for implementing a pedestrian plan and recommends a pedestrian Action Plan for the City of Tigard. The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's TSP Task Force. This committee provided input regarding the transportation system in Tigard, specifically exploring pedestrian needs. The methodology used to develop the pedestrian plan combined citizen and staff input, specific Transportation Planning Rule requirements' and continuity to the regional pedestrian network.2 NEEDS A limited number of sidewalks are provided on the arterial and collector roadways (see Figure 3-15) in the City of Tigard, resulting in a fair existing pedestrian network. However, many residential subdivisions in Tigard are relatively new and a majority of them have sidewalks available. A problem exists outside the limits of the new developments where connecting sidewalks often do not exist. Continuity and connectivity are key issues for pedestrians in Tigard since, generally, if there is a sidewalk available, there will be sufficient capacity. In other words, it is more important that a continuous sidewalk be available than that ® it be of a certain size or type. ® The most important existing pedestrian needs in Tigard are providing sidewalks on arterials and collectors and connectivity to key activity centers in the City. This includes the need for safe, well lighted arterial and collector streets. Arterials and collectors can act as barriers to pedestrian movement if safe facilities are not provided. In the future, pedestrian needs will be similar, but there will be additional activity centers that will need to be considered and interconnected. Walkway needs in Tigard must consider the three most prevalent trip types: • Residential based trips - home to school, home to home, home to retail, home to park, home to transit, home to entertainment, home to library O Service based trips - multi-stop retail trips, work to restaurant, work to services, work/shop to transit 0 Recreational based trips - home to park, exercise trips, casual walking trips Residential trips need a set of interconnected sidewalks radiating out from homes to destinations within one-half to one mile. Beyond these distances, walking trips of this type become significantly less common (over 20 minutes). Service based trips require direct, conflict-free connectivity between uses (for example, ' Transporration Planning Rule, State of Oregon, DLCD, Sections 660-12-020(2)(d) and 660.12-045-3. 2 Metro Draft RTP, 1999, Regional Pedestrian System. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAT? P99161 Pedestrians 5-1 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates a shopping mall with its central spine walkway that connects multiple destinations). Service based trips need a clear definition of connectivity. This requires mixed use developments to locate front doors which relate directly to the public right-of-way and provide walking links between uses within one-half mile. Recreational walking trips have different needs. Off-street trails, well landscaped sidewalks and relationships to unique environmental features (creeks, trees, farmland) are important. Because all of these needs are different, there is no one pedestrian solution. The most common need is to provide a safe and interconnected system that affords the opportunity to consider the walking mode of travel, especially for trips less than one mile in length. FACILITIES Sidewalks should be built to current design standards of the City of Tigard/Washington County and in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (at least four feet of unobstructed sidewalk) 3 Wider sidewalks may be constructed in commercial districts or on arterial streets. Additional pedestrian facilities may include accessways, pedestrian districts and pedestrian plazas, as defined in the Transportation Planning Rule:4 Accessway: A walkway that provides pedestrian and/or bicycle passage either between streets or from a street to a building or other destination such as a school, park or transit stop. Pedestrian District: A plan designation or zoning classification that establishes a safe and convenient pedestrian environment in an area planned for a mix of uses likely to support a relatively high level of pedestrian activity. Pedestrian Plaza: A small, semi-enclosed area usually adjoining a sidewalk or a transit stop which provides a place for pedestrians to sit, stand or rest. These designations will be provided as the TSP is implemented. Any pedestrian districts, for example the downtown area (Main Street), may be identified in further studies which address pedestrian issues. In addition, pedestrian issues in Main Street and Town Center areas (as defined by Metro) should be reviewed in greater detail for pedestrian accessibility, facilities and/or street crossing treatments. The land uses proposed in the Main Street and Town Center areas will help to promote more pedestrian use. Better pedestrian access should be developed to support and encourage this use. Sidewalks should be sized to meet the specific needs of the adjacent land uses and needs. Guidance to assess capacity needs for pedestrians can be found in the Highway Capacity Manual and Pushkarev and Zupan S Typically, the base sidewalk sizing for local and neighborhood routes should be 5 feet (clear of obstruction). 3 Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Building Code. 4 Transportation Planning Rule, State of Oregon, Department of Land Conservation and Development, OAR-560-12- 005(2, 14 and 15). 5 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1994; Chapter 13; and Pushkarev, Zupan, Urban Spaces for Pedestrians, 1975. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-2 October 30, 2001 Mill A cenriof®c DKPushkarev & Zupan define impeded pedestrian flow occurring at 2 to 6 pedestrians per foot per minute. At this upper level (6 p/f/m) a five foot sidewalk would have peak five minute capacity of 150 pedestrians. There is no location in Tigard with this level of pedestrian activity. While identified as level of service B in the Highway Capacity Manual, no sidewalk in Tigard should exceed 6 pedestrians per foot per minute without widening. The critical element of this analysis is the effective width of walkway. Because of street utilities and amenities, a five foot walkway can be reduced to two feet of effective walking area. This is the greatest capacity constraint to pedestrian flow. Therefore, landscape strips should be considered on all walkways to reduce the impact of utilities and amenities - retaining the full sidewalk capacity. As functional classification of roadways change, so should the design of pedestrian facilities. Collectors may need to consider minimum sidewalk widths of 6 to 8 feet and arterials should have sidewalk widths of 6 to 10 feet. Wider sidewalks may be necessary depending upon urban design needs and pedestrian flows (for example, adjacent to storefront retail or near transit stations). Curb-tight sidewalks are generally acceptable at the local and neighborhood route classification, however, with high vehicle volumes and on collector/arterial streets, landscape strips between the curb and the sidewalk should be required. Where curb-tight sidewalks are the only option, additional sidewalk width must be provided to accommodate the other street side features (light poles, mail boxes, etc... potentially an additional 3 to 4 feet). CRITERIA Tigard's TSP Task Force created a set of goals and policies to guide transportation system development in Tigard (see Chapter 2). Several of these policies pertain specifically to pedestrian needs: Goal 1 Policy 2 Encourage pedestrian accessibility by providing safe, secure and desirable pedestrian routes. Goal 2 Policy 1 Develop and implement public street standards that recognize the multi purpose nature of the street right-of-way for utility, pedestrian, bicycle, transit, truck and auto use. Policy 4 Sidewalks must be constructed on all streets within Tigard (with construction or reconstruction projects). All schools, parks, public facilities and retail areas shall have direct access to a sidewalk { Policy S Bicycle and pedestrian plans shall be developed which link to recreational trails. a i Policy 6 Local streets shall be designed to encourage a reduction in trip length by providing connectivity and limiting out-of-direction travel. Provide connectivity to activity f centers and destinations with a priorityfor bicycle and pedestrian connections. Goal 3 Policy 3 Safe and secure pedestrian and bicycle ways shall be designed between parks and other activity centers in Tigard. 77gard Trensportetion System Plan DRAFT' P99181 Pedestrians 5-3 October 30, 2001 DKQ. Associates Policy 4 Safe and secure routes to schools shall be designated for each school and any new residential project shall identify the safe path to school for children Goal 5 Policy I Design and construct transportation facilities to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. These goals and policies are the criteria that all pedestrian improvements in Tigard should be compared against to determine if they conform to the intended vision of the City. STRATEGIES Several strategies were evaluated by the TSP Task Force for future pedestrian projects in Tigard. These strategies aimed at providing the City with priorities to direct its funds toward pedestrian projects that meet the goals and policies of the City: Strategy 1 - "Fill In Gaps In the Network Where Some Sidewalks Exist" This strategy provides sidewalks which fill in the gaps between existing sidewalks where a significant portion of a pedestrian corridor already exists. This strategy maximizes the use of existing pedestrian facilities to create complete sections of an overall pedestrian network. Strategy 2 - "Connect Key Pedestrian Corridors to Schools, Parks, Recreational Uses and Activity Centers" This strategy provides sidewalks leading to activity centers in Tigard, such as schools and parks. This strategy provides added safety on routes to popular pedestrian destinations by separating pedestrian flow from auto travel lanes. These routes are also common places that children may walls, providing them safer routes. A key element of this strategy is to require all new development to define direct safe pedestrian paths to parks, activity centers, schools and transit (in the future) within one mile of the development site. Direct will be defined as 1.25 times the straight line connection to these points from the development. Any gaps (off-site) will be defined (location and length). Strategy 3 - "Coordination of Land Use Approval Process to Provide Sidewalks & Links to Existing Sidewalks" This strategy uses the land use approval process to ensure that sidewalks are provided adjacent to new development and that links from that new development to existing sidewalks are evaluated. If there are existing sidewalks in close proximity, either the developer or the City will be required to extend the sidewalk adjacent to the new development to meet the existing nearby sidewalk. The development shall use the pedestrian master plan as a basis for determining adjacent sidewalk placement. To effectively implement this strategy, close proximity shall be determined to be within 300 feet of the proposed development. In addition, if extension is not found to be roughly proportional to the development, the City Shall add this to future years CEP consideration list. Strategy 4 - "Improved Crossings" This strategy focuses on ensuring that safe street crossing locations are available, particularly along Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-4 October 30, 2001 high traffic volume streets or locations where there is a lot of pedestrian traffic (i.e. adjacent to schools, activity centers, etc.) Strategy 5 - "Pedestrian Corridors that Connect to Major Recreational UsesL7 This strategy provides a connection between the sidewalk network and major recreational facilities, such as the Greenway Trail, the the Fanno Creek Trail and other recreational uses. Strategy 6 - "Pedestrian Corridors that Connect to Major Transit Locations0 This strategy provides sidewalks leading to major transit facilities, such as bus stops which service a high volume of riders. This strategy increases pedestrian safety and encourages transit use. Strategy 7- "Pedestrian Corridors that Connect Neighborhoods" This strategy puts priority on linking neighborhoods together with pedestrian facilities. This can include walkways at the end of cul-de-sacs and direct connections between neighborhoods (avoiding "walled" ® communities). Strategy 8 - "Reconstruct Ail Existing Substandard Sidewalks to City of Tigard Standards" ® This strategy focuses on upgrading any substandard sidewalks to current city standards. Current standards ® are for five foot sidewalks to meet ADA6 requirements. Several sidewalks exist that do not meet the minimum five foot requirement. Fronting property owners are responsible for sidewalk maintenance where pavement has fallen into disrepair. ® Strategy 9 - "Pedestrian Corridors that Commuters Might Use" This strategy focuses on providing sidewalks in areas where commuters might walk. For example, ® connecting neighborhoods to large employment areas (Le Washington Square Regional Center or the Tigard Triangle). ® Table 5-1 lists each strategy in the order it was ranked by the committee and provides an assessment of how ® each of the strategies meets the requirements of each of the goals and policies. 6 Americans with Disabilities Act, Uniform Building Code. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-5 October 30, 2001 ss~o/aP% A '...d.~~ LJ)%a /-i55UU1dL .!Z Table 5-1 Pedestrian Facilit Strategies Com arisons Policies Strategy 1-2 24 2-5 2-6 3-3 3-4 5-1 1. Fill in gaps in network 6 4 O O A 4 O where some sidewalks exist 2. Connect pedestrian a ® ! 4 ® ® 4 corridors to schools, arks, activity centers 3. Coordination of land ® @ O 4 O d e use approval process to provide sidewalks & links to existing 4. Improved crossings . ® 1 O a e e Q 5. Pedestrian corridors that connect to major a ® ® O C 4 4 recreational uses 6. Pedestrian corridors that connect to major transit ! ® O e O O 4 locations 7. Pedestrian corridors that connect neighborhoods i O O 1 O 4 O 8. Reconstruct O ® O O ® O B substandard sidewalks to City standards 9. Pedestrian corridors t ® O 4 O 4 d commuters might use X Does not meet criteria 8 Mostly meets criteria O Partially meets criteria ® Fully meets criteria RECOMMENDED PEDESTRIAN FACILITY PLAN The strategies that had been evaluated by the TSP Task Force were ranked by each member of the committee according to his or her vision of priorities for the City of Tigard. The ranking of these strategies is listed in Table 5-1 from most important to least important. Three strategies were considered to be a high priority for pedestrians in Tigard and ranked significantly higher than the remaining strategies. These strategies were filling in network gaps, connections to schools, parks and activity centers and coordination of land use approval process to provide sidewalks and links to existing sidewalks. A list of likely actions to achieve fulfillment of these priorities was developed into a Pedestrian Master Plan. The Pedestrian Master Plan (Figure 5-1) is an overall plan and summarizes the "wish list" of pedestrian-related projects in Tigard. From this Master Plan, a more specific, shorter term, Action Plan was developed. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-6 October 30, 2001 •~.••V1L111111 viiv.i DKS Associates N fir T NOT Transportation Systems Plan . : Leg-d T rtmwrvTm~aca .::..s PW" r . 1¢,.:~ RTP RM'itW Cortidor OQSrwI R.000ml14*Ua P•A ~ ii^iiii:o: ~ raa~el~.•aueea.w.•r~m.mwaat~ w~msewoasrl /V . 1 R` o 1 &v • 9 1 d f e o - 1 0 Figure 5-1 1 .0 y PEDESTRL414 MASTER PLAN ® S Associates 0 The Action Plan consists of projects that the City should give priority to in funding. As development 40 occurs, streets are rebuilt and other opportunities (such as grant programs) arise, projects on the Master Plan should be pursued as well. 40 It is preferable to provide pedestrian facilities on one side of the street if it means a longer section of the system could be covered (i.e. sidewalk on one side of the street for two miles is preferable to sidewalk on both sides of the street for one mile). In the case of significant stretches where sidewalk is only provided 49 on one side of the road, particular emphasis should be placed on developing safe crossing locations. 49 Development shall still be responsible for any frontage improvements, even if a pedestrian facility already exists opposite the proposed development. Sidewalks on both sides of all streets is the ultimate desire. POTENTIAL PROJECT LIST Table 5-2 outlines potential pedestrian projects in Tigard. The City, through its Capital Improvement Program (CIP), joint funding with other agencies (Washington County, Metro) and development approval would implement these projects. The following considerations should be made for each sidewalk installation: 40 • Every attempt should be made to meet City standards • All sidewalks should be a minimum of five feet wide 0 • Landscape strips should be considered and are encouraged (see standard street cross-sections 40 in Motor Vehicles chapter) 0 Action Plan Projects Figure 5-2 and Table 5-2 summarize the Pedestrian Action Plan. Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects Rank* Project From To Action Plan Projects H Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62 Avenue 0 H Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue H 72 Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road H 72 Avenue Carman/Upper Boones Ferry Durham Road H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72 Avenue f H Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits H Bonita Road West of 72 Avenue 72 Avenue i H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard H ORE 99W McDonald Street South City Limits i H Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road H Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road H Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-8 October 30, 2001 ~01 11a, DKS Associates Rank* Project From To ® H Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (West) Scholls Ferry Road (East) H Walnut Street 135` Avenue Tiedeman Avenue H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W H 12151 Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street H North Dakota Street 1215( Avenue Greenburg Road H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road H Tigard Street 115` Avenue Main Street H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard H Fonner Street Walnut Street 1215( Avenue ® H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street ® H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80 Avenue Other Potential Projects M 80 Avenue Taylor's Ferry Road Spruce Street M Spruce Street Hall Boulevard 80 Avenue M Oak Street Greenburg Road Hall Boulevard ® M Oak Street 80 Avenue 7131 Avenue M Locust Street 80 Avenue 72 Avenue M 74 Avenue Taylor's Ferry Road South of Barbara Lane ® M 72 Avenue North of Locust Street Oak Street M Spruce Street 78 Avenue 7151 Avenue M 715' Avenue Oak Street ORE 99W ® M. 78 Avenue Spruce Street ORE 99W ® M Pine Street 715` Street 69 Street M 69 Street Pine Street ORE 99W M 90 Avenue Hall Boulevard Locust Street M 62 /6151 Avenues Taylor's Ferry Road Pomona Street M Pomona Street 6131 Avenue 64 Avenue 0 M 64 Avenue Pomona Street ORE 99W 451 M 68 Avenue ORE 99W South of Hampton Street M 6b Avenue South of Hampton Street Dartmouth Street M Hampton Street 68 Avenue 66 Avenue M Haines Street 68 Avenue Tigard City Limits M Shady Lane Greenburg Road 95 Avenue Aft M 95 Avenue Shady Lane Greenburg Road AIM M 98 Avenue Greenburg Road Main Street M 115 Avenue North Dakota Street Tigard Street M Cascade Avenue Scholls Ferry Road Existing sidewalk M Johnson Street ORE 99W End M Grant Avenue Johnson Street Tigard Street Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-9 October 30, 2001 Associates 0 Rank* Project From To M Scoffins Street Main Street Hall Boulevard M Ash Avenue Commercial Street Scoffins Street M Ash Avenue McDonald Street Burnham Street M Frewing Street ORE 99W O'Mara Street M Garrett Street ORE 99W Ash Avenue M O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard M 97 Avenue McDonald Street Murdock Street M Murdock Street 97` Avenue 103 Avenue M 103 Avenue Murdock Avenue Canterbury Lane M Canterbury Lane 103 Avenue ORE 99W M 100 Avenue McDonald Street Highland Drive M Highland Drive 100 Avenue Summerfield Drive M Sattler Street 100 Avenue 98 ' Avenue M 98 Avenue Sattler Street Murdock Avenue M Ross Street Hall Boulevard East End M 79 Avenue Durham Road Bonita Road M 108 Avenue Durham Road South End M 133 Avenue Bull Mountain Road South End Aft M Peachtree Drive Bull Mountain Road South End M 150 Avenue Bull Mountain Road Beef Bend Road M 135Avenue Walnut Street Hillshire Drive M Hillshire Drive 135 Avenue Mistletoe Drive M Mistletoe Drive Hillshire Drive Benchview Terrace M Benchview Terrace White Cedar Place Bull Mountain Road M 132 Avenue Walnut Street Benchview Terrace M Menlor Lane Barrows Road Sunrise Lane M Sunrise Lane Menlor Lane 150 Avenue M 150 Avenue Sunrise Lane Bull Mountain Road M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements Regional Center (RTP 6022) { i M Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Existing Sidewalk to North M Watkins Avenue Park Street Walnut Street Aft M Off-Street Multi-Use Tualatin River Crossing at approximately 108'n Avenue Path M Off-Street Multi-Use I-5/ORE 217 Kruse Way Bridge linkage to 72 Avenue south of ORE f Path 217 M Off-Street Multi-Use Powerline Corridor/Tualatin River/Fanno Creek/Greenway Park Loop Path • H=High, M=Medium, L--Low Priority Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-10 October 30, 2001 Dote TWO ARID rtation ,w ter,?'F(~ YS Plan DAates R° s$an' Vim ~ ~r S F 1=K fl 's, ~4 v.~ Legend T N0 t ~r " c r zStmanatteast V ~ at;.east ~ r r PrdSidewa~ On eofStree ~ al-" cenel y m fi~~~ r ~ ~ R~Cenler 1 .ajC X+~F~'ir ti'l a:9SrF~.C 'L e ~ JO~~•`uu ~f Y7'• i 4 Q w ' a figure 5.2 i H E {~S F P D PLAN TUdfg CMGs Associates Complementing Land Development Actions Land use actions are where significant improvements to the pedestrian system can occur. Basically a change in land use from vacant or under utilized land creates two key impacts to the pedestrian system: 1. Added vehicle trips that conflict with pedestrian flows 2. Added pedestrian volume that requires safe facilities These impacts require mitigation to maintain a safe pedestrian system. Pedestrians walking in the traveled way of motor vehicles are exposed to potential conflicts that can be minimized or removed entirely with sidewalk installation. The cost of a fronting sidewalk to an individual single family home would be about $1,000 to $2,000 (representing less than one percent of the cost of a house). Over a typical 50 year life of a house this would represent less than $50 per year assuming the cost of money is 4% annually. This cost is substantially less than the potential risk associated with the cost of an injury accident or fatality without safe pedestrian facilities (injury accidents are likely to be $10,000 to $50,000 per occurrence and fatalities are $500,000 to $1,000,000). Sidewalks are essential for the safety of elderly persons, the disabled, transit patrons and children walking to school, a park or a neighbor's home. No area of the city can be isolated from the needs of these users (not residential, employment areas or shopping districts). Therefore, fronting improvements including sidewalk are required on every change in land use or roadway project. For any developing or redeveloped property in Tigard, the benefit of not providing sidewalks is only the cost savings to the developer - at the potential risk and future expense to the public. Therefore, sidewalks are required in Tigard with all new development and roadway projects. It is important that, as new development occurs, connections or accessways are provided to link the development to the existing pedestrian facilities in as direct manner as possible. As a guideline, the sidewalk distance from the building entrance to the public right-of-way should not exceed 1.25 times the straight line distance. If a development fronts a proposed sidewalk (as shown in the Pedestrian Master Plan), the developer shall be responsible for providing the walkway facility as part of any frontage improvement required for mitigation of development. It is also very important that residential developments consider the routes that children will use to walk to school and provide safe and accessible sidewalks to accommodate these routes, particularly within one mile of a school site. Additionally, all commercial projects generating over 1,000 trip ends per day should provide a pedestrian connection plan showing how pedestrian access to the site links to adjacent uses, the public right-of-way and the site front door. Conflict free paths and traffic calming elements should be identified, as appropriate. Address Gaps in Pedestrian System Many of the areas developed in Tigard 10 to 25 years ago did not provide sidewalks. With as much of the City built-out (as is the case today) there are limited opportunities for development to create major portions of the missing pedestrian system. The historic gaps in the pedestrian walking system become more important as land development and activity grow creating new demands for an integrated pedestrian system. Current land developments build sidewalks on project frontages, but have little means or incentive to extend sidewalks beyond their property. Property owners without sidewalks are unlikely to independently build sidewalks that do not connect to anything. In fact, some property owners are resistant to sidewalk 40 1 Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-12 October 30, 2001 ACS Associates improvements due to cost (they do not want to pay) or the impact to their frontage (they may have landscaping in the public right-of-way). As an incentive to fill some of these gaps concurrent with development activities, the City could consider an annual walkway fund that would supplement capital improvement-type projects. A fund of about $40,000 to $50,000 per year could build over a quarter mile of sidewalk to help fill gaps. If matching funds were provided, over double this amount may be possible. The fund could be used several ways: • Matching other governmental transportation funds to build connecting sidewalks identified in the master plan. • Matching funds with land use development projects to extend a developer's sidewalks off-site to connect to non-contiguous sidewalks (especially with residential development and its access to schools and parks, commercial development linking retail (ie deli, bank,..) with employment) • Supplemental funds to roadway projects which build new arterial/collector sidewalks to create better linkages into neighborhoods. • Matching funds with adjacent land owners that front the proposed sidewalk. • Reimbursement agreements with developers Parks and Trails Development 40 The City Parks and Recreation Department and Metro Greenspaces programs are responsible for the majority of off-street trail opportunities. These two agencies must coordinate their pedestrian plans to provide an integrated off-street walking system in Tigard. Recent Metro Greenspaces initiatives and City park projects provide an opportunity to implement the off-street trails in Tigard as an integrated element of the pedestrian action plan. The Fanno Creek Trail and Powerlines trail systems are already well developed north of Tigard in Beaverton. Because of the regional nature of the interconnected powerlines to Tualatin River to Fanno Creek trail system, Tigard will need to work cooperatively with Metro, Washington County, Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreation District and the City of Beaverton. Safety Pedestrian safety is a major issue. Pedestrian conflicts with motor vehicles are a major issue in pedestrian 40 safety. These conflicts can be reduced by providing direct links to buildings from public rights-of-way, considering neighborhood traffic management (see Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles), providing safe roadway crossing points and analyzing/reducing the level of pedestrian/vehicle conflicts in every land use application. In setting priorities for the pedestrian action plan, school access was given a high priority to improve safety. However, beyond simply building more sidewalks, school safety involves education and planning. Many cities have followed guidelines provided by Federal Highway Administration and Institute of Transportation Engineers. Implementing plans of this nature has demonstrated accident reduction benefits. However, this type of work requires staffing and coordination by the School District as well as the City to be effective. Several "pedestrian crossing evaluation" locations were identified on the Pedestrian Master Plan and on the Pedestrian Action Plan. These are locations where it may be desirable (where warrants are met) to install a pedestrian activated signal for the sole purpose of allowing pedestrians to cross the roadway. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-13 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates 2040 Coordination Metro has designated three areas within Tigard as 2040 land use designated pedestrian districts. These areas will require the greatest attention to the development of integrated pedestrian networks. The three areas include: • Washington Square Regional Center • Downtown Tigard Town Center/Main Street/Commuter Rail Station Area • King City Town Center The City of Tigard has developed a plan for the Washington Square Regional Center which is in the final. approval process. While not a 2040 land use designated area, the Tigard Triangle has special development code regulation in Tigard that pertain to pedestrian design. Plans will need to be developed for both the Tigard Downtown and King City. The areas designated on Figures 5-1 and Figure 5-2 are the pedestrian districts in Tigard. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Pedestrians 5-14 October 30, 2001 DIGS Associates Chapter 6 ° CITY OF TIPaAit® Bicycles OREGON This chapter summarizes existing and future facility needs for bicycles in the City of Tigard. The following sections outline the criteria to be used to evaluate needs, provide a number of strategies for implementing a bikeway plan and recommend a bikeway plan for the City of Tigard. The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's TSP Task Force. As part of the TSP Task Force, the Planning Commission provided input regarding the transportation system in Tigard, specifically exploring bicycle needs. The methodology used to develop the bicycle plan combined citizen and staff input, specific Transportation Planning Rule requirements' and continuity to the regional bicycle system.2 Metro's Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) has identified a Proposed Regional Bicycle Network. As such, these routes will eventually have bicycle lanes, if they don't already. The following Tigard streets are classified as follows in the RTP: Regional Access Regional Corridor Community Regional Corridor Off-Street (on-street) Connector e Hall to Greenburg • Walnut Street • 72°d Avenue • Fanno Creek to Main to Y Scholls Ferry Rd 6 Bonita-McDonald a Tualatin River Hunziker . Hall Boulevard • Carman-Durham O Powerlines • ORE 99W Y Hunziker to LO through m Hall-Durham- I-510RE 217 Boones NEEDS Continuous bikeways are currently only provided for the full length of Durham Road, McDonald Street and Tigard Street in the City of Tigard. Bikeways are also currently provided for significant portions of ORE 99W, Hall Boulevard, Bonita Road, 97a'198's Avenues, Greenburg Road, Walnut Street, 12151 Avenue and Bull Mountain Road. In addition, there are a few segments where bikeways do exist where new development and roadway improvements have occurred. Continuity and connectivity are key issues for bicyclists and the lack of facilities (or gaps) cause significant problems for bicyclists in Tigard. Without connectivity of the bicycle system, this mode of travel is severely limited (similar to a road system full of cul-de-sacs). The TPR3 calls for all arterial and collector streets to have bicycle facilities. To meet the TPR requirements and fill in existing gaps in the existing bicycle system, an action plan that focuses on a framework system should be developed to prioritize bicycle investment. ' Transportation Planning Rule, State of Oregon, DLCD, Section 660-12-020(2)(d), 660-12-035(3)(e), 660-12-095(3)(b & c). 2 Regional Bicycle System Map, Regional Transportation Plan Draft, Metro, 1999. 3 Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660, Division 12, Section 045(3). Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-1 October 30, 2001 MEM K Assocra tens Bicycle trips are different from pedestrian and motor vehicle trips. Common bicycle trips are longer than walking trips and generally shorter than motor vehicle trips. Where walking trips are attractive at lengths of a quarter mile (generally not more than a mile), bicycle trips are attractive not only for these short trips, but lengths of two to three miles. Bicycle trips can generally fall into three groups: commuters, activity-based and recreational. Commuter trips are typically home/work/home (sometimes linking to transit) and are made on direct, major connecting roadways and/or local streets. Bicycle lanes provide good accommodations for these trips. Activity based trips can be home-to-school, home- to-park, home-to-neighborhood commercial or home-to-home. Many of these trips are made on local streets with some connections to the major functional classification streets. Their needs are for lower volume/speed traffic streets, safety and connectivity. It is important for bicyclists to be able to use through streets4. Recreational trips share many of the needs of both the commuter and activity-based trips, but create greater needs for off-street routes, connections to rural routes and safety. Typically, these bike trips will exceed the normal bike trip length. FACILITIES Bicycle facility needs fall into two primary categories: route facilities and parking facilities. Bicycle lanes are the most common route facilities in Tigard. Racks, lockers and shelters are typical bicycle parking facilities that are provided at individual land use sites. Bicycle ways can generally be categorized as bike lanes, bicycle accommodation, or off-street bike paths/multi-use trails. Bike lanes are areas within the street right-of-way designated specifically for bicycle use. Federal research has indicated that bike lanes are the most cost effective and safe facilities for bicyclists when considering all factors of design. Bicycle accommodations are where bicyclists and autos share the same travel lanes, including a wider outside lane and/or bicycle boulevard treatment (priority to through bikes on local streets). Multi-use paths are generally off-street routes (typically recreationally focused) that can be used by several transportation modes, including bicycles, pedestrians and other non-motorized modes (i.e. skateboards, roller blades, etc.). The terns bikeway is used in this plan to represent any of the bicycle accommodations described above. The bicycle plan designates where bike lanes and multi-use paths are anticipated and any other bicycleways are expected to be bike accommodations (i.e. shared with motor vehicles). Bicycle lanes adjacent to the curb are preferred to bicycle lanes adjacent to parked cars or bicycle lanes combined with sidewalks. Six foot bicycle lanes are recommended. Provision of a bicycle lane not only benefits bicyclist but also motor vehicles which gain greater shy distance/emergency shoulder area and pedestrians which gain buffer between walking areas and moving vehicles. On reconstruction projects, bicycle lanes of five feet may need to be considered. Bicycle accommodations can be provided by widening the curb travel lane (for example, from 12 feet to 14 or 15 feet. This extra width makes bicycle travel more accommodating and provides a greater measure of safety). Off-street trails should be planned for 12 feet in width, desirable for mixed-up activity (ped and bike). Signing and marking of bicycle lanes should follow the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, as adopted for Oregon. Design features in the roadway can improve bicycle safetys. For example, using curb storm drain inlets rather than catch basins significantly improves bicycle facilities. a This can include end of cul-de-sac connections, but even better is regular spacing of local streets. 5 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, ODOT, June, 1995; this provides an in-depth discussion on bicycle network development. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-2 October 90, 2001 D S J`1 ss%c a & %j n-7 Bicycle parking is required in Tigard for new land use applications (see Development Code Section 18.765, Table 18.765.2 Minimum and Maximum Required Off-street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking) Requirements in Community Development Code Section 18.765.050 outline the design and placement of bicycle parking (within 50 feet of building entrance). CRITERIA Tigard's TSP Task Force created a set of goals and policies to guide transportation system development in Tigard (see Chapter 2). Several of these policies pertain specifically to bicycle needs: Goal 2 Policy 3 Bicycle lanes must be constructed on all arterials and collectors within Tigard (with construction or reconstruction projects). All schools, parks, public facilities and retail areas shall have direct access to a bikeway. Policy S Bicycle and pedestrian plans shall be developed which link to recreational trails. Policy 6 Local streets shall be designed to encourage a reduction in trip length by providing connectivity and limiting out-of-direction travel. Provide connectivity to activity centers and destinations with a priority for bicycle and pedestrian connections. Goal 3 Policy 3 Safe and secure pedestrian and bikeways shall be designed between parks and other activity centers in Tigard These goals and policies are the criteria that all bikeway improvements in Tigard should be measured against to determine if they conform to the intended direction of the City. Policy 2-3 sets a specific requirement that bicycle lanes be constructed on all arterials and collectors within Tigard consistent with the Bicycle Master Plan and that all schools, parks, public facilities and retail areas have direct access to a bikeway. Table 6-1 summarizes the bicycle corridors created by overlaying the bicycle network over the arterial and collector system in Tigard. Since bicyclists can generally travel further than pedestrians, connections that lead to regional destinations such as Portland, Beaverton, Tualatin and Lake Oswego are important. Tigard's bicycle network should connect to Washington County's, Beaverton's, Tualatin's and Lake Oswego's bicycle networks and be consistent with the Regional Bicycle System. Key locations where connections should be made to these other jurisdiction's networks are shown in Table 6-2. STRATEGIES Several strategies were considered for construction of future bikeway facilities in Tigard. These strategies were studied to provide the City with priorities since it is likely that the available funding will be insufficient to address all of the projects identified in the Bikeway Master Plan. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-3 October 30, 2001 ®K Associates Strategy 1- "Fill in Gaps in the Network where Some Bikeways Exist" This strategy provides bikeways which fill in the gaps between existing bikeways where a significant portion of a bikeway corridor already exists. This strategy maximizes the use of existing bicycle facilities to create complete sections of an overall bikeway network. Examples would include ORE 99W, Hall Boulevard, Bull Mountain Road, Greenburg Road and 12151 Avenue, where short segments would complete routes. Table 6-1 Corridors in Proposed Bikewa Network North-South Corridors East-West Corridors Beef Bend Road Taylor's Fen Road Walnut Street 121St Avenue Barrows Road Bull Mountain Road Greenburg Road Nimbus/Oak Street Beef Bend Rd./Durham Rd./ ; Carman Drive ORE 99W North Dakota/Greenburg/ Gaarde St/McDonald St./ Hunziker Bonita Road Hall Boulevard Pfaffle/Dartmouth Street 72 Avenue Table 6-2 Bicycle Connectivity to Adjacent Jurisdictions Link Included in City Interface Street Tigard Master Plan? Lake Oswego Haines Street Atlanta Kruse Way multi-use athwa Hunziker Bonita Road Bonita Carman Drive Carman Beaverton Scholls Ferry Road Scholls Fe Barrows Road Barrows Powerlines multi-use path Powerlines off-street path Murry Boulevard Walnut Davies Road Barrows 125 Avenue North Dakota Nimbus Avenue Nimbus to Locust Hall Boulevard Hall Portland Tay lors Ferry Taylors Ferry Barbur Boulevard ORE 99W Oleson Road Greenbur Tualatin Tualatin Road/Boones Ferry Rd. Hall Boulevard Upper Boones Ferry Road Upper Boones Ferry Lower Boones Ferry Road 72nd Washington County Elsner Road Beef Bend Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-4 October 30, 2001 nK -1 Q 4cnr~s~~~S 9~P , Strategy 2 - "Connect Key Bicycle Corridors to Schools, Parks and Activity Centers (public facilities, etc.)" This strategy provides bikeway links to schools, parks, recreational facilities and activity centers from the arterial/collector bikeway network. This alternative provides added safety to likely bicyclist destinations as well as destinations where children are likely to travel. Examples would include Hall Boulevard, Durham Road, Walnut Street, Tiedeman Avenue, Bull Mountain and the off-street multi- use paths throughout Tigard. Strategy 3 - "Develop Bicycle Network on Flat Routes" This strategy focuses on providing bicycle lanes on "flat" routes, or those routes without significant grade changes. This strategy provides bicycle facilities where a larger percentage of the population is likely to travel. Examples would include routes such as Walnut Street, Hall Boulevard, Durham Road, North Dakota Street, etc. Strategy 4 - "Develop a Bike Sign Program-Focus on Low Volume Streets" This strategy would provide signs to guide bicyclists to appropriate bicycle routes in the City ® Strategy 5 - "Bicycle Corridors that Connect to Major Recreational Facilities0 This strategy provides a connection between the bikeway network and major recreational facilities, such as the Greenway Trail. Examples would be the Greenway Trail, Fanno Creek Trail and the proposed powerline corridor in the western part of the City. Strategy 6 - "Develop Maintenance Program to Clean Bike Lanes" This strategy establishes a program to provide maintenance services to clean the bike lanes. Debris in bike lanes is one of the biggest complaints (deterrents) of bicyclists. Strategy 7- "Bicycle Corridors that Commuters Might Use" ® This strategy focuses on providing bicycle facilities where commuters are likely to go such as local (within Tigard) or regional (i.e. Beaverton, Tualatin, Lake Oswego or downtown Portland) employment centers or leading to transit which provides access to regional employment centers. Examples would include ORE 9;W, Scholls Ferry Road and Hall Boulevard. Strategy 8 - "Bicycle Corridors that Connect Neighborhoods" This alternative puts priority on bicycle lanes for routes which link neighborhoods together. Some of these could include paths crossing parks, schools or utility rights-of-way. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-5 October 30, 2001 LOWS Associates Strategy 9 - "Construct All Bikeways to City of TigardlWashington County Standards" This strategy focuses on upgrading any substandard existing bikeways to current city/county standards. Current standards are for six foot wide bike lanes with appropriate striping and signs for bicycle safety. Strategy 10 - "Bicycle Corridors that Access Commercial Areas0 This strategy puts priority on bicycle lanes for arterials/collectors which provide access to commercial areas within the City. Examples would include ORE 99W, 72"d Avenue, Dartmouth Street and Hall Boulevard. Table 6-3 summarizes the strategies in the priority order ranked by the TSP Task Force in terms of meeting the transportation goals and objectives. Table 6-3 Bikeway Facility Strategies Comparisons Policies Strategy 2-3 2-5 2-6 3-3 1. Fill in gaps in the network where some bikeways exist 4 O O O 2. Connect key bicycle corridors to schools, parks and activity centers (public facilities, etc.) 4 a ! 2. Develop bicycle network on flat routes O O d 3. Develop a bike sign program-focus on low volume streets O O O t 4. Bicycle corridors that connect to major recreational facilities f 5. Develop maintenance program to clean bike lanes X X X X 7. Bicycle corridors that commuters might use t O O O 8. Bicycle corridors that connect neighborhoods O O ® O 8. Construct all bikeways to City of Tigard standards O O O O 10. Bicycle corridors that access commercial areas 4 O 4 A X Does not meet criteria G Mostly meets criteria O Partially meets criteria ® Fully meets criteria Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-6 October 30, 2001 ®ecnr±iat~c ALTERNATIVES Two basic alternative bicycle networks were developed through the TSP Task Force discussion. The first option was to place bicycle lanes on every existing arterial and collector street. Figure 6-1 summarizes the All Arterial and Collector alternative. The end result is several redundant bicycle facilities on routes that will no longer be collectors or arterials in the new functional classification. Additionally the cost and right-of-way impact is so significant that this alternative may be difficult to successfully implement. A second alternative was developed by the TSP Task Force that is build upon a framework of bicycle lanes through Tigard. This alternative provides framework grids of bicycle lanes with fewer lanes identified on lower classification streets (which typically have lower traffic volumes). Based upon the highest priority strategies the TSP Task Force recommended the framework option as the Tigard Bicycle Master Plan (Figure 6-2). RECOMMENDED BIKEWAY FACILITY PLAN A list of likely actions to achieve fulfillment of these priorities was developed into a Bicycle Master Plan. The Bicycle Master Plan (Figure 6-2) is an overall plan and summarizes the "wish list" of bicycle- related projects in Tigard, providing a long-term map for planning bicycle facilities. From this Master Plan, a more specific, shorter term, Action Plan was developed. The Action Plan (Figure 6-3) consists of projects that the City should actively try to fund. These projects form a basic bicycle grid system for ® Tigard. As development occurs, streets are rebuilt and other opportunities (such as grant programs) arise, projects on the Master Plan should be pursued as well. POTENTIAL PROJECT LIST Table 6-4 outlines potential bicycle projects in Tigard. The City, through its Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and bond measure funding (along with joint funding with other agencies such as Washington County or Metro or development approval) would implement these projects. Figure 6-3 summarizes the Bicycle Action Plan. Multi-use paths identified on the bicycle plans should be aligned to cross roadways at intersections for safe crossing rather than crossing roadways at mid-blocks without traffic control. There is an off-street multi-use trail shown along the powerline corridor in the western part of Tigard. This corridor is designated as a proposed Off-Street Multi-Use Path in Metro's Regional Bicycle Systemb, however, the corridor follows a very steep grade and would be extremely difficult for most bicyclists. The corridor could be developed as a multi-use path that could be used by serious bicyclists as well as pedestrians. 6 Regional Bicycle System Map, Version 4.0, Metro, December 1, 1997. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-7 October 30, 2001 Transp plan SysteMs A.S(-;Oc'aW a T ® 8ike,anes 1 T ~v S ~Sr,,~1F. •~SgeelPa ~ 5 > ) - 2,7 K • p ~~y~bBx~Bj~ai T E <Note:mom~distl F 210 ~ ~ st b w O . b b 5 0 A A A~ CIA ~ PO b i fl9upel~ r 0 0 ,w see ofIAG O"GW S A5s~ciates rainscortaboll 1 ~ S sterns Man T 'v ~ ~pyyut~~ • ► b Pau • tws Bdv Edon axwe q tl~ --1..- ro tl tl t ~ m Oyu Oplion) S ✓*if o flon Tra►n~p plan Systems Dilates te9end a ~ j = sT.. ra~® P&kelac~s~ 7 7 s .OIL SQab+s Pao$ 211 saws r eM & ~r F~~ R N0 DAK~7p , ± , GREE < 'IC typle: Ogg1igwa6o~ s ~ 5 i o~yy ~aS~ y ~ /12 S a i~ 5 a ~ H O• .mot ~ ~ pc.~®~ Pl.~► ® fC Associa teas 0 Table 6-4 ® Bicycle Project Priorities ® Ralik Project From To Action Plan Project; H Taylor's Ferry Road Washington Drive City Limits ® H Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road H Hall Boulevard Pfaffle Street Bonita Road ® H Greenbur Road Hall Boulevard Cascade Avenue H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80 Avenue ® H Oak Street Hall Boulevard 90 Avenue H ORE 99W East City Limits South City Limits ® H 72 Avenue ORE 99W South City Limits H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72 Avenue H Upper Boones Ferry Rd I-5 Durham Road H Bonita Road 72 Avenue West of 72 Avenue ® H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard ® H O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard H Frewin Street ORE 99W O'Mara Street H Murdock Street 98 Avenue 97 Avenue H 98 Avenue Murdock Stret Durham Road 0 H 92 Avenue Durham Road Cook Park H Tiedeman Avenue Greenbur Road Walnut Street H Walnut Street ORE 99W Barrows Road H 121" Avenue Walnut Street Gaarde Street ® H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W H Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (West) Scholls Ferry Road (East) ® H Scholls Ferry Road Hall Boulevard Barrows Road ® H Bull Mountain Road 150 Avenue Beef Bend Road ® H Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Fe Road H Other Master Plan Projects ® M 80 Avenue Taylor's Ferry Road Spruce Street M Oak Street Greenbur Road 901Avenue M Oak Street 80th Avenue 71St Avenue M 71" Avenue Oak Street Pine Street ® M Pine Street 715` Avenue 69 Avenue M 69 Avenue Pine Street ORE 99W M 68 Avenue ORE 99W South End of Street M Dartmouth Street _ ORE 99W 68 Avenue M Hampton Street 72 Avenue 68 Avenue M Pfaffle Street Hall Boulevard ORE 99W M Haines Street 68 Avenue East City Limits Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-11 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates Rank Project From To M Bonita Road 72 Avenue East City Limits M Scoffns Street Hall Boulevard Main Street M Sattler Street 100 Avenue Hall Boulevard M Ross Street Hall Boulevard East End of Street M Hall Boulevard Durham Road South City Limits M 108 Avenue Durham Road South End of Street M 150 Avenue Bull Mountain Road Beef Bend Road M 130 Avenue Scholls Ferry Road Winterlake Drive M Winterlake Drive 130 Avenue 128 Avenue M 128 Avenue Winterlake Drive Walnut Street M North Dakota Street Scholls Ferry Road Greenbur Road M S rin wood Drive Scholls Ferry Road 121" Avenue M Cascade Avenue Scholls Ferry Road Greenbur Road M Durham Road Upper Booties Fe Road 72 Avenue M 79 Avenue Durham Road Bonita Road M Off-Street Multi-Use Path Powerline corridor in west Tigard M Off-Street Multi-Use Path Southside ORE 217 from Hunziker to I-5 Bride kMME Off-Street Multi-Use Path Adjacent to Tualatin River Off-Street Multi-Use Path Brid a over Tualatin River at 108th Off-Street Multi-Use Path Adjacent to Fanno Creek • H=High, M=Medium, L--Low Priority COMPLEMENTING LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS The Transportation Planning Rule requires that bicycle parking facilities be provided as part of new residential developments of four units or more, new retail, office and institutional developments, and all transit transfer stations and park and ride lots. The City through its Community Development Code has in place requirements for bicycle parking. It is important that, as new development occurs, connections or accessways are provided to link the development to the existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities in as direct manner as is reasonable. If a development fronts a proposed bikeway or sidewalk (as shown in the Bicycle or Pedestrian Master Plans), the developer shall be responsible for providing the bikeway or walkway facility as part of any half-street improvement required for project mitigation. Transportation Planning Rule, State of Oregon, Department of Land Conservation and Development, Section 660-12-045(3)(a). Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Bicycles 6-12 October 30, 2001 DIGS Associates after 7 Transit CITY OF TIGARD OREGON This chapter summarizes existing and future transit needs in the City of Tigard. The following sections outline the criteria to be used to evaluate needs, provides a number of strategies for implementing a transit plan and recommends a transit plan for the City of Tigard. The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's TSP Task Force. This committee provided input regarding the transportation system in Tigard, specifically exploring transit needs. The methodology used to develop the transit plan combined citizen and staff input. (NEEDS There are currently 12 fixed bus routes which provide service within the City of Tigard. These bus routes ® are summarized in Chapter 3 (Existing Conditions). There are four express routes providing service to ® Tigard residents (12E, 64X, 92X and 95X). Existing transit headways on bus routes in Tigard range from 10-15 minutes on Routes 12 and 92X to about 30 minutes on Routes 76 and 78 during peak commute periods. Metro's Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) identifies the following routes on its Public Transportation System Map (Figure 7-1)1: 0 ORE 217 HCT Corridor 0 Greenburg/Hall/Durham HCT Corridor 0 ORE 99W (East of ORE 217) HCT Corridor 0 Hall Boulevard (North of ORE 217) Frequent Bus 0 Hunziker Street Frequent Bus 0 ORE 99W (West of ORE 217) Primary Bus 0 Scholls Ferry Road (East of Murray) Primary Bus 0 121"[Walnut Street Primary Bus 0 680' Parkway/Hampton Street Primary Bus 0 72nd Avenue (South of Hampton) Primary Bus Based upon these designations, the City of Tigard designates all bus stops on HCT Corridors and Frequent Bus routes as Major Transit Stops. In addition, all park and ride sites and transit stations are designated major transit stops (Downtown Tigard, Washington Square, park and ride at ORE 99W/72nd Avenue). While Tri-Met bus ridership in Tigard increased by 35% from 1990 to 1994 and another 15% from 1994 to 1999 (comparing 12 routes), transit ridership represents 6 percent of Tigard PM peak hour trip making. Public Transportation System Map, Metro, Version 4.0, December 1, 1997. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7-1 October 30, 2001 ~As~c~a~es MY OF TIG.M® NOT TD iA oRS RD Transportation Systems PIT > a I o CR T Z Legend ■ ®m Hgh Capadty Transit (HCT) Z s e • Frequent Bus 211 ' e~ -ReOW Bus ® •Transit Center Location Q z CR - Potential Commuter Raitstation S 210 ° • Park d Ride Lot Location ® Ma# Trar l Stop r0 ti 99W Gr 0 sr( 1w mcDwmD sr BUU O " RD O S i ~ 2 < d O D OD DR R BEND DURHAM v B EF y Figure 7-1 RTP PUBLIC co TRANSPORTATION ..y SYSTEM CLASSIFICATION ' KS Associates Existing Tri-Met service covers nearly all of the routes established in the Metro Public Transportation Plan today. Primary routes provide the backbone of the transit system and are intended to provide high quality service operating at frequencies of 15 minutes all day. The HCT service on Hall that diverges to Durham should be considered to stay on Hall to the south when Hall is extended in the future. All of Tri-Met's bus routes are accessible and most are equipped with lifts. Every Tri-Met bus has priority seating near the front for seniors and passengers with disabilities. Tri-Met also operates a LIFT program for those who are unable to use Tri-Met buses or MAX because of a disability. One of Tigard's greatest transit needs in the future will be improving transit service to the southwest portion of the City where much of the new development is occurring. Tri-Met has identified Durham Road and Barrows Road for transit service in the future. Rapidly increasing employment and housing creates a much greater opportunity to create productive public transit routing in Tigard. CRITERIA IND Tigard's TSP Task Force created a set of goals and policies to guide transportation system development in Tigard. These goals and policies represent the criteria that all transit improvements in Tigard should be compared against to determine if they conform to the intended vision of the City. A few of these policies pertain specifically to transit needs: Goal 2 Policy 2 The City shall coordinate with Tri-Met, and/or any other transit providers serving Tigard, to improve transit service to Tigard. Fixed route transit will primarily use arterial and collector streets in Tigard. Development adjacent to transit routes will provide direct pedestrian accessibility. Policy 7 Tigard will participate in vehicle trip reduction strategies'developed regionally targeted to achieve non-single occupant vehicle levels outlined in Table 1.3 of the Regional Transportation Plan. ® Policy 8 Tigard will support the development of a commuter rail system as part of the regional transit network. Goal 5 Policy I Design and construct transportation facilities to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. STRATEGIES Tri-Met is responsible for any changes in routes through their annual transit service plan process. In order for the City to have its transit needs assessed, the City can provide input to Tri-Met through this process. Several strategies were developed for the implementation of future transit facilities in Tigard. These strategies were developed to provide the City with priorities in providing guidance to Tri-Met since it is 40 likely that the available funding will be insufficient to address all of the projects identified in the Transit Master Plan. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7-3 October 30, 2001 xm~ DK Associates Strategy 1 - "Provide Commuter Rail" This strategy focuses on providing Commuter Rail through Tigard. This allows greater connectivity to the regional transit network and to other nearby Cities such as Hillsboro, Tualatin and Wilsonville. Stations in the Tigard area would be located in the Downtown Area and near Washington Square. Beyond the current Beaverton/ Wilsonville proposal, the significant traffic operational problems in the ORE 99W corridor make extended commuter rail service to Sherwood, Newberg, McMinnville, Spirit Mountain and the coast requires further study. Strategy 2 (Tie) - "Provide Service Often (i.e, every 15 minutes) in Peak Commute Periods" This strategy focuses on decreasing the headways between buses during peak morning and evening commute periods. This increases operating costs for Tri-Met and without increased ridership (or potential for more ridership), Tri-Met would not upgrade services. In the 1999 service plan, Tri-Met focused on more frequent service. Strategy 2 (Tie) - "Provide Express Routes to Regional Employment Centers (i.e. Downtown Portland, Washington Square)" This strategy is aimed at providing service directly from Tigard to regional employment centers. This might include a few stops in Tigard followed by express service to downtown Portland (one or two stops at park & ride lots along the way) or Beaverton Transit Center, etc. Strategy 2 (Tie) - "Provide Bus Shelters/Improved User Amenities" This strategy focuses on installation of bus shelters and other user amenities along bus routes in Tigard. The need for bus shelters at bus stops, as well as other user amenities, should be evaluated in conjunction with any new commercial or residential development adjacent to a transit street. One user amenity that got a favorable reaction from the Task Force was "real time" bus schedule information at bus stops, indicating how long it would be before the next bus arrives at a particular stop. Tri-Met's Planning and Design for Transit Handbook should be used as a guide in providing transit amenities. Generally, when a transit stop has 75 or more daily boardings, transit amenities should be pursued. Strategy 5 (Tie) - "Provide Access to Employment Areas" This strategy focuses on providing access to locations where people work in Tigard. Employment areas in and near Tigard might include Washington Square, Tigard Triangle, ORE 99W and Sequoia Parkwayn2"d Avenue. Strategy 5 (Tie) - "Provide More Local Transit Service" This strategy focuses on providing more transit service on local routes (typically near where people live), rather than primarily on arterials and collectors. An assessment of existing transit route coverage in Tigard was done comparing current and future placement of transit services in relationship to land use densities that would be supportive of transit use. The land use data from the travel demand forecast model was Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7.4 October 30, 2001 DK Associates utilized in this assessment. A one quarter mile "buffer" was established around each transit stop and compared to the adjacent land use. The existing conditions indicate that about 80 percent of the land area in Tigard with density supportive of transit use would be within one-quarter mile of a transit stop (Figure 7-2). With the proposed future transit service coverage, approximately 85 percent of the land area in Tigard with land use densities supportive of transit service would be within one-quarter mile of a transit stop (Figure 7-3). This does not specifically address the frequency of some of the transit services or the destinations (which would require coordination with Tri-Met for this strategy to be effectively implemented). Strategy 7 - "Provide Access to Commercial Areas" This strategy focuses on providing access to locations where people choose to do their shopping. ® Commercial areas in Tigard might include Washington Square, the Tigard Triangle, ORE 99W, Main Street, and the area adjacent to Sequoia Parkway. Strategy 8 - "Provide Park & Ride Lots" This strategy provides park & ride lots at locations where concentrated transit demand exists or where it is desirable for Tri-Met to stop. ® Strategy 9 - "Provide Access to Activity & Service Centers" This strategy focuses on providing transit access to destinations such as community centers, hospitals, W schools, churches, etc. Table 7-1 summarizes the strategies in terms of meeting the transportation goals and policies of Tigard. The strategies are listed in the priority order as determined by the TSP Task Force. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7-5 October 30, 2001 ACS Associates AN NOT ' I MY OF IGARD TO SCME one*" Transportation Systems Plan Legend aamr.AM EriAq L06AC Tgrarti~er EAftLOGOTEMNINAW . ~ l ~ Edia~ylOBFTw~Nlr ® 7MIT~EW9~~a~slMCoiweyYi Notes Trarvdt LOS is based on haadviay in the PM Peak Period. as del6ted in the 20M Highway LOS A 1-9 rnhwtes sw LOS B: 10.14 rninartaa WM-WT LOS C: 15-20 rrkartea LOS D: 21-30 LOS E. 3160 rtkarles r` LOS R Gamer than 60 ffk# ss sw w u b Figure 7-2 - - Existing Transit C®~rrrage tt l MEW DIKS Associates N W* r ®FTIGARD TO SCALE OREOM Transp®rta~ti®n Systems Plan r Legend PXPONdCOMMAK M i ,vp t'17DCmdY/YelalTimMle~io Nato ® PWtO FawT4.rr8a~lotldto . ~QO Pa1taY FroTar~aNv NLgt 20m CmiLOIDBACTtLaLtrtaa 2=Ca-dbd LOB ETRmAlbia Pd dd F~sTm.KRattU)BD&ia : PYiwaFrnTaod Nast Llle DeaOa ® 2Ml5Titttt&VPw"ZotwlMCawwft%. tr Nate: Tramit LOS is based on tma mwy in the PM Peak ftiod. w &&wd in the mw Homy e CSPOC4 marrow. LOS A : 1-9 mkartes LOS B: 11F14 mkiutes LOS C: 15-20 mkktos LOS D: 21-30 r,*A Bs LOS E 31.60 n*wtes LOS F: Grestw dw 60 mkvA s sw II 'l Figure 7-3 Future 'Transit k Overage DKS Associates Table 7-1 Transit Strategies Comparisons is Policies Strategy 2-2 2-7 2-8 5-1 1 1 1. Provide Commuter Rail / 1 ! 6 2. Provide Service Often in Peak Commute Periods 1 1 ! 3. Provide Express Routes to Regional Em to ment Centers 4. Provide Bus Shelters/User Amenities 4 5. Provide Access to Employment Areas / 1 ! 4 / 1 0 / 6. Provide More Local Transit Service 7. Provide Access to Commercial Areas ® O ! 1 8. Provide Park & Ride Lots 4 ! O ! 9. Provide Access to Activity & Service Centers x Does not meet criteria O Partially meets criteria ! Mostly meets criteria ® Fully meets criteria RECOMMENDED TRANSIT PLAN The strategies that had been developed by the TSP Task Force were then ranked by the committee. Each committee member was assigned a certain number of points that he or she could allocate to each of the strategies according to his or her priorities. The ranking of these strategies is the same as listed previously. Potential Project List Proposed transit routes/facilities are summarized in Table 7-2 and Figure 7-4. Transit projects were determined based on strategies listed above and project feasibility. Park and ride lots, pedestrian districts and potentially new service areas are shown on Figure 7-4. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7-8 October 30, 2001 PAN ®MIS Associates ® Table 7-2 Potential Transit Projects Rank Project Description ® 1 Provide Commuter Rail Station As part of the Beaverton to Wilsonville Commuter Rail in Tigard system provide a park and ride station in downtown Tigard. Support regional study of western extensions of commuter rail service (or comparable options). 2 Provide Transit Amenities at Provide shelters, information kiosks, etc key transit routes Major Transit Stops in Tigard with land use development. Focus on development of "SMART" bus stops. 3 Improve Pedestrian Connections Construct sidewalks, crosswalks, etc. adjacent to transit to Transit Facilities routes and facilities (i.e. park-and-ride lots, bus stops, etc.). Within 1/4 mile of bus stops, focus on enhancing pedestrian access. Enhance Regional Center and Town Center pedestrian access to transit. 4 Decrease Headways Provide more frequent transit service during peak commute periods. 5 Establish Additional Transit Provide service along Durham Road and in the western Routes part of the City (i.e. Durham Road, Barrows Road, Murray/Walnut/Gaarde). Time additional transit service to coordinate with major road extensions or street improvements. 6 Add a new Transit Center at the Provide a new transit center with the development of the Murray/Scholls Town Center Murray/Scholls Town Center. The Downtown Town Center and Washington Square Regional Center are the existing Transit Center locations. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7-9 October 30, 2001 CIO a~ eS ~rans9ovta ion $ ~SS~~la~ Stems P~an N p Legend Z ~5> tom OW^OW N F40" UO&ft f,0.•T~a'" Au _ p ~ py~ra b It e0 v'°i'c+~F'wf0tt0'~~~~ RV UAW ? 0,0,* 00 7b b b Figure 7A samc i II KS Associates Recommended Land Use Actions The City of Tigard Development Code includes requirements for land use changes to address transit access. Section 18.360.090 provides approval criteria related to public transit. a. Provisions within the plan shall be included for providing for transit if the development proposal is adjacent to existing or proposed transit route; b. The requirements for transit facilities shall be based on: (1) The location of other transit facilities in the area; and (2) The size and type of the proposal. c. The following facilities may be required after City and Tri-Met review: (1) Bus stop shelters; (2) Turnouts for buses; and (3) Connecting paths to the shelters. ® The only modification to this code provision is to define adjacent as having a bus stop within 500 feet of the property. Tlgard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transit 7-11 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates Chapter 8 Motor Vehicles CITY OF TIGARD OREGON This chapter summarizes needs for the motor vehicle system for both existing and future conditions in the City of Tigard. This chapter also outlines the criteria to be used in evaluating needs, provides a number of strategies and recommends plans for motor vehicles (automobiles, trucks, buses and other vehicles). The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's Task Force (which consisted primarily of the Tigard Planning Commission). This group explored automobile and truck needs in the City of Tigard and provided input about how they would like to- see the transportation system in their city develop. The Motor Vehicle modal plan is intended to be consistent with other jurisdictional plans including Metro's Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Washington County's Transportation Plan and ODOT's Oregon Highway Plan (OHP). The motor vehicle element of the TSP involves several elements as shown in Figure 8-1. This chapter is separated into the following ten sections: ! Criteria • Functional Classification (including summary of cross sections and local street connectivity) 0 Circulation and Capacity Needs • Safety • Access Management e Maintenance • Neighborhood Traffic Management Parking e Transportation System Management/Intelligent Transportation Systems • Truck Routes CRITERIA I Tigard's TSP Task Force created a set of goals and policies to guide transportation system development in Tigard (see Chapter 2). Many of these goals and policies pertain specifically to motor vehicles. These goals and policies represent the criteria that all motor vehicle improvements or changes in Tigard should be measured against to determine if they conform to the intended direction of the City. GoalI Livability Policy I Maintain the livability of Tigard through proper location and design of transportation facilities. Policy 3 Address issues of excessive speeding and through traffic on local residential streets through a neighborhood traffic program. The program should address corrective measures for existing problems and assure that development incorporates traffic calming. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-1 October 30, 2001 IJ% Bill! INN- of -RGARD m PI n ASSC~CiaQS 'srransP ystems r r u01~r~ .r 5 ® ~ a f6 N 1 .e 1 • i r~ • • PLAN eLEmeNTS 41 ® s Associates Goal2 Balanced Transportation System Policy 1 Develop and implement public street standards that recognize the multi-purpose nature of the street right-of-way for utility, pedestrian, bicycle, transit, truck and auto use. Policy 6 Local streets shall be designed to encourage a reduction in trip length by providing connectivity and limiting out-of-direction travel. Provide connectivity to activity centers and destinations with a priority for bicycle and pedestrian connections Policy 7 Tigard will participate in vehicle trip reduction strategies developed regionally targeted to achieve non-single occupant vehicle levels outlined in Table 1.3 of the Regional Transportation Plan. Goal3 Safety ® Policy 1 Design of streets should relate to their intended use. Policy 2 Street maintenance shall be a priority to improve safety in Tigard. Policy S Access management standards for arterial and collector streets shall be developed to improve safety in ® Tigard. Policy 6 Establish a City monitoring system that regularly evaluates, prioritizes and mitigates high accident ® locations within the City. Goal 4 Performance Measures Policy 1 A minimum intersection level of service standard shall be set for the City of Tigard. All public facilities shall be designed to meet this standard. Policy 3 Work with Washington County, Metro, and ODOT to develop, operate and maintain intelligent transportation systems including coordination of traffic signals. Goal S Accessibility Policy 2 Develop neighborhood and local connections to provide adequate circulation in and out of the neighborhoods. Policy 3 Work to develop an efficient arterial grid system that provides access within the City and serves through City traffic. lift Goal 6 Goads Movement Policy 1 Design arterial routes, highway access and adjacent land uses in ways that facilitate the efficient movement of goods and services. is 40 40 ® Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 40 Motor Vehicles 8-3 October 30,2001 DKS Associates FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Roadways have two functions, to provide mobility and to provide access. From a design perspective, these functions can be incompatible since high or continuous speeds are desirable for mobility, while low speeds are more desirable for land access. Arterials emphasize a high level of mobility for through movement; local facilities emphasize the land access function; and collectors offer a balance of both functions (Figure 8-2). Functional classification has commonly been mistaken as a determinate for traffic volume, road size, urban design, land use and various other features which collectively are the elements of a roadway, but do not represent function. For example, the volume of traffic on a roadway is directly related to land uses and because a roadway carries a lot or a little traffic does not necessarily determine its function. The traffic volume, design (including access standards) and size of the roadway are outcomes of function, but do not define function. Function can be best defined by connectivity. Without connectivity, neither mobility nor access can be served. Roadways that provide the greatest reach of connectivity are the highest level facilities. Arterials can be defined by regional level connectivity. These routes go beyond the city limits in providing connectivity and can be defined into two groups: principal arterials (typically state routes) and arterials. The efficient movement of persons, goods and services depends on an interconnected arterial system. Collectors can be defined by citywide or district wide connectivity. These routes span large areas of the city but typically do not extend significantly into adjacent jurisdictions. They are important to city circulation. The past textbooks on functional classification generally defined all other routes as local streets, providing the highest level of access to adjoining land uses. These routes do not provide through connection at any significant regional, city-wide or district level. Based upon connectivity there is a fourth level of functional classification - neighborhood route. In many past plans, agencies defined a minor collector or a neighborhood collector; however, use of the term collector is not appropriate. Collectors provide citywide or large district connectivity and circulation. There is a function between a collector and a local street that is unique due to its level of 40 connectivity. Local streets can be cul-de-sacs or short streets that do not connect to anything.' Other routes people use to get in and around their neighborhood. They have connections within the neighborhood and between neighborhoods. These routes have neighborhood connectivity, but do not serve as citywide streets. They have been the most sensitive routes to through, speeding traffic due to their residential frontages. Because they do provide some level of connectivity, they can commonly be used as cut-through routes in lieu of congested or less direct arterial or collector streets that are not performing adequately. Cut-through traffic has the highest propensity to speed, creating negative impacts on these neighborhood routes. By designating these routes, a more systematic citywide program of neighborhood traffic management can be undertaken to protect these sensitive routes. ' Or in the case of neo-traditional grid systems, extensive redundancy in facilities results in local status to streets that have greater than local connectivity. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-4 October 30,2001 DKSAssopiates CITY OF TIGARD '-anspoirtation ~ystern Plan 6p- 'SO" eel GOV J 01 Z ~ 4 c t,(,OIOQ .c h h~Q W o V ~ti Q Q tess ~ c ~xP ch ~3 fee o0 Comp/et access control o through lncreosirrg proportion of through No ocal traffic traffic.lncreasing speed. traffic MOVEMENT FUNCTION Source. University of California, Figure 2 Fundamentals of Traffic Engineering' m me ell s r S, Homburger and S'TREET FUNCTION RELATIONSHIP oll KS Associates In the past, traffic volume and the size of a roadway have been directly linked to functional classification. More recently, urban design and land use designations have also been tied to functional classification. Discussions of neo-traditional street grids that eliminate the need for functional classification creates another commentary on this issue. All of these approaches to functional classification tend to be confusing and ever changing, complicating an essential transportation planning exercise. The planning effort to identify connectivity of routes in Tigard is essential to preserve and protect future mobility and access, by all modes of travel. In Tigard, it is not " possible to have a citywide neo-traditional layout. Past land use decisions, topography and environmental features preclude this2. Without defining the varying levels of connectivity now in the TSP, the future impact of the adopted Comprehensive Plan land uses will result in a degraded ability to move goods and people (existing and future) in Tigard. The outcome would be intolerable delays and much greater costs to address solutions later rather than sooner. By planning an effective functional classification of Tigard streets', the City can manage public facilities pragmatically and cost effectively. These classifications do not mean that because a route is an arterial it is large and has lots of traffic. Nor do the definitions dictate that a local street should only be small with little traffic. Identification of connectivity does not dictate land use or demand for facilities. The demand for streets is directly related to the land use. The highest level connected streets have the greatest potential for higher traffic volumes, but do not necessarily have to have high volumes as an outcome, depending upon land uses in the area. Typically, a significant reason for high traffic volumes on surface streets at any point can be related to the level of land use intensity within a mile or two. Many arterials with the highest level of connectivity have only 35 to 65 percent "through traffic". Without the connectivity provided by arterials and collectors, the impact of traffic intruding into neighborhoods and local streets goes up substantially. If land use is a primary determinate of traffic volumes on streets, then how is it established? In Oregon, land use planning laws require the designation of land uses in the Comprehensive Plan. Tigard's Comprehensive Plan land uses have been designated for over two decades. These land use designations are very important not only to the City for planning purposes, but to the people that own land in Tigard. The adopted land uses in Tigard have been used in this study, working with the Metro regional forecasts for growth in the region for the next 20 years. A regional effort, coordinated by Metro and local agencies, has been undertaken to allocate the determined overall land use in the most beneficial manner for transportation. Without this allocation, greater transportation impacts would occur (wider and more roads than identified in this plan). As discussed in Chapter 10, if the outcome of this TSP is either too many streets or solutions that are viewed to be too expensive, it is possible to reconsider the core assumptions regarding Tigard's livability - its adopted land uses or its service standards related to congestion. The charge of this TSP (as mandated by State law) is to develop a set of multi-modal transportation improvements to support the Comprehensive Plan land uses. Key to this planning task is the functional classification of streets. 2 While subdivisions or areas of neo-traditional development exist and are possible (even desirable), on the whole, the concept cannot be generically applied citywide in lieu of functional classification. Including definition of which routes connect through Tigard, within Tigard and which routes serve neighborhoods and the local level in the city. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-6 October 30,2001 S Associates Functional Classification Definitions The proposed functional classification of streets in Tigard is represented by Figure 8-3. Any street not designated as either an arterial, collector or neighborhood route is considered a local street. Principal Arterials are typically freeways and state highways that provide the highest level of regional connectivity. These routes connect over the longest distance (many miles long) and are less frequent than other arterials or collectors. These highways generally span several jurisdictions and many times have statewide importance (as defined in the ODOT Level of Importance categorization).' In Tigard, I-5 is designated an Interstate Highway and two routes (ORE 217 and ORE 99W) are designated Statewide Highways. All three of these routes are part of the National Highway System. While State Highways make up only 10 percent of Oregon's road mileage, they handle over 60 percent of the daily traffics. Arterial streets serve to interconnect and support the principal arterial highway system. These streets link major commercial, residential, industrial and institutional areas. Arterial streets are typically spaced about one mile apart to assure accessibility and reduce the incidence of traffic using collectors or local streets for through traffic in lieu of a well placed arterial street. Access control is the key feature of an arterial route. Arterials are typically multiple miles in length. Many of these routes connect to cities surrounding Tigard and commonly provide access to freeways via interchanges. Collector streets provide both access and circulation within and between residential and commercial/industrial areas. Collectors differ from arterials in that they provide more of a citywide ® circulation function, do not require as extensive control of access (compared to arterials) and penetrate residential neighborhoods, distributing trips from the neighborhood and local street system. Collectors are greater than 0.5 to 1.0 miles in length. Neighborhood routes are usually long relative to local streets and provide connectivity to collectors or arterials. Because neighborhood routes have greater connectivity, they generally have more traffic than local streets and are used by residents in the area to get into and out of the neighborhood, but do not serve citywide/large area circulation. They are typically about a quarter to a half mile in total length. Traffic from cul-de-sacs and other local streets may drain onto neighborhood routes to gain access to collectors or arterials. Because traffic needs are greater than a local street, certain measures should be considered to retain the neighborhood character and livability of these routes. Neighborhood traffic ® management measures are often appropriate (including devices such as speed humps, traffic circles and other devices - refer to later section in this chapter). However, it should not be construed that neighborhood routes automatically get speed humps or any other measures. While these routes have special needs, neighborhood traffic management is only one means of retaining neighborhood character and vitality. Local Streets have the sole function of providing access to immediate adjacent land. Service to "through traffic movement" on local streets is deliberately discouraged by design. ' 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, ODOT, March 1999. 1999 Oregon Highway Plan, ODOT, March 1999, page 13. Tigard Transportation System Plan "DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-7 October 30,2001 DKS ASSoclates N TO SCAM OREGON 1 Transportation IX, Systems Plea Legend Road c,oeun N`'.. - Fundiorral C!asdfic~lon :cfx;x: r•:; Wnpcoed FreWAay fl'ic. y' PtopMed Arterial ftpo..a k*4 w Rain. ::.tier.; Yr t0~ xc`::: 'c Premwd Amid P4rrWH.+ab«^ooaRow R-91-rW C~ T- C~ S16 A. v ` d z::»>s *-Transportation facilities in the Tigard Tdaros wAUUr' .sa+:. • and WasWgtan Square PlarMg areas have spedfic design relation and cww f " E£> 3z that may slightly differ from those in the TSP for WCY ptwpases. In ttteso overlay areas, . i^ : ` there are spec3fie P~n~B Y ~ for tia,>spartatitm design regulations. f Note: The exact a5ganart of dwhed km to address pt ysical, access control, rightof-way J and envvoruruwrtel corrstrairds n development. Figure 8-3 Proposed Functional ® , , Classification System KS Associates Functional Classification Changes The proposed functional classification differs from the existing approved functional classification. Neighborhood routes were not defined in the existing functional classification. The proposed functional classification was developed following detailed review of Tigard's, Washington County's and Metro's current functional classification maps. Table 8-1 summarizes the major differences between the proposed functional classification and the existing designations for streets in Tigard. This table also outlines the streets which were previously designated collectors that are now identified as neighborhood routes. 49 Criteria for Determining Changes to Functional Classification The criteria used to assess functional classification have two components: the extent of connectivity (as defined above) and the frequency of the facility type. Maps can be used to determine regional, city/district and neighborhood connections. The frequency or need for facilities of certain classifications is not routine or easy to package into a single criterion. While planning textbooks call for arterial spacing of a mile, collector spacing of a quarter to a half mile, and neighborhood connections at an eighth to a sixteenth of a mile, this does not form the only basis for defining functional classification. Changes in land use, environmental issues or barriers, topographic constraints, and demand for facilities can change the frequency for routes of certain functional classifications. While spacing standards can be a guide, they must consider other features and potential long term uses in the area (some areas would not experience significant changes in demand, where others will). Linkages to regional centers and town centers are another consideration for addressing frequency of routes of a certain functional classification. Connectivity to these areas is important, whereas linkages that do not connect any of these centers could be classified as lower levels in the functional classification. Table 8-1 Proposed Changes to Existing Roadway Classification Roadway Classification According to Jurisdiction Roadway Tigard Wash Count Metro Proposed TSP Greenburg Road Major Collector Minor Arterial/ Major Arterial Arterial Major Collector 72 Avenue Major Collector Stud Area Minor Arterial Arterial Durham (W. of Hall) Major Collector Stud Area Minor Arterial Arterial Murray (Scholls Ferry Major Collector Proposed Collector Proposed Collector of Arterial to Barrows) Regional Significance Walnut Major Collector Proposed Collector Collector of Regional Arterial (Barrows to Gaarde) Significance Gaarde Street Major Collector Proposed Collector/ Collector of Regional Arterial Major Collector Significance Beef Bend Road Major Collector Major Collector Collector of Regional Arterial Significance Barrows Road Arterial Major Collector Not Classified Collector Sequoia Parkway Not Classified Not Classified Not Classified Collector Oak St (e of Lincoln) Not Classified Not Classified Not Classified Collector Oak St (w of Lincoln) Minor Collector Not Classified Not Classified Local Table 8-1 (cont.) Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-9 October 30,2001 DKS Associates Tech Center Drive Minor Collector Not Classified Not Classified Local 97"/98" Avenue Major Collector Major Collector Not Classified Neighborhood Routes that Chan a rom Minor Collector to Neighborhood. Route 135`" (s/o, Gaarde) Sunrise Lane Watkins Avenue Summerfield Drive 133`d Avenue Benchview Terrace Grant Avenue Sattler Street 130" Avenue Peachtree Drive Park Street Ross Street 128`' Avenue Morning Hill Drive Johnson Street Alderbrook Drive 115" Avenue Falcon Rise Drive Commercial Street Pinebrook Street 109" Avenue Winter Lake Drive Shad Lane 98" Avenue North Dakota St. Washington Drive 95 Avenue 5 rin wood Drive Ash Avenue 79 Avenue Tigard Street O'Mara Street 74"/72 Avenue Former Street Canterbury Lane Changes from Collector or Local deli nation to Nei hborhood Route see Fig 8-4) Metzger Area South Tigard Central Tigard North Dakota Area Southwest Washington Drive Sattler Street Shad Lane North Dakota Street Horizon Boulevard Cedarcrest Street Pinebrook Street 95 Avenue S rin wood Drive Creekshire Drive 82 Avenue Alderbrook Drive Dakota Street 115 Avenue Fern Street Locust Street 92 Avenue 90 Avenue Tigard Street Ascension Drive 74 Avenue Inez Street 98 Avenue Tigard Drive Windson Court 69 Avenue 93 Avenue Commercial Street 116 Avenue Northview Drive Alfred Street 97 Avenue Tigard Street Ann Street Mistletoe Drive Ventura Court Murdock Street Grant Avenue Katherine Street 135 Avenue Ventura Drive 98 Avenue Johnson Street 125 Avenue Essex Drive 72 Avenue 100 Avenue Brookside Avenue Karen Street Benchview Terrace 80 Avenue 103` Avenue Watkins Avenue 127 Avenue 132 Avenue Pine Street Canterbury Lane Park Street 128 Avenue Greenfield Drive 75 Street Highland Drive 110 Avenue Winter Lake Drive Menlor Lane Spruce Street Summerfield Drive 115 Avenue 130 Avenue Sunrise Lane 78 Avenue 92 Avenue Fonner Street Brittany Drive 150 Avenue 69 Avenue 108 Avenue 116 Avenue Morning Hill Drive Uplands Drive ® East Tigard Riverwood Lane Howard Drive Falcon Rise 141' Avenue Fanno Creek Drive Copper Creek Drive Ganett Street 131" Avenue Woodhue Street 79'° Avenue Millen Drive Frewin Street Tewkesbury Drive Ross Street River Drive Ash Avenue Barrington Terrace nster Drive Ashford Street Tualatin Drive O'Mara Street [Evenue Ed ewood Street ee Drive The proposed changes in functional classification on Durham Road, Murray Boulevard, Gaarde Street, 72"d Avenue, Greenburg Road and Beef Bend Road affect Washington County roadways. These proposed changes have been discussed with County staff and the County is in the process of reviewing these changes. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles B-10 October 30,2001 r 1 1-1~'IU 1jj. J_1 U -LJL1 DKS Associaf eS N ir~l II CnY OF WARD TO SCALE ! MON Transportation 1 Systems Plan _ Legend ® PAW Clow" "W=tVDW ROUWS 5 w SW WPIMIT / J y aw - •a Sw qnyGe J -i in ` f=igure 8-4 ® Proposed I , Neighborhood Routes ® ®606999®99®9®00000000000000000 00 1~ 11 ®®®®®00®® DKS Associates Characteristics of Streets for each Functional Classification The design characteristics of streets in Tigard were developed to meet the function and demand for each facility type. Because the actual design of a roadway can vary from segment to segment due to adjacent land uses and demands, the objective was to define a system that allows standardization of key characteristics to provide consistency, but also to provide criteria for application that provides some flexibility, while meeting standards. Figures 8-5 to 8-10 depict sample street cross-sections and design criteria for arterials, collectors, neighborhood routes and local streets. Figure 8-5 shows the Existing Tigard Standard Cross-Sections, Figure 8-6 and 8-7 shows Washington County's Standard Cross- Sections (these apply to Washington County owned roadways) and Figures 8-8 through 8-10 show the proposed Tigard Standard Cross-Sections. Planning level right-of-way needs can be determined utilizing these figures and Table 8-2 and the lane geometry outlined later in this chapter. Specific right-of-way needs will need to be monitored continuously through the development review process to reflect current ® needs and conditions6 (that is to say that more specific detail may become evident in development review which requires improvements other than these outlined in this 20 year general planning assessment of street needs). The analysis of capacity and circulation needs for Tigard outlines several roadway cross sections. The most common are 2, 3 and 5 lanes wide. Where center left turn lanes are identified (3 or 5 lane sections), the actual design of the street may include sections without center turn lanes (2 or 4 lane sections') or with median treatments, where feasible. The actual treatment will be determined within the design and public process for implementation of each project. The plan outlines requirements which will be used in establishing right-of-way needs for the development review process. The right-of-way ® (ROW) requirements for arterial and collector streets on the Washington County system are 50-74 feet for collector streets, 90 feet for three-lane arterials and 90-122 feet for four-to-seven-lane arterials8. 6 For example, designations by Metro, ODOT and Washington County all play a role in the ROW determination. ' For example, adjacent to environmentally sensitive or physically constrained areas. Washington County Uniform Road Improvement Design Standards, Ordinance No. 524, Adopted July 28, 1998, pages 13-18. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-12 October 30,2001 DKS Associates Table 8-2 Pro osed Street Characteristics Vehicle Lane Widths: Truck Route = 12 feet (minimum widths) Bus Route = 11 feet Arterial = 12 feet Collector= I I feet Neighborhood = 10 feet Local = 99 to 10 feet Turn Lane = 12 feet}0 On-Street Parking: 8 feet" Bicycle Lanes: New Construction = 6 feet (minimum widths) Reconstruction = 5 to 6 feet Curb Extensions for Pedestrians: Consider on any Pedestrian Master Plan Route Sidewalks: Local = 5 feet'2 (minimum width) Neighborhood = 5 feet 12 Collector = 6 to 813 feet Arterial = 6 to 1013 feet Landscape Strips: Residential/Neighborhood = Required Collector/Arterial = Required Medians: 5-Lane = Required 3-Lane = Optional Neighborhood Traffic Management: Local = Should not be necessary Neighborhood = Should Consider Collectors = Under Special Conditions Arterials = Only under S iat Conditions Transit: Arterial/collectors = Appropriate Neighborhood = Only inspecial circumstances Turn Lanes: When Warrantedlu Access Control: See later section for Arterials and Collectors 9 foot lanes would only be used in conjunction with on-street parking. 10 In constrained conditions on collectors, neighborhood and local routes, a minimum width of 10 feet may be considered (except on bus routes) " For 32 foot streets, the City recognizes that there will not be 20 feet of unobstructed pavement. 115 foot with landscape strip, 6 foot against curb. 17 Larger sidewalks than minimums should be considered for areas with significant pedestrian volumes. In commercial areas where pedestrian flows of over 100 pedestrians an hour are present or forecast, specific analysis should be conducted to size sidewalks appropriately for safe movement. " Turn lane warrants should be reviewed using Highway Research Record, No. 211, NCHRP Report No. 279 or other updated/superseding reference. Aft Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-13 October 30,2001 40 ANh uKb Assoplates ® Local Street Residential 2.5'24'-32' S' 2.5' im! (m) R/W 36'-50' Im) •m Local Street Commercial & Industrial 2R•5' S' . 34' (m1 5' 2.5' m m) m) m R/W NY (ml o (Minor Collector Q 2.5' V, 40 5' 2.5' Im1 (m)' R/W 60'(m( lm) Im. /Major Collector 6 Center Turn Lane or Median a; 1.51(61 16 12' 16' m m R/W 60'- 80' m m p Arterial Center Turn Lane or Median a § 8' 14' 17 17 17 14' i g 1.5' m (m) ' RN 60'- 99 -gym) 1 m' (m) - Minimum Required Width Figure 8-5 EXISTING TYPICAL. STREET CROSS SECTIONS DKSAssociates CITY OF TIGA►RD Transportation System Plan Arterial Major and Minor Center Turn Lane or Median Fe'r~'AU4. r:~s<'- 1~ Iml _ 1 12' 12' IN 12 12' 1 5.5 .5 RMr 98' lm) (m) 5 Lanes Arterial Minor Only Center Turn Lane or Median IF lf, e'k "ft5f7Z',• F9.t^y!"~:?'iw:AY.'~ 14.5' 17 14' 17 1 r gym) RM 9Q lmf r~+ 1 'r 3 Lanes Figure 6-6 (m) - Min{mum Required Width WASHINGTON COUNTY ARTERIAL TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTIONS KS Associates ® CI1Y OF TIGARD Transportation System Plan Major Collector + Center Turn Lana or Median 1 6' , 6' 12' 14' 12' 5.5' ( m m R/W 74' m m) IND 3 Lanes Minor Collector or Minimum Transit A ® 1 6' 5'' A 6' 12' 12' 6 6.5' RMW 2 Lanes ® Commercial and Industrial + Center Turn Lane aft, or Median Nnd a x, ~Fnt~ 5 ra t' 12 14' m m i_ R/UI/ 64' iiml 3 Lanes Local Street (Standard) O ~ ?jKJA:: 1. 5' 4' . e~ 32' a~ ' r (n+) (ml R/W 38' F4 Parsing Both Sides Figure 8-7 (m) - Minimum Required Width WASHINGTON COUNTY O - On-street ft*ing TYPICAL. STREET CROSS SECTIONS ®K Associates CITY OF TIGARD 49 Transportation p System Plan 40 Y Q One Side Access 20' 5' - 1.5' S.5' . 36 T R/W 25' r-~ ~ RNJ•50' I Industrial/Commercial Local (No parking) M V Q •YO 5.5% ~i 24' S.5' +5.5' , f- R/W 46' Cul-de-saclResidential Local Street ee (No parking) e o s e 0 ~ p q A 5.5'i 5.6 17 28' 55i 5.5'. i3,5% 551 32' 5.5' 3,5', R/W 59 R/W 50 Residential Local Street/Cul-de-sac On-street Parking One Side On-sheet Parking e e go= If parking on both sides, block length not to exceed 600 feet Notes: 1. Selection of placement of sidewalk and planter strip specific to application. 2. Width of curb is included in sidewalk width when adjacent to street. 3. Samples show the desirable applications given number of lanes; Criteria minimum standards can be applied case by case. Vehicle Lane Wldths: 9 to 10 P. 4. Actual width of street and sidewalk area can be adjusted within (minimum widths) 10 R/W based on modal priorities and adjacent land use. On-Street Parking 8 ft. 5. Volume guides represent estimated Full Buildout Conditions, not just Sidewalks: 5H. 40 existing or project needs. (minimum wid(h) 6. The 36' street shall be used in any area adjacent to commercial or Landscape Strips: Where Appropriate industrial zoning. Sidewalk would be T curb tight in Commercial Traffic Should not be necessa areas and 5.5' for Industrial areas (cross section shows both samples). Neighborhood ry (under 7. Where existing street curb to curb widths vary from those shown, the Management: special conditions & over 1500 vpd) minimum length of new cross section should be (or have the potential to be) 500 feet contiguous. - On-street Parking Figure 8-8 0 0 - Guide for Traffic Volume Per Day (does not require conversion of existing routes) ALLEY, CUL-DE-SACe AND LOCAL STREET 40 where volume exceeds 1500 vpd, this cross section may still be SAMPLE STREET CROSS SECTIONS utilized however land use actions or roadway projects impacting such streets may require additional connectivity to reduce volume and/or REQUIRED ROW VVIDTH neighborhood tralbc management measures to reduce impacts. DKSAssodates CITY OF TIGARD Transportation System Man 55' T 5_5' i28' 5-51 1 5 5 5 10 32' 5.6T3_51 F-- rm 50' { RM 50' No Parking on One Side With Parking on Both Sides ® Pea pa 36' ® 5.5' .6 BT 12' 12' .6 Me. 5.5' X6.5 i r Rf W 60' With Bike Lanes/ No Parking Notes: Criteria 1. Selection of placement of sidewalk and planter specific to application. Vehicle Lane Widths: (minimum widths) 9-1011. 2. Width of curb Is included in sidewalk width when adjacent to street. On-Street Panting 8 ft. 3. Samples show the desirable applications given number of lanes; Curb Extensions for Pedestrians: Consider on Pedestrian Routes minimum standards can be applied case by case. Sidewalks: (minimum width) 5 ft. 4. Actual width of street and sidewalk area can be adjusted within Landscape Strips: Where Appropriate R/W based on modal priorities and adjacent land use. Neighborhood Traffic Management: Appropriate when Warranted 5. These are guidelines for future neighborhood route development and does not require changes/conversion to existing streets. Figure 9-9 NEIGHBORHOOD O - On-street Panting SAMPLE STREET CROSS SECTIONS REQUIRED ROW WIDTH ®KS Associates CITY OF WARD ~ Transportation p System Plan 5 6' ` 6 Bike 12 12' W. 46' V RM 60' 2 Lane 60' R/W a p M. ediaN 12-14'M 6 1213. Tum Lane r~k 12-13' T B&e~rT RM 74' 3* Lane 74R4V ~ ~ 4 R 1 14' Medk7 T_6'Bke 12 J 11M l nna 56' 12 12' 6'BUce_I 6' I 5' 111 RW98' 5 *Lane 98' R/W 1 12 Medlar h t--~-T -W I 12 1 12 12' Turn Lnrua 12 12 12 ate 6'. 6'_ RMI 98' 7* Lane 122'R4V cAterla Vehicle Lane Midths: Truck Route =12 ft. (minimum widths) Bus Route =12 ft. 11 ft. (12 ft. Preferred) Collector 10-11 ft. On Street Parking: None (with few existing exceptions) Bicycle Lanes: New Construction = 61 (minimum wktths) Reconstruction = 5 to 6 ft. Sidewalks: (minimum width) 5-13 ft. Consider Curb Extensions on Pod Routes Landscape Strips: Required Medians: W Lane = Required 3 Lane = Optional Neighborhood Traffic Only Under Special Conditions: Management: Selected Measures Figure 840 * Note that, sidewalk widths above 6 ft. may require additional right-of--way. ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR Mere appropriate, the medlan4sne may not be provided resulting in 2,4 and SAMPLE STREET CROSS SECTIONS 6 tone cross seceons. The removal of the center turn lane must consider both ~y ~~,rya WIDTH safety and pedes fen needs. REQUIRE® ~ kill ®K"s Associates ® Wherever arterial or collectors cross each other, planning for additional right-of-way to accommodate turn lanes should be considered within 500 feet of the intersection. Figure 8-11 summarizes the Tigard streets that are anticipated within the TSP planning horizon to require right-of-way for more than two lanes. Planning level right-of-way needs can be determined utilizing Figure 8-11 and the lane geometry outlined later in this chapter. Specific right-of-way needs will need to be monitored continuously through the development review process to reflect current needs and conditions. This ® will be necessary since more specific detail may become evident in development review which requires improvements other than these outlined in this 20 year general planning assessment of street needs. These cross sections are provided for guiding discussions that will update the City of Tigard Public ® Improvement Design Standards for Public Works Construction. There is an on-going discussion at the regional level regarding street cross sections. Several of the major streets in Tigard are maintained and operated by Washington County or ODOT. Metro has specified Regional Street Design designations in their draft of the RTP". These designations change over the length of the road. The City of Tigard will need to coordinate with regional agencies to assure consistency in cross section planning as the County Transportation Plan and the Metro Regional Transportation Plan move forward. The designations are summarized in Table 8-3. The Metro definitions for their designations are provided in the Appendix. ® Table 8-3 ® Metro Regional Street Design and Motor Vehicle Designations Roadway Regional Street Design Motor Vehicle Classification ORE 217 Freeway Principal Arterial (Freeway) I-5 Freeway Principal Arterial (Freeway) ORE 99W Regional St./Regional Boulevard Major Arterial Scholls Ferry Road Regional St./Re ional Boulevard Major Arterial Greenbur Road Regional St./Regional Boulevard Major Arterial ® Hall Boulevard Regional Boulevard Major Arterial (Scholls Ferry to Greenbur ) Hall Boulevard Community St./Community Blvd Minor Arterial (Greenbur to South City Limits) Durham Road Community Street Minor Arterial 72°d Avenue Urban Road Minor Arterial Upper Boones Ferry Road Urban Road Minor Arterial Beef Bend Road (West of City Rural Road Rural Arterial Limits to Scholls Ferry) Dartmouth Street Community Street Collector of Regional Significance Gaarde/Walnut/Mun a Communit Street Collector of Re ional Significance McDonald Street Community Street Collector of Regional Significance Beef Bend Rd (East of City Limits) Community Street Collector of Regional Significance NOTE: Refer to Metro's RTP Policy Chapter for background on guidelines for streets, 1997. Refer to Regional Street Design Svsiem, Preliminary Draft RTP, Metro, June 17, 1999. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-20 October 30,2001 Associates Of ransp0 SYsteps Plan 1 x Legend Tom fnaWrIkImM of way ! ~~pesy,onCeP~ t 7 _ 7 7 ,~5L A~ r1 ~ 20 t9~ AN, SP" n►SWdy ~ Cordda y4f c ASSU" Prase" ROW tot 5n'sinfuh1m ATU ~ ae~ was-eo w,+ couec tCa a to wR9 sw 5oa to 2!3 and 415: WVW may be Used nrm;~ e sv~ e te %ftwm an is COW-06 tD t Figure BOA4 Vvhere rrutu~ tree ow is Planned for tAore ~ -han - vv'0 ® A 0 DKS Associates Connectivity/Local Street Plan Much of the local street network in Tigard is already existing and, in many cases, fairly well connected. In other words, multiple access opportunities exist for entering or exiting neighborhoods. However, there are a number of locations in Tigard where, due to the lack of connection points, the majority of neighborhood traffic is funneled onto one single street. This type of street network results in out-of- direction travel for motorists and an imbalance of traffic volumes that impacts residential frontage. The outcome can result in the need for wider roads, traffic signals and turn lanes (all of which negatively ® impact traffic flow and degrade safety). By providing connectivity between neighborhoods, out-of- ® direction travel and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) can be reduced, accessibility between various modes can be enhanced and traffic levels can be balanced out between various streets. Several goals and policies established by this TSP are intended to accomplish these objectives. In Tigard, some of these local connections can contribute with other street improvements to mitigate capacity deficiencies by better dispersing traffic. Several roadway connections will be needed within neighborhood areas to reduce out of direction travel for vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists. This is most important in the sub-areas to the west where a significant amount of new development is possible (i.e. Bull Mountain area). In many areas of Tigard, most of the land is built out. Figures 8-12 through 8-17 show the proposed Local Street Connectivity Plans for Tigard. In most cases, the connector alignments are not specific and are aimed at reducing potential neighborhood traffic impacts by better balancing traffic flows on neighborhood routes. The arrows shown in the figures represent potential connections and the general direction for the placement of the connection. In each case, the specific alignments and design will be better determined upon development review. The criteria used for providing connections ® is as follows16: • Every 330 feet, a grid for pedestrians and bicycles • Every 530 feet, a grid for automobiles To protect existing neighborhoods from potential traffic impacts of extending stub end streets, connector roadways should incorporate neighborhood traffic management into their design and construction. Neighborhood traffic management is described later in this chapter. All stub streets should have signs indicating the potential for future connectivity. The arrows shown on the local connectivity figures indicate priority connections only. Topography, ® railroads and environmental conditions limit the level of connectivity in Tigard. Other stub end streets in the City's road network may become cul-de-sacs, extended cul-de-sacs or provide local connections. Pedestrian connections from the end of any stub end street that results in a cul-de-sac should be considered mandatory as future development occurs. The goal would continue to be improved city connectivity for all modes of transportation. 16 The Regional Transportation Plan calls for pedestrian/bicycle connectivity every 330 feet and motor vehicle connectivity every 530 feet for vacant areas of residential and mixed use zoning greater than five acres. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99181 Motor Vehicles 8-22 October 30,2001 ®Associaias CITY OF TIGA►RD NOT TSyst m Plan n TO SCALE 99W T 217 re. 5 a 1C 0 ca Lwend Figure 8-12 *w - Stub End Street LOCAL. STREET CONNECTIVITY ~..pa - Pedestrian Connection East 'Tigard !ie - School Site ladSt71i71ui t i v t XL . DKSAsxcWes t~nr®FIGARD Transportation ® I/U system Plat: ~50~ Ry RD Tam v d d Q ~ coo 217 -Ulm 99W Figure 8-13 LOCAL STREET CONNECTMTY . - Stub End Street etzger .4. v . -Pedestrian Connection .School Site DKS&socbtcs ® CITY OF TICARD M T 217 Transportation SQ D~ ST ° VdA~-NUj ~ ® J ~ m 991,N J J 2 Q- CW-LLV ckb LID) LMend Figure 8-14 f - Stub End Street LOCAL STREET CONNECTWITY .4••• - Pedeftn Connection Centel Tigard ~ -s~,oo~ site V 0 6 ~90 Mp 0 GIiY0F1itGARG on ta IransP° plan system DKSASWciates system plan 211 Q ~ r SGN ~~S 6p i0 0P all 0~ E 6l"! Figure 845 LOCAL ST~E~ t:t~NNE ®Ti9~ ~ North -Stub End Street pedestrian Connelldo" . Schoot Sita Q Cny OF nGARD -,sansP° plan = system DAssociateS s~ ~O WALNUT VaE -To ROME ® GpARDE ST c 99W O W P, A A A A EN figure 816 CAL SSREET CtJ~1NEC~ d Lo Southwest 9 .,O,,- SwD End Street j - Direction of Acxess Pedestrian Connection 000 000 lions -School Sita r~--~ ®ISAssoc ates lb CWA~ARD NOT Transportation TO SCALE System Plan GAARDE ST McDONALD ST WF-TTIU ITT C+H7~ EEEE9 J 0 Legend Figure 817 - Stub End Street LOCAL STREET CONNECTMTY ■ - Pedestrian Connection South Tigard SdmI Site ® 5 Associates CIRCULATION AND CAPACITY NEEDS The motor vehicle capacity and circulation needs in Tigard were determined for existing and future conditions. The process used for analysis is outlined below, followed by the findings and recommendations of the analysis. The extent and nature of the street improvements for Tigard are significant. This section outlines the type of street improvements that would be necessary as part of a long range master plan. Phasing of implementation will be necessary since all the improvements cannot be done at once. This will require prioritization of projects and periodic updating to reflect current needs. It should be understood that the improvements outlined in the following section are a guide to managing growth in Tigard, defining the types of right-of-way and street needs that will be required as development occurs. Strategies A series of strategies were developed to address the future motor vehicle needs of Tigard. Each of these strategies were discussed by the TSP Task Force and prioritized. The initial prioritization was reviewed and refined following discussion about the implications of the high priority strategies. The actual strategy selected is a prioritization of the highest priority strategies. The following listing reflects the initial prioritization of strategies. • Promote Regional Circulation (I-5, ORE 217, ORE 99W) • Improve Local Street Circulation (connectivity) • Provide Additional Street System Capacity to LOS D" (turn lanes, signals, widening, new roads) • Improve Operation of Existing System (signal coordination, intelligent transportation systems, neighborhood traffic management) • Transportation Demand Management (telecommuting, alternative modes, pricing) • Change Land Use to Promote Alternative Modes Use • Improve Access Control to increase capacity • Change Level of Service Definitions Model Forecasts Existing conditions were identified in Chapter 3. Future capacity needs were developed using a detailed travel demand forecast tool, based on the Metro regional travel demand model. This detailed model more accurately reflects access and land use in Tigard than the regional travel demand model. Evening peak hour traffic volumes were forecast for the future (modified year 2015 buildout) scenario for the Tigard area. This 2015 forecast included the highest level of transit service given regional funding constraints. It also assumes that Transportation Demand Management (TDM) will occur. The initial 2015 test was performed on a street network that included existing roads, plus those improvements which are currently funded and would likely be implemented before the 2015 scenario is reached. The most significant of these improvements in Tigard include the following: " Level of service D as defined by the Highway Capacity Manaul. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-29 October 30,2001 KS Associates ® 0 ORE 217 widened one additional lane each direction and the ORE 217/I-5 interchange improvements • Gaarde Street linking from ORE 99W to Murray Boulevard • Walnut Street improved to three lanes • Dartmouth Street as five lanes from ORE 99W to I-5 • Hall Boulevard as a continuous three lane roadway with improvements at ORE 99W The modified 2015 forecast for Tigard is unique in that it reflect greater land use in Tigard than the Metro 2015 forecast (reflective of a build out-like scenario). 2015 was used as a base rather than the 2020 because of the greater Tigard trip generation and detailed network included in the 2015 forecast. A separate 2620 forecast was done for a sensitivity analysis of recommended motor vehicle ® improvements to validate their need. ® Future Needs Future transportation conditions were evaluated in a similar manner to existing conditions. Improvements to intersections, roadways between intersections and brand new or extended facilities were considered and a package of recommended improvements was determined. Where level of service conditions approached level of service E or volume-to-capacity ratio of 0.90 or above, improvements were initially considered. The final conditions for mitigation were set at conditions below V/C of 1.0 and level of service E. Table 84 summarizes the intersection levels of service under year 2015 base ® future conditions and the recommended mitigated scenario. In summary, nearly half of the study intersections fail in the future, even with funded roadway ® improvements. The extent of failure is so severe that it is unlikely that the land use scenario assumed for the modified 2015 forecast would be achieved with the extent of congestion. Because of this many alternatives were evaluated in developing the recommended set of mitigation measures for the TSP. The ® following sections explore the options and the findings for each alternative. Table 8-4 2015 Intersection Level of Service PM Peak Hour Intersection 2015 Base 2015 Mitigated Signalized Intersections (future) Del LOS VIC Davies/Scholls Ferry Road >60.0 F >1.0 33.2 C 0.89 Barrows (E)/Scholls Ferry Road 11.1 B 0.73 15.3 B 0.93 North Dakota/125 /Scholls Ferry Road >60.0 F >1.0 38.7 D 0.95 Nimbus/Scholls Ferry Road >60.0 F >1.0 44.7 D 0.94 121"/Walnut >60.0 F >1.0 33.0 C 0.87 Greenbur Oleson/Hall >60.0 F >1.0 46.8 D 0.91 Greenbur ashin on Square Road >60.0 F >1.0 51.4 D 0.92 Greenbur ust 43.6 D 1.0 29.9 C 0.91 Hall/Locust 32.7 C 0.86 25.5 C 0.79 Greenbur ORE 217 WB Rams 27.8 C 0.74 29.3 C 0.65 Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 ® Motor Vehicles 8-30 October 30,2001 DK Associates Intersection 2015 Base 2015 Mitigated Signalized Intersections (future) Delay LOS VIC Greenbur ORE 217 EB Rams 29.1 C 0.72 23.4 C 0.58 Greenbur iedeman 53.1 D >1.0 39.6 D 0.96 Main/Greenbur ORE 99W 60.4 E 0.96 51.3 D 0.88 Hall/Oak 56.2 E >1.0 33.4 C 0.88 I-ialVORE 99W >60.0 F >1.0 54.7 D 0.95 ORE 217 NB Ramps/ORE 99W 28.8 C 0.95 18.0 B 0.79 ORE 217 SB Ram s/ORE 99W 40.7 D 0.99 31.6 C 0.86 Main/Johnson/ORE 99W 23.1 C 0.80 16.4 B 0.75 Dartmouth/ORE 99W >60.0 F >1.0 52.1 D 0.96 72 /ORE 99W 41.7 D 0.88 53.8 D 0.92 40 68 /ORE 99W >60.0 F >1.0 48.3 D 0.94 72 /Dartmouth >60.0 F >1.0 31.3 C 0.70 68 /Dartmouth >60.0 F >1.0 21.4 C 0.72 72'/Hampton 34.0 C 0.90 52.8 D 0.84 68 /Atlanta/Haines 29.9 D 0.92 16.5 B 0.61 Hall/Hunziker >60.0 F >1.0 40.7 D 0.88 Hall/Burnham 19.6 B 0.75 21.0 C 0.65 ORE 217 SB Ram s/72 Narns 65.4 E 1.0 31.0 C 0.83 72 Bonita >60.0 F >1.0 49.9 D 0.97 40 Hall/McDonald 47.0 D 0.99 36.1 D 0.93 Hall/Bonita 33.5 C 0.86 45.0 D 0.82 72 /Carman 50.1 D 0.97 43.7 D 0.95 1-5 SB Ram s/Carman >60.0 F >1.0 58.9 E 1.0 U"7/-Upper Boones Ferry 51.4 D 1.0 49.8 D 0.97 72 /Durham 20.6 C 0.75 9.0 A 0.50 I-5 NB Ram s/Cannnan >60.0 F >1.0 47.1 D 0.91 Upper Boones Fe /Durham 62.3 E >1.0 31.0 C 0.85 Upper Boones Ferry/Bridgeport >60.0 E 1.0 31.9 C 0.79 Hall/Sattler/Ross >60.0 F >1.0 27.4 C 0.85 Hall/Durham >60.0 F >1.0 45.6 D 0.86 ORE 99W/Walnut 40.6 D 0.93 52.0 D 0.87 ORE 99W/Garrett 3.4 A 0.51 3.4 A 0.51 ORE 99W/Park 22.8 C 0.84 18.6 B 0.76 ORE 99W/Tigard Marketplace 18.5 B 0.57 18.5 B 0.57 ORE 99W/McDonald/Gaarde >60.0 F >1.0 67.1 E 1.0 ORE 99W/Canterbury 16.9 B 0.83 15.4 B 0.76 ORE 99W/Bull Mountain 30.1 C 0.95 27.0 C 0.89 ORE 99W/Beef Bend 67.2 E >1.0 54.8 D 0.88 ORE 99W/Durham >60.0 E >1.0 40.2 D 0.82 Tiedeman/Walnut >60.0 F >1.0 24.0 C 0.90 Mums /Old Scholls Ferry 79.4 E >1.0 51.1 D 0.92 40 Barrows (W /Scholls Ferry 8.7 B 0.73 9.1 B 0.70 Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-31 October 30,2001 Associa t-&- 7 Intersection 2015 Base 2015 Mitigated Signalized Intersections (fitture) Delay LOS VIC Beef Bend/Scholls Ferry >60.0 F >1.0 40.2 D 0.96 Unsi nalized Intersections Greenbur Oak A/C A/C Burnham/Main A/C A/E 97 Ave/McDonald A/E AID 135 /Walnut ® Alternatives To address these deficiencies, a series of alternatives and strategies were considered by the TSP Task ® Force. The range of strategies includes: ® • Do nothing: This results in severe impacts to motor vehicle and transit circulation in ® Tigard with delays which would not be tolerable. • Assume that alternative modes can serve excess demand. The TSP analysis assumed that alternative modes would be developed to their optimal levels. The order of magnitude of trips to be served in 2015 goes well beyond the capacity of the alternative mode systems by themselves, even at their optimal levels. Forecasted vehicle trips in the PM peak hour range from 40,000 to 50,000 in the future - transit would serve only about 3,000 to 5,000 person trips in Tigard. e Build all the road capacity necessary to achieve level of service D conditions at intersections. This strategy would have significant impact on right-way-way for roads. Larger roads would be the result; that is contrary to the more livable, pedestrian friendly outcome expressed by the TSP Task Force. ® • Pragmatically add capacity to all modes, developing a balanced system. Outline the long term configuration of streets to allow development to best accommodate future needs. The TSP ® Task Force chose to pursue this strategy. It involves significant system improvements, but is the only alternative that balances performance between modes, consistent with regional policy. With the chosen strategy, there were numerous alternatives explored in developing the balanced system. Street improvements are required throughout Tigard in the next twenty years. Working with the top three priorities of the TSP Task Force, alternatives were considered in each of the following: 1. Regional Circulation Enhancements 2. Connectivity/Circulation Improvements within Tigard 3. Traffic Operational Improvements Regional Circulation Enhancements Through the travel forecasting efforts, tests were conducted of a variety of motor vehicle improvements. Within Tigard, the most significant changes in future traffic volume resulted from Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-32 October 30,2001 jj~ INAMM "s Associates improvements to regional highways. Because Tigard is located at the junction of two major urban freeways and is bifurcated by ORE 99W, its arterial street system (which is very limited - not a traditional grid) is impacted by the performance of these regional facilities. Today, incidents on I-5 or ORE 217 send traffic cascading through Tigard, snarling local circulation that has few options. Future solutions could focus on regional highways alone - however, this TSP takes an integrated approach to regional, city circulation and traffic operational improvements. Therefore, while the following regional improvements are substantial - they are part of an overall package of improvements needed to balance future circulation needs. The following four sections outline problems identified in the future forecasts and possible solutions for ORE 217, traffic between ORE 99W and 1-5, I-5 and ORE 99W. 1. ORE 217 is Overcapacity. Many prior adopted plans have identified the need for additional capacity on ORE 217 (RTP, Western Bypass Study, Washington County Transportation Plan, Beaverton TSP). Recent studies by ODOT" indicate additional corridor capacity can accommodate 20 year demand and that various alternatives are possible (ranging from general purpose lanes to high occupancy vehicle lanes to high occupancy toll lanes to a transitway to off-system improvements). Further analysis in the ORE 217 Corridor Study will lead to a preferred alternative for this corridor. Tigard is substantially impacted by the lack of additional capacity on ORE 217 (routes such as Scholls Ferry Road, Hall Boulevard, ORE 99W, Greenburg Road and Walnut Street all will operate over capacity without ORE 217 improvements). An improvement to ORE 217 is critical to maintaining adequate circulation capacity in Tigard. However, the improvements to ORE 217 are of regional significance and the City should work together with other agencies to define the most appropriate corridor enhancement. For this TSP, a space holder project of widening ORE 217 by one lane each way is identified (similar to other approved plans noted above) until the Corridor Study gains consensus on the preferred ORE 217 alternative. 2. Tigard continues to serve growing cut-through traffic on ORE 99W. Future forecasts for ORE 99W show it is well over capacity in future demand. A significant share of traffic is regional in nature and cuts through Tigard. This demand (Sherwood/Yamhill County/Oregon Coast) has limited other alternative routes. Prior studies in the Washington County Transportation Plan called for a Western Bypass connecting 1-5 with ORE 99W and further to the north toward Hillsboro. This connection has been studied in the Western Bypass Corridor Study conducted by ODOT in the early 1990's. There are few alternatives to serving this regional traffic. Therefore tests were conducted of two regional options to determine their impact on Tigard streets. The first is a connection between 1-5 and ORE 99W. ODOT continues to evaluate this connection. While helpful in reducing cut through traffic on ORE 99W in Tigard (a few hundred vehicles in the peak hour), its benefit to Tigard traffic operation is minimal. ORE 99W still fails with or without the I-5/ORE 99W connector. The greatest benefits of the I-5/ORE 99W connector are east-west streets in Tualatin. Even Durham Road benefits from the I-5/ORE 99W connector. While by itself the benefits are not large in Tigard, the I-5/ORE 99W contributes to mitigating ORE 99W and should be supported by Tigard as a helpful regional improvement. The northern portion of the Western Bypass was also investigated as to its benefits to Tigard circulation. In testing this connection with the regional model, there was little if any benefit of 1" ORE 217 Corridor Study Initial Improvement Concepts Draft, ODOT, February 2000. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-33 October 30,2001 DKS Associates northerly connections north of Scholls Ferry Road. While traffic is attracted to the new route, it ® creates significant impact on streets such as Scholls Ferry Road (creates balanced peak flows rather than directional flows resulting in capacity failures). Additionally, routes such as ORE 99W which are in the most need of benefits from such a facility sees less than 100 vehicles per hour benefit. ORE 99W gains as much mitigation benefit from an enhanced Beef Bend/Elsner Road arterial as it does from any "Western Bypass". Therefore, this analysis finds little or no operational benefit to Tigard from a Western Bypass. 3.1-5 fails south of ORE 217 impacting Tigard streets at peak times. The modified 2015 travel forecasts show congestion on I-5 south from ORE 217 to 1-205 and Wilsonville. The lack of capacity on I-5 results in diversion onto Tigard surface streets (and as with ORE 217, the limited circulation network breaks down). Without 1-5 improvements, it is unlikely that the southeastern portion of Tigard will be without extensive congestion in peak periods. Unlike improvements to ORE 217 (which have been adopted in various plans) there is little regional recognition of the 1-5 south corridor deficiencies and need for improvements. No amount of ramp metering or freeway ® management can avoid this deficiency. Based upon the modified 2015 forecasts, the addition of one lane each direction (including ramp braids between ORE 217 and Carman Drive, retaining auxiliary ® lanes from Carman Drive to Lake Oswego/Durham exit) is necessary to reduce impact of several ® hundred peak hour vehicles on Tigard surface streets. As with ORE 217, this improvement is of ® regional significance and Tigard should work with affected agencies in determining the most appropriate corridor improvements. There is a strong relationship between the ORE 217 needs and I- 5 needs and any corridor improvement to one corridor should consider the other. For this TSP, a ® space holder of additional person carrying capacity on I-5 south of ORE 217 to I-205 is identified until appropriate corridor studies can determine the preferred solution for both I-5 and ORE 217. 4. ORE 99W fails in the future without improvement. Of all the regional transportation issues in Tigard, ORE 99W is probably the closest to a "rubik's cube". Tigard depends heavily on ORE ® 99W as its primary arterial. There are no parallel routes to ORE 99W and its diagonal alignment and the physical features of Tigard make using ORE 99W essential for also any trip in Tigard. ORE 99W's statewide status and linkage to Yamhill County and the Oregon Coast have similar issues - the only route servicing northeast-southwest travel. The future demand for this corridor is well beyond its five lane capacity without system-wide improvements. Ten various alternatives to improving ORE 99W were investigated, ranging from the no improvement to radical capacity improvements. Table 8- 5 summarizes the wide range of alternatives. Unfortunately, no one improvement results in desirable (better than level of service F) operation. The most significant finding was that no matter whether ORE 99W was widened southwest of Greenburg Road, the end result was failure. Added capacity on ORE 99W (tested by modeling seven lanes) resulted in significantly higher turning movements on/off ORE 99W and large through movements on ORE 99W. The end result was that not only would you have to widen to seven lanes but at nearly every intersection additional turning lanes were needed (double lefts, right turn) creating nearly a 10 lane cross section at intersection. And even after that the end result was level of service F conditions. Therefore the recommended approach combines several elements to produce a minimally acceptable operating condition. Tile TSP recommends: 1) widening ORE 99W to seven lanes between I-5 and Greenburg Road, 2) retaining the fcve lane cross section southwest of Greenburg Road, 3) extensive intersection improvements - turning lanes, 4) access management; 5) improvements to ORE 217 and 1-5 noted above; 6) off-system Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P89161 Motor Vehicles 8-34 October 30,2001 DKS Associates improvements such as freeway improvements and arterials such as Walnut extension, and 7) consideration of a western/Yamhill County commuter rail corridor, Table S-5 ORE 99W Alternatives Evaluation IN 11 Retain ORE 99W as 5 lanes No improvement =existing of Service F operation in 20 extensive congestion beyond levels Widen to 7 lanes I-5 to Widening of ORE 99W in key Resoves many of the Tigard Triangle Greenburg segment between I-5 and ORE 217 operational problems, requires off- Retain 5 lanes west of Greenburg system improvements and access management to work at Level of Service E, significant business impact Widen ORE 99W to seven lanes Complete corridor widening Attracts significant traffic from arterials Requires extensive intersection that can be made to work in future - improvement (multi-turn lane) added ORE 99W traffic is nearly unmitigatable at intersections due to heavy through traffic and conflicts with turning vehicles - results in LOS F conditions after widening, substantial business impact 0 Retain 5 lane ORE 99W, use Widening of ORE 217,1-5 and a new Helps ORE 99W significantly (several other regional routes to mitigate ORE 99W to I-5 Connector hundred vph) but segment between I-5 and Greenburg (Tigard Triangle area) remains at LOS F Retain 5 lane ORE 99W, widen Other Tigard arterials widened to five Does not resolve Tigard Triangle area, Hall/McDonald/Bonita/Durham lanes to improve other arterials major residential impacts of multiple arterial widening, other arterials can get b with three lanes Build a viaduct above ORE 99W provide ramps only at the ends and at Pulls substantial (30 to 60%) portion of from I-5 to southwest of Durham ORE 217 traffic off ORE 99W, a few local intersections still operate poorly, very expensive -$300.000,000) Implement Access Management Closes driveways, limits access points Improves capacity 25-35%, substantial to 1,000 feet business impact, difficult to implement -could take 50 years to fully implement - minor capacity gain with phased or limited implementation - level of service is still a problem N Build a bypass around ORE 99W New roadway near Beef Bend/Eisner Does not substantially reduce traffic on in Tigard linking to Scholls Ferry Road and ORE 99W, LOS F remains heading further north Fronting Roadways along ORE Build entirely new fronting roadway Substantial land use impact, traffic 99W either adjacent to ORE 99W or behind benefit is marginal on the whole but fronting land uses good benefits in selected locations, LOS still F. could consider better connectivity between I-5 and ORE 217 Commuter Rail to the west Would require large park and ride lots, May be useful in twenty years to reduce servvcn Sherwood Newberg, could consider bus alternative ORE 99W potential demand by 400 to Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-35 October 30,2001 E K" Associates Yarnhill County, Spirit Mountain however, congestion on ORE 99W 800 vehicles per hour - by itself not and the coast would result in slower operation enough to mitigate problems on ORE 99W but helps reduce through traffic Connectivity/Circulation Improvements in Tigard Several alternative connections were explored throughout Tigard to address future deficiencies. While improvements were considered in many locations, there were four primary areas where future problems are significant: a Washington Square Area • Tigard Triangle Area • Western Tigard capacacity • East-West Circulation Capacity 1. Durham Road area ® 2. North of Durham ® Washington Square Area. The Washington Square Regional Center Plan has recently been ® completed and will be adopted by City Council. It outlines many of the transportation alternatives for ® this area. There are three significant improvements that have been identified for the regional center area: ® o Overcrossings of ORE 217. To relieve the over-capacity ORE 217 interchanges near Washington Square, two new overcrossings are identified for the next 20 years. The first is between Greenburg and Scholls Ferry Road, linking ® Washington Square Road over the top of ORE 217 connecting Locust with Nimbus Avenue. This overcrossing is highly effective in reducing traffic at ORE 217/Scholls Ferry Road (about 10,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day). The linkage to Nimbus is critical in mitigating problems at the Scholls Ferry interchange. ® ODOT has evaluated this overcrossing for its potential to serve drop-in ramps to any high occupancy toll lane scenario on ORE 217. The second overcrossing is an extension of the Washington Square Road near Scholls Ferry, over ORE 217 to access Cascade Avenue (potentially Nimbus Avenue also). This linkage may i become necessary with the widening of ORE 217 and the close proximity of the { Scholls Ferry/Cascade intersection to ORE 217. Widening of ORE 217 may require the closure of the Scholls Ferry/Cascade intersection and this new overcrossing would be a replacement to that lost access. The southern overcrossing should be viewed as the higher priority of the two overcrossings since it carries more traffic (the southerly crossing has 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles per day). e Scholls Ferry Road widened to seven lanes. Future traffic in the regional center area results in level of service F conditions without additional lanes on ® Scholls Ferry Road. Even with new overcrossings, Scholls Ferry fails in 20 Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFTP99161 Motor Vehicles 8-36 October 30,2001 Aft DK Associates years. Because widening Scholls Ferry Road is a complex right-of-way task, the overcrossings of ORE 217 should be implemented first before full widening of Scholls Ferry Road. The timing of ORE 217 improvements will also affect the timing of the seven lane improvement. Based upon capacity analysis for the future years, the seven lane widening should extend to Barrows Road/Davies Road. Right of way for seven lanes should be preserved in this corridor to Murray Boulevard to address potential future Town Center and other future growth potential needs possibly within or outside the 20 year planning horizon. An alternative to be considered in this projects development would be a viaduct from ORE 217 west over the railroad tracks forming an expressway for approximately a half mile from Hall to west of Nimbus. • Greenburg Road widening. The eastern face of Washington Square will require reevaluation of access to the center. Widening of Greenburg Road to two lanes each way north of Locust past the cemetery will require extensive right-of-way acquisition. The four lanes are needed to avoid level of service F conditions on Greenburg at Locust and Hall. The segment adjacent to the cemetery could be four lanes with no access and no left turn lanes to minimize right of way taking. • Other roadway connections. Three other roadway connections were considered in the Washington Square area. Two were recommended in the Regional Center Plan. While these roadway connections have some benefit to capacity in the area, but these linkages are significant in improving circulation in the Washington Square area. The first connection is the extension of Nimbus Avenue south to Greenburg Road. This linkage attracts 9,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day (in the future with ramp metering). It is very helpful in reducing short trips on ORE 217 and minimizing impacts to streets such as 121" Avenue. Wetland and railroad constraints require further investigation as to the feasibility of this linkage. The second was a collector roadway linking Locust Street to Oak Street east of 40 Greenburg Road. This linkage serves between 5,000 and 10,000 vehicles per day, reducing the burden of local trips on Greenburg Road. Both of these connections were recommended in the Washington Square Regional Center Plan. The third connection studied was a link from Pfaffle Street with Oak Street and Lincoln Street, paralleling ORE 217. This linkage was rejected in the Washington Square Regional Center Plan study. While helpful in relieving Hall Boulevard, the impacts were found to be greater than the benefits in that study. The outcome of not selecting this connector is that Hall Boulevard must have right-of-way set aside for a five lane roadway. Tigard Triangle Area. This subarea is also subject of a recently adopted plan. The basic package of street improvements needed to mitigate level of service F conditions in this area include: • ORE 99W seven lanes • Dartmouth Street five lanes • 72°d Avenue five lanes • Atlanta Street extended from Haines Street to 72nd Avenue • Backage roads to ORE 99W (providing access to business but not directly on ORE 99W) Tigard Transportation System Plan "DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-37 October 30,2001 KS Associates 0 Reconstructed ORE 217/72nd Avenue interchange utilizing 68th Parkway for northbound ORE 217 access (closing the existing substandard northbound 72nd ramps). 40 A Hunziker to Hamption overcrossing of ORE 217 Other options considered in this sub area included a Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing of ORE 217, an extension of Atlanta Street to Dartmouth Street and five lanes on ORE 99W. The following summarizes the findings of these options: Dartmouth to Attracts less than 5,000 vehicles per day by itself; extend Walnut to link up with the Hunziker overcrossing of ORE 217 and the volume increase to 8,000 per day. Implement ORE 217 complete ramp metering in the Tigard Triangle area (on ORE 217 and I-5) and the Overcrossing volume increases to 13,000 vehicles per day. Most of the traffic benefits of the overcrossing are produced with the Hunziker to Hampton overcrossing and the Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing has limited additional benefit. Unfortunately, f ORE 99W still requires mitigation with or without overcrossing; access to ORE 217 would not be allowed by ODOT due to substandard spacing resulting in unsafe operation at large expense. One option where this overcrossing may be desirable in ® the future would be where ramp metering is fully operational and improvements to ORE 217 include a High Occupancy Toll (HOT) or High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane alternative where direct connections to ORE 99W are desired. The Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing could provide access to the Tigard Triangle and ORE 99W area via drop in ramps. Therefore, a potential alignment should be preserved for future consideration (where the alignment would go through parking lots). However, the overcrossin is not art of the street improvement plan in the TSP. Atlanta While the Atlanta extension to 72 is 10,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day the segment Extension to to the south connecting to Dartmouth is well below that level. Recent development Dartmouth has blocked an optimal alignment. Backage roads will be more effective in this setting. The TSP includes the Atlanta extension to 72nd and Backage roads with redevelopment. Five lane Level of service F conditions result in Tigard Triangle without 7 lanes. This option ORE 99W would limit the potential of the Tigard Triangle to serve the projected land use in the future. There were no subarea alternatives that precluded the need for 7 lanes between 1-5 and 217. Western Tigard Capacity. Future growth in western Tigard results in the need for improved north- south and east-west capacity. Today most of the western Tigard land is vacant or under utilized. While Beef Bend Road serves this area adequately today, future land use growth will generate demand for over 10,000 vehicles per day. For Beef Bend to operate satisfactory in the future with two to three lanes, access must be limited to maximize the operating capacity of the only north/south and east/west linkage in the western end of Tigard. With 1,000 foot spacing the capacity of Beef Bend Road can be preserved at 1,200 to 1,500 vehicles per hour per lane. With current access spacing the capacity of Beef Bend Road would drop to 700 to 900 vehicles per hour per lane. Because of its rural stature today and under developed frontage, there is potential to avoid similar mistakes made on other arterial routes (such as ORE 99W or Greenburg Road) where frequent driveways rob the potential capacity of the roadway. Access from local streets not Beef Bend, consolidation of driveways and the use of medians should all be implemented on Beef Bend. Without this treatment, Bull Mountain Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-38 October 30,2001 DKS Associates Road will carry the additional load and the lost capacity from frequent driveways will virtually require another new roadway to service the same traffic. Similar consideration should be given to 15Cx' Avenue. Spacing of access points every 600 feet should be considered on 1501'. East-west Circulation Capacity. Future demand for east-west travel on Tigard's east side will result in level of service F conditions. Two options were evaluated to address this future deficiency. First widening Bonita and McDonald to five lanes was considered. Because Bonita does not connect to the I-5 freeway ramps (Carman does), there is limited benefit achieve by five laning the McDonald- Bonita corridor. Both Carman and Durham remain at LOS F. A second option was considered by widening Carman Drive at I-5 to five lanes and connecting it directly to Durham Road. This option eliminates the level of service F conditions and provided safer operation for the majority of vehicular traffic. The heavy traffic on Durham Road is prevalent from Carman Drive to Hall Boulevard. Traffic on Durham drops sharply west of Hall and can be handled by a three lane cross section. Right-of-way in the Durham corridor should be preserved for a five lane roadway, even though this TSP calls for three lanes west of Hall Boulevard. The impacts of the Carman to Durham option are less than the Bonita/McDonald option for the following reasons: 1) level of service is adequate with Carman/Durham and not with Bonita/McDonald resulting in unsafe operating conditions; 2) Carman/Durham accesses I-5; 3) even with three lanes Durham is carrying high traffic volume east of Hall (15,000 to 20,000 vehicle per day). The impacts of street improvements to Carman/Durham can be minimized through design (medians, landscaping). Other alternatives to serve future east-west demand are precluded due to the railroad , wetlands, river and being too far north or south to serve the projected demand. Traffic Operational Improvements A series of intersection improvements were identified which primarily add turning movement capacity. These roadway improvements typically consist of left and right turn lanes and/or traffic signals. Nine of the study intersections require significant improvements. Most of these intersection improvements are complementary to the regional improvements and connectivity enhancement noted above. 0 Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-39 October 30,2001 a 00 0 Igo 0 00 TO% 1 OF TIG~D RD Transp ~ocucT Ortation YseMs Plan 210 8tid 0 ~yS Q e 217 Sck ` c C", ~t Ov c sr °°~.~eetlmpt ®''~ieauu rr5 c+~rorrimap t • Nµ O Sheet Path 94W N r ~ RD '~47 ! Q ~fllfR ST S D ~ 5 v r ° RTP AND Figure &18 C1P PLANNED iMPRDVEIWEtfij ®~CS Associates Table 8-6 Proposed 20 Year Metro and Planned CIP Projects Table 8-6 Project Project Name (Facility) Project Location Project Description Estimated No. Project Cost Regional Transportation Plan, August 2000 1 Beaverton-Wilsonville Wilsonville to Beaverton Constructs peak-hour service $75,000,000 Commuter Rail only with 30-minute frequency 2 Highway 217 Ramp Greenburg Road and Widen Greenburg off-ramps; $ 12,000,000 Improvements - Highway 217 install ramp meter to Highway lGreenbura 217 3 Highway 217 Washington Square Area Cascade Plaza to $25,000,000 Overcrossings & Washington Square OC $15,000,000 Connections Locust to Nimbus OC Nimbus to Greenburg $15,000,000 connector 4 Hall Boulevard Scholls to Locust Widen to 5 lanes with $ 4,700,000 Im rovements boulevard design 5 Greenburg Road WashingtonSquare Road to Widen to 5 lanes with $ 2,500,000 Improvements Shady Lane boulevard design; NB Highway 217 off-ramp improvement 6 Greenburg Road Hall Boulevard to Widen to five lanes with $ 2,500,000 .Improvements, North Washington Square Road bikeways and sidewalks 7 Greenburg Road Shady Lane to N. Dakota Widen to five lanes with $ 2,000,000 - 40 Im rovements, South bikeways and sidewalks 8 Taylors Ferry Road Washington Drive to Oleson Three lane extension with $ 1,900,000 Extension Road bikeway and sidewalks 9 Oak Street Hall Boulevard to 80th Signal improvement, bikeway $ 800,000 Improvements Avenue and sidewalks 10 Powerline Trail Corridor Farmington Road to Lower Plan, design and construct n/a Tualatin Greenwa multi-use path 11 Scholls Ferry Road Highway 217 to 125th Widen to seven lanes with $ 15,760,000 Improvements Avenue access management 12 Hall Boulevard Locust to Durham Road Improve Hall Boulevard to 5 $ 4,700,000 Improvements lanes 13 Greenburg Road Tiedeman Road to 99W Widen to 5 lanes $ 4,800,000 Improvements 14 Highway 217 Hunziker Street to 72nd at Construct new two-lane $ 4,000,000 Overcrossin - Tigard Hampton crossing of Highway 217 15 Walnut Street at 121st Avenue Install traffic signal at 121st $ 1,750,000 Improvements, Phase 1 Avenue 16 Walnut Street Gaarde Street to 121st Widen to three lanes with $ 5,720,000 Im rovements, Phase 3 Avenue bikeways and sidewalks 17 Gaarde Street 110th Avenue to Walnut Widen to three lanes with $ 4,000,000 Improvements Street bikeways and sidewalks 18 Bonita Road Hall Boulevard to Bangy Widen to four lanes $ 8,000,000 Improvements Road 19 Durham Road Upper Boones Ferry Road to Widen to five lanes $ 3,500,000 Improvements Hall Boulevard 1 40 Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-41 October 30,2001 DKS Associates Table 8-6 Project Project Name (Facility) Project Location Project Description Estimated No. Project Cost 20 Durham Road Hall Boulevard to 99W Widen to two lanes $ 5,000,000 Improvements westbound, 1 lane ® eastbound, turn lane, ® bikeways and sidewalks 21 99W Improvements 1-5 to Hi hwa 217 Widen to seven lanes $ 25,000,000 22 72nd Avenue 99W to Hunziker Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,000,000 Improvements 23 72nd Avenue Hunziker Road to Bonita Widen to five lanes $ 5,000,000 Improvements Road ® 24 72nd Avenue Bonita Road to Durham Widen to five lanes with $ 5,000,000 Improvements Road bikeways and sidewalks ® 25 Upper Boones Ferry 1-5 to Durham Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,000,000 Road 26 Dartmouth Street Dartmouth Road to Hunziker Three lane extension; new $ 28,000,000 Extension Road Hi hwa 217 overcrossin 27 Dartmouth Street 72nd Avenue to 68th Widen to four lanes with turn $ 500,000 Improvements Avenue lanes 28 I-5/ORE 217 I-5/0RE 217 Interchange Interchange Modernization $ 54,000,000 Improvements Phases 2 & 3 29 Highway 217/72nd Highway 217 and 72nd Complete interchange $ 15,000,000 Avenue Interchange Avenue reconstruction with additional Improvements ramps and overcrossin s ® 30 Scholls Ferry Road At Hall Boulevard Add SB right turn lane from $ 500,000 Intersection SB Hall Boulevard Improvement ® 31 Highway 99W Bikeway Hall Boulevard to Greenburg Retrofit for bike lanes $ 500,000 Road 32 Highway 99W/Hall 99W/Hall Boulevard Add turn signals and modify $ 3,700,000 Boulevard Intersection signal Improvements 33 Hall Boulevard Extension from Durham to Extend Hall Boulevard to $ 25,000,000 Extension Tualatin Road connect across the Tualatin River 34 Beef Bend Road King Arthur to 131 s Widen to three lanes $5,000,000 35 Beef Bend/Elsner ORE 99W to Scholls Ferry Widen to three lanes $24,000,000 ® Subtotal RTP Group $410,830,000 Ti and GIP pro cis: 999-2000. nc udes• o ec s ro 00 . 2 A Grant Avenue Park Street to School Street Provide a pedestrian path $ 47,000 Pedestrian to Charles F. Tigard along Grant Avenue Improvements Elementary School connecting the existing walkway to Charles F. Tigard Elementary School Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-42 October 30,2001 fCS Associates Table 8-6 Project Project Name (Facility) Project Location Project Description Estimated . No. Project Cost B Bonita Road Railroad Tracks to Fanno Underground utilities, $ 386,000 Improvements Creek reconstruction of railroad (completed) crossings, street widening C Walnutlfiedeman Walnut Street/Tiedeman Intersection realignment and $1,300,000 Realignment Avenue signalization (complete d D Lincoln Street Between Greenburg Road Construct half-street $190,000 Improvements and Commercial Street improvements, including sidewalks, curbs and streetlights E 69th Avenue LID Between Hampton Street Construct 69th Avenue to $1,600,000 and Dartmouth Street, also ultimate section in includes Beveland Street compliance with Tigard from 68th Avenue to 70th Triangle Design Standards Avenue F Mapleleafl71 st Avenue from 72nd Avenue to Oak Widens existing pavement on $ 650,000 Street 71st Avenue and Mapleleaf Street to the standard width of a local street G Gaarde Street Quail Hollow to Walnut Construct street to ultimate $ 50,000 Extension (completed) section (Cost is for design & ROW only) Subtotal City CIP Group $ 4,223,000 Total $ 415,053,000 Tigard Transportation System Plan "DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles B-43 October 30,2001 DKS Associates Recommended improvements The improvements needed to mitigate modified 2015 future conditions combine both chose identified in prior plans (Figure 8-18 and Table 8-6) and those determined as the outcome of the TSP transportation analysis. The improvements shown in Figure 8-18 are part of the updated RTP listing for the Tigard area which is in process of approval (planned summer 2000). Also shown on Table 8-6 is a listing of the City of Tigard Capital Improvement Program projects through 2002. Of all the improvements identified in the TSP analysis, only three projects were not included in the TSP improvements. Each of these three improvements may be necessary within or after the 20 year time frame of the TSP. The forecasts for the TSP did not indicate they were necessary with the modified 2015 forecast. Right-of-way should be preserved for each of these projects for future consideration. o Bonita Road widening to four lanes from Hall to Bangy (preserve right-oGway) o Durham Road widening west of Hall Boulevard (preserve right-of-way) • Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing of ORE 217 (retain an alignment for future ORE 217 HOT/HOV options) Of all the TSP recommended improvements most projects have been discussed for several years. There is one significant project (the extension of Walnut) that is different than prior plans. Circulation and capacity deficiencies along ORE 99W and Tigard Triangle required more than spot intersection improvements or roadway widening to mitigate future growth impacts. The ability to circulate in Tigard ® from northwest to east is severely limited except for ORE 99W. There are few options to accommodate additional circulation. One option was to realign Greenburg Road to Johnson Street. Another was to extend Walnut Street west of ORE 99W. The Greenberg Road realignment did little to improve capacity. The Walnut extension helped resolve problems in the ORE 99W area near Hall/Greenburg and in the Tigard Triangle area on ORE 99W. The specific alignment of this improvement would need to be ® detailed in project development. However, three alignments were initially investigated. First an alignment from ORE 99W/Walnut northeasterly over Fanno Creek to the Ash Street right-of-way running north to intersect with Scoffins/Hunziker. This allowed traffic to proceed on Hunziker east to ® Tigard Triangle over the recommended overcrossing to 72°d/Hampton. It would also serve as direct access to the proposed commuter rail station area. Other alignment options that should be explored would be connecting to Bumham/Hall and continuing northward to Hunziker to a likely location for the conceptual overcrossing of ORE 217 from Dartmouth (not part of this TSP - more than 20 years in the future). A third alignment would utilize City Hall right-of-way and align similar to the second option with Hunziker. More detailed study of the alignment will be part of the future project development. A key issue in determining need was the level of service calculation. The 1997 Highway Capacity Methodology for the peak hour was utilized. ODOT and Metro have recently adopted two hour level of service. To approximate this measure, the volume-to-capacity ratios in Table 8-4 can be multiplied by a ratio of the average of the two hour volume divided by the peak hour volume. This ratio ranges from 0.93 to 0.97 at intersections in Tigard in 1999. Very few improvements would change under this assessment of capacity. Nearly all the improvements needed in the peak hour would also be necessary in the two hour. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles B-44 October 30,2001 IN', ,ii,,l II 1 1, 1 111 DKS Associates The recommended TSP motor vehicle improvements are summarized in Table 8-7 and Figure 8-19. Several spot improvements were also identified at various intersection in Tigard and they are summarized in Figure 8-20 and Table 8-8. Prioritization should occur in coordination with the CIP Figure 8-18 Street Improvement Plan process. All improvements on arterials and collectors shall include sidewalks, bike lanes and transit facilities. These improvement lists should be used as a starting point for inclusion in regional funding programs for streets. Table 8-7 Future Street Improvements (All Pro'ects include sidewalks, bic cle lanes and transit accommodations as required ) a- I-5 Widen to 4 plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) between ORE Not Funded 217 and I-205/Wilsonville Not in any plan Widen to 4 lanes (each direction) south to Wilsonville ORE 217 Widen to 3 lanes plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) between Not Funded US 26 and 72°d Avenue In RTP (as widening or HOV or HOT) 49 New ORE 217/1-5 interchange between 72"d Avenue and Phase I Funded Ban Road Phase 11 in RTP ORE 99W Widen to 7 lanes (total-both directions) between 1-5 and In RTP Greenbur Road I-5 to ORE 99W Connector Connector linking 1-5 and ORE 99W (model assumed In RTP connector would be located north of Sherwood-specific location to be determined b further stud Overcrossings over ORE 217 5 lane overcrossings linking Washington Square and Cascade Not Funded Avenue-one north of Scholls Ferry Road, one south of (identified in Scholls Ferry Road to Nimbus. The Washington Square Washington Square Regional Center study also identifies linking Nimbus to Regional Center Greenbur . Stud & RTP) Overcrossing of I-5 Widen Carman Drive interchange overcrossing to six lanes Not Funded from four (two through lanes each way, side by side left turn In no Plans lanes). Scholls Ferry Road Widen to 7 lanes (total-both directions) between ORE 217 Not Funded and BaiTows Road (East). Preserve right-of-way for seven (widening to IT 5th lanes to Murray Boulevard for future corridor needs. identified in Wa.Co, Beaverton TSP & RTP Greenburg Road Widen to 4 lanes adjacent to cemetary Not funded In Wa.Co. Plan Walnut Boulevard Widen to 3 lanes (total-both directions) between 135 (or In RTP where Gaarde connects) to ORE 99W MSTIP for parts Extend Walnut east of ORE 99W to meet Hall Boulevard and Not Funded Hunziker Street 3 lanes-total, both directions In no fans Gaarde Street Widen to 3 lanes west of 121st to ORE 99W In RTP Use access control and 2 lanes in sensitive areas Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-45 October 30,2001 ICS Associates Hall Boulevard Extend south to Tualatin (3 lanes-total, both directions) In RTP Durham Road Widen to 5 lanes (total, both directions) between Hall Boulevard and Upper Boones Ferry Road. In RTP Reserve right-of-way to the west for 5 lanes Durham Road/Upper Boones Realign intersection so that Durham Road continues on Not Funded Ferry Road intersection continous route to I-5/Carmen interchange-Upper Boones In no plans Ferry Road would "tee" into Durham Road/Upper Boones Ferry Road intersection 72 Avenue Widen to 5 lanes (total, both directions) between ORE 99W In RTP (could be and south city limit at Upper Boones Ferry Road/Carman partially funded by Drive/Durham Road development in Tigard Triangle-ie. LID) Hunziker/Hampton Realign Hunziker Road to meet Hampton Road at 72 In RTP ® Avenue-requires overcrossing over ORE 217-removes existing 72°d Avenue/Hunziker intersection Atlanta Street Extend Atlanta Street west to meet 72 Avenue To be funded with development in ® Tigard Triangle (i.e. LID) Dartmouth Street Widen to five lanes from ORE 99W to I-5 In RTP, To be ® funded by fronting improvements 68 Avenue Widen to 3-lanes between Dartmouth/I-5 Ramps and ORE 217 Not Funded (could be partially funded Extend 68`s Avenue south to meet ORE 217 providing right- by development in in/right-out only access to 68'b Avenue from ORE 217, Tigard Triangle-ie. replacing the NB ramps to 72od at ORE 217 LID) Scofftns/Hunziker/Hall Realign Scofftns to meet Hunziker at Hall Not Funded intersection Hall Boulevard Widen to 5 lanes between Washington Green and ORE 99W In RTP Beef Bend Road Access Control should be implemented to preserve capacity Not Funded with 2 lanes (with intersection turn lanes). Minimum 1,000 Implemented with foot spacing should be used between any driveway(s) and/or adjacent public street(s) development Widen from King Aruther to 131" to 3-lanes In RTP MSTIP Widen Beef Bend/Elsner Road to 3-lanes from ORE 99W to In RTP Scholls Ferry Road MSTIP • - Refers to inclusion in prior plans such as Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Major Strxts Transportation Improvement Program (MSTiP), Washington County Transportation Plan, Beaverton TSP or other subarea plan. The RTP anticipates funding for projects within the plan in a 20 year horizon. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-46 October 30,2001 D AssoLiC7 es Widen US 26 Z !72nd 3 [am beMrem 72nd Av. /~ayq~ TOSCALE ' C ~ OF IGARD s r" s jw Transportation Systems Plan a 5 Legend 05 -N=WofUm o -FreewayYYdenirg r 217 • R=My Widening ..Now.. - ProposedRoaM 210 7 s M -ProposedOmmsing 5 rp b O 5 - hlterdwo kpmenlerd It (g) -Amm CmW 5 ® -Added Person Capadly 3 3 Preserve Rigb4of IMay for 7 Law; 33 3 Corr&A6gnwtSb*Area 99W 3 •3 5 z tz 5 5 DURHM 5 ...River....... Flgum 8-19 ; STREI: i' ORE 99W . 15~ . ~ dm~+ IMPROVEMENT PUN +04 4- lanes txr.emORE2f 7 . a to an~ vil"lam e 0 0 ®fe 009(b0®®®®®0®00 D Associates Gtfi9f OF TICARD TO WAM T~ ~s S RD Transportation . Systems Plan a° S T S T Legend S W y S ~ ~ ~ ~ . Mte,secfio„ Improtrre;rtent Q FE S LoamNumber 217 QS -SPISSatet lff4)wffwt T to Lom5m G 210 Q~ a ERG Nola - Sately Itttpmtrements would also be done at saute lime odersectian irttprovements 5 r arett*dakert. ,ya 99W as ~ Z S 5 -1 ~FZD S ' ~ Q Q ~ axe B N WRHAM ~ U B .F c a Figure 8.20 is INTERSECTION s ¢i„ M14 ; ? t ° IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS DKS Associates Table 8-8 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements Table 8-8: Future Intersection Improvements - - • 0 1 Davies/Scholls Ferry Road • Traffic signal • Northbound right turn lane • Realign to meet Barrows Road, close Barrow to local traffic 2 North Dakota/l25 /Scholls Ferry Road • Southbound right turn lane • Retain westbound right turn lane when 3rd lane added on Scholls Ferry Road • Change from protected left turn phasing to permitted phasing north/south 3 Nimbus/Scholls Ferry Road • Retain eastbound right turn lane when 3'd lane added on Scholls Ferry Road • Retain westbound right turn lane when P lane added on Scholls Ferry Road • Southbound right turn lane • Reconfigure northbound and southbound lanes to create exclusive left turn lanes • Change from split phasing to protected left turn phasing north/south 4 121"/Walnut • Traffic signal • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Westbound left turn lane 5 121"/North Dakota • Traffic signal 6 Greenburg/Oleson/Hall • 2od northbound left turn lane • Extend signal cycle length • Assumes Hall widened to 5 lanes 7 Greenburg/Washington Square Road • Southbound right turn lane • Overlap eastbound right turn o Extend signal cycle length 8 Main/Greenburg/ORE 99W • Southbound left turn lane • Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 9 GreenburgITiedeman • Extend signal cycle length • Improved geometry/alignment 10 Hzll/Oak • Extend signal cycle length • Assumes Hall widened to 5 lanes 11 Hall/ORE 99W • Southbound right turn lane • Northbound left turn lane • Westbound right turn overlap • Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 12 ORE 217 NB Ram s/ORE 99W • Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to Tlgard Transportatlon System Plan DRAFT P99169 Motor Vehicles 8-49 October 30,2001 ®l S Associates Table 8-8: Future Intersection Im rovements 7 lanes • Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes • 2nd northbound left turn lane 13 ORE 217 SB Ramps/ORE 99W • 2nd southbound right turn lane • Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 14 Dartmouth/ORE 99W • Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to ® 7 lanes 15 72 /ORE 99W • Southbound right turn lane • Northbound right turn overlap • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 16 68 /ORE 99W • 2nd westbound left turn lane • Northbound left turn lane ® • Southbound left turn lane • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south 17 72 /Dartmouth • Traffic signal ® • Assumes 72nd Avenue and Dartmouth widened to 5 !anes 18 68 /Atlanta/Haines • Traffic signal ® 19 ORE 217 SB Ramps/72 • Assumes 72nd Avenue widened to 5 lanes ® 20 72 Bonita • Assumes 72' Avenue widened to 5 lanes ® 21 72 /Carmen • 200 northbound right turn lane 22 72 /Upper Boones Ferry Road • Assumes Durham/Upper Boones Ferry/72nd widened to 5 ® lanes 23 Hall/Sattler/Ross • Traffic signal • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane ® 24 Hall/Durham • 2nd southbound left turn lane • Widen west of intersection to introduce 5-lane section on Durham (include existin westbound riht turn lane 25 ORE 99W/McDonaid/Gaarde • Westbound right turn lane • 2nd Northbound left turn lane 26 ORE 99W/Beef Bend • Southbound right turn lane (on ORE 99W) • Adjust cycle length 27 Tiedeman/Walnut • Completed • Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound left turn lane • Westbound left turn lane Q • 2nd westbound right turn lane 28 Munra /Scholls Ferry Road Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-50 October 30,2001 ®KS Associates Table 8-8: Future Intersection Improvements a Add additional southbound lane to achieve 2 southbound left turn lanes and two southbound through lanes Extend signal cycle length . Changes to protected left turn phasing north/south and east/west 29 Beef Bend/Scholls Ferry Road . Eastbound right turn lane f Northbound left turn lane a Eastbound right turn overlap a Change to protected phasing east/west a Change to split phasing north/south 30 Walnut/ORE 99W a Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 99W is widened to 7 lanes a Change to protected left turn phasing on Walnut 31 72 Mampton/Hunziker a Southbound right turn lane OR eastbound right turn lane a Change to protected left turn phasing all directions 32 Durham/Upper Booties Ferry Road a Reconfigure intersection to make through route between Durham and I-5/Carmen interchange 33 Gaarde/Walnut a Traffic signal a Eastbound right turn lane 34 68 /Dartmouth a Traffic signal 35 Carman/I-5 southbound o Eastbound right turn lane 36 Carman/1-5 northbound a 2od westbound through lane + 2°d northbound left turn lane a Eastbound separate through and left turn 2 lanes Intersection Safety Enhancements Evaluate improvements to reduce collisions at high SPIS intersections refer to 1997-99 intersection list in Chapter 3) Pedestrian Crossing Evaluation/Signals Study and determine appropriate locations for Pedestrian lCrossing Signals Traffic Signal Guidelines Traffic signal warrant analyses were performed for all unsignalized study intersections operating at LOS E or worse under future base (2015) conditions (Table 8-9). Traffic signal warrants were based on the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device's (MUTCD) Warrant 11 (Peak Hour Volume)." To guide future implementation of traffic signals to locations which have the maximum public benefit by serving arterial/collector/neighborhood routes, a framework master plan of traffic signal locations was developed figure 8-21). The intent of this plan is to outline potential locations where future traffic 14 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, Federal Highway Administration, 1988 Edition. Tigard Transportation System Flan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-51 October 30,2001 000 000 00 c~F11GARD 000 00 Tc~`'~s Flan i Systems S tes T~ ®KS 81~ ~ Z L e9 ,~a1~te~sedia` ~ ~ ~~dedalolh~bc~' ~x Note: '.I1'►S~~S~i¢ed 217 m ~ y~fSpd ' r G ° > ~ 4 aa~ g 7 a y a 210 N a ~ x ~ pUR~ o ~ 'Fag~re gaZ1 r DDS Associates ` signals would be placed to avoid conflicts with other development site oriented signal placement. To maintain the best opportunity for efficient traffic signal coordination on arterials, spacing of up to 1,000 feet should be considered. No traffic signal should be installed unless it meets Manual q Uniform Traffic Control Devices warrants. Three key traffic signal issues are outlined in this TSP as part of the transportation policy of Tigard: • Establishing a traffic signal spacing standard of 1,000 feet and a traffic signal master plan to guide future traffic signal placements. When this standard is not met, additional evaluation should be prepared to assure signal progression can be efficiently maintained; • Traffic signals disrupt traffic flow. Their placement is important for neighborhood access, pedestrian access and traffic control. To not utilize the limited placements of traffic signals to serve private land holdings will limit the potential for use that will generally benefit the public, neighborhoods and pedestrian access. Limiting placement of traffic signals to locations that are public streets would minimize or eliminate the potential for traffic signals solely serving private access. • ODOT signal design and signal phasing guidelines should be followed for all traffic signal installations. Table 8-9 Traffic Signal Warrants MUTCD Peals Hour Volume Warrant Intersection Warrant Met? 72 /Dartmouth Yes 68 /Dartmouth Yes Gaarde/121" Yes Gaarde/Walnut Yes Walnut/121" Yes Walnut/ Tiedeman Yes Sattler/Hall Yes Bonita/79th Yes Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles B-53 October 30,. 001 DKS Associates SAFETY( Needs Accident data was obtained for the City of Tigard from Washington County. Chapter 3 provides detailed data regarding motor vehicle accidents in Tigard. Several strategies are suggested for improving safety in the City of Tigard. These strategies aimed at providing the City with priorities that meet the goals and policies of the City. • Work with other agencies such as Washington County and ODOT to help prioritize and fund safety programs - coordinated approach Y Develop a citywide safety priority system which identifies high accident locations, ranks the locations and identifies safety mitigation measures • Address safety issues on an as needed basis ® Suggested Improvements Most of these high accident locations are included in future street improvements listed in Tables 8-6 and 8-7. The only two intersection not being improved are the two on Locust Street (at 72"d and 80`s). Accident numbers over three years at these all-way stop sign controlled intersections are very low (3-4 in 3 years). Beyond maintenance, signing and lighting there is little else necessary at these two locations. In the short term, specific action plans should be prepared to address whether beneficial improvements at these locations can be made without affecting future plans. A future issue with regard to safety involves the decision to go to three lanes from two lanes or five lanes from four lanes. National research has clearly demonstrated the beneFts of providing a turning lane when daily traffic volumes exceed 15,000 vehicles per day20. While widening the street can commonly be viewed as pedestrian unfriendly, the potential impact of not having a turning lane is that accident rates will increase substantially (11 to 35 percent) on two lane roads compared to three lane roads. One safety action that can have an immediate impact is to condition all land use development projects that require access on city streets to maintain adequate sight distance. This should address all fixed or temporary objects (plants, poles, buildings, signs, etc.) that potentially obstruct sight distance. Any property owner, business, agency or utility that places or maintains fixed or temporary objects in the sight distance of vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians should be required to demonstrate that adequate sight distance is provided (per American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials)?' Finally, the City should coordinate with Washington County and ODOT to develop real-time accident reporting statistics that allow the city to prioritize current collision issues, not four to seven year old data. Current vendors exist that provide accident report software (,Washington County uses Intersection Magic). Tigard, as one of several cities with this need, should work cooperatively-with peer jurisdictions to implement software that prioritizes collision locations, produces detailed accident diagrams to allow for assessment and is real time (no more than 3 to 6 months old data with five years of historical data). 20 Multilane Design Alternatives for Improving Suburban Highways, TRB NCHRP Report No. 282, March 1986. 21 "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets", Green Book American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 1994. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-54 October 30,2001 ACS Associates ACCESS MANAGEMENT Access Management is a broad set of techniques that balance the need to provide efficient, safe and timely travel with the ability to allow access to the individual destination. Both Washington County and ODOT have clear and concise access management policies and the supporting documentation to ensure that the highway system is managed as wisely as possible for the traveling public. Proper implementation of Access Management techniques should guarantee reduced congestion, reduced accident rates, less need for highway widening, conservation of energy, and reduced air pollution. Access management is control or limiting of access on arterial and collector facilities to preserve their functional capacity. Numerous driveways erode the capacity of arterial and collector roadways. Preservation of capacity is particularly important on higher volume roadways for maintaining traffic flow and mobility. Where as local and neighborhood streets function to provide access, collector and arterial streets serve greater traffic volume. Numerous driveways or street intersections increase the number of conflicts and potential for accidents and decrease mobility and traffic flow. Tigard, as with every city, needs a balance of streets that provide access with streets that serve mobility. Several access management strategies were identified to improve access and mobility in Tigard: • Provide left tum lanes where wan-anted for access onto cross streets • Work with land use development applications to consolidate driveways where feasible • Meet Washington County/ODOT access requirements on arterials • Establish City access standards for new developments on collectors and arterials • Develop city access requirements that are consistent with Metro Title 6 access guidelines The following recommendations are made for access management: • Incorporate a policy statement regarding prohibition of new single family residential access on arterials and collectors. A design exception process should be outlined that requires mitigation of safety and NTM impacts. This addresses a problem in Tigard where property owners consume substantial staff time on issues of residential fronting impacts after they have chosen to build adjacent to an arterial. • Use Washington County and ODOT standards for access on arterials and collectors under their jurisdiction (see tables showing Washington County and ODOT standards in Appendix). • Specific access management plans be developed for arterial streets in Tigard to maximize the capacity of the existing facilities and protect their functional integrity. New development and roadway projects should meet the following requirements: Arterial: Maximum spacing of roadways and driveways =1,000 feet Minimum spacing of roadways and driveways = 600 feet Collector. Maximum Spacing of roadways and driveways = 400 feet Minimum Spacing of roadways and driveways = 200 feet All Roads: Require an access report stating that the driveway/roadway is safe as designed meeting adequate stacking, sight distance and deceleration requirements as set by ODOT, Washington County and AASHTO. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-55 October 30,2001 DKS Associates Access management is not easy to implement and requires long institutional memory of the impacts of short access spacing - increased collisions, reduced capacity, poor sight distance and greater pedestrian exposure to vehicle conflicts. The most common opposition response to access control is that "there are driveways all over the place at closer spacing than mine -just look out there". These statements are commonly made without historical reference. Many of the pre-existing driveways that do not meet access spacing requirements were put in when traffic volumes were substantially lower and no access spacing criteria were mandated. With higher and higher traffic volume in the future, the need for access control on all arterial roadways is critical - the outcome of not managing access properly is additional wider roadways which have much greater impact than access control. Staff will have to come back at a later to date to propose revisions to the development code to reflect the standards being developed in the TSP and Comprehensive Plan. At that time, additional attention can be given to the specific standards and whether exceptions are appropriate to be written into the code or if variances are the action needed. The ODOT Highway Plan spacing standards will apply to ORE 99W (530 - 740 feet), Hall Boulevard (400 - 475 feet) and streets/driveways within 1,320 feet of ORE 217 or I-5 interchanges. For Washington County roads access spacing standards would be 1,000 feet for major arterials, 600 feet for minor arterials and 150 feet for major collectors. The spacing standards outlined in the TSP would apply for City streets 1,000 feet maximum/600 feet minimum for arterials and 400 feet maximum/200 feet minimum for collectors. The maximum and minimum standards balance safety needs and connectivity needs. Additionally, three other standards are recommended. First, a restriction of direct access of new single family units on arterials and collectors (this would include an exception process that addresses safety and neighborhood traffic management needs). Second, an access report with new land development that requires applicapts to verify design of their driveways and streets are safe meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (utilizing future traffic volumes from this TSP as a future base for evaluation). Third, driveways should not be place in the influence area of intersections. The influence area is that area where queues of traffic commonly form on the approach to an intersection (typically between 150 to 300 feet). In a case where a project has less than 150 feet of frontage, the site would need to explore potential shared access, or if that were not practical, place driveways as far from the intersection as the frontage would allow (permitting for 5 feet from the property line). MAINTENANCE Preservation, maintenance and operation are essential to protect the City investment in transportation facilities. The majority of current gas tax revenues are used to maintain the transportation system With an increasing road inventory and the need for greater maintenance of older facilities, protecting and expanding funds for maintenance is critical. A Pavement Management Program is a systematic method of organizing and analyzing information about pavement conditions to develop the most cost effective maintenance treatments and strategies. As a management tool, it aids the decision-making process by determining the magnitude of the problem, the optimum way to spend funds for the greatest return on the dollar, and the consequences of not spending money wisely. Tigard maintains an annual program of pavement management and monitors Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFTP99161 Motor Vehicles 8-56 October 30,2001 DDS Associates conditions in setting priorities for overlays, slurry seals and joint sealing. With over 130 miles of roadway, maintenance is one of the largest transportation expenditures, requiring almost $1,500,000 per year (to put this budget in perspective, this relates to about $2 per foot of road). A pavement management program can be a major factor in improving performance in an environment of limited revenues. A pavement management program is not and should not be considered the answer to every maintenance question. It is a tool that enables the public works professional to determine the most cost-effective maintenance program The concept behind a pavement management system is to identify the optimal rehabilitation time and to pinpoint the type of repair which makes the most sense. With a pavement management program, professional judgment is enhanced, not replaced. A critical concept is that pavements deteriorate 40 percent in quality in the first 75 percent of their life. However, there is a rapid acceleration of this deterioration later, so that in the next 12 percent of life, there is another 40 percent drop in quality. A pavement management system can identify when pavements will begin to deteriorate before rapid deterioration starts to focus preventative maintenance efforts cost effectively. These solutions are generally one-fifth to one-tenth the cost required after a pavement is 80 percent deteriorated. Figure 8-22 illustrates the pavement life cycle. A visual inspection of Tigard's surface street system was prepared by a consultant for the City of Tigard in 1998/99. This inspection produced a "report card" of the street pavement status for each roadway in Tigard. Figure 8-23 summarizes the pavement condition identified on City streets in the last pavement management inspection. The next pavement inspection will be conducted in 2001. Based upon the last inspection, a determination was made that Tigard has approximately a $3,000,000 back log of needed maintenance that cannot be addressed by annual on-going maintenance programs. Tigard has recently taken on the maintenance and operation of several county roads over the past several years. The on-going maintenance budget has increased as Tigard receives more of the statewide motor vehicle fee allocation for roadway preservation and operation. Table 8-10 summarizes the roadway maintenance funding history for the last five fiscal years. Table 8-10 Cit of Tigard Street Maintenance Budget Summa u FY 96-97 FY 97-98 FY 98-99 FY 99-00 FY 00-01 40 Requirements actual actual budgeted budgeted budgeted Description IND Street Maintenance Overlays/Slurry Seal $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $380,000 Contracted out 40 Minor Safety Imp. $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 $140,000 Small Improvements NTM $ 45,000 $ 45,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Traffic Calming Striping $ 7,000 $ 7,000 $ 7,000 $ 7,000 $ 12,000 Restriping roads Street Program Dig Outs/Contracts Reconstruction, Signs, LaborOutlay $523,000 $620,000 $814,000 $1,050,000 $774,000 Guard rail, Sweeping Capital/Equlpment 1 -1 Administration $30,000 $31,000 $41,000 $58,000 $55,000 Total $1,045,000 $1,143,000 $1,362,0001$1,615,0001$1,421,0001 Note: Tigard started maintaining an increase share of County streets from 1997 to present. Based on information received from Gus Duneas, City of Tigard, February 2000. Tigard Transportation System Plan "DRAFT " P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-57 October 30,2001 ® ASsodates 40 CITY OF TIGARD Transportation System Plan c Excellent ® Good 40% drop in quality ® - $1.00 for renovation Fair 75% of life ~r here ® ~ E I Poor ® 40% drop in quality 12% Will cost 15 Very Poor of life ~~$5 00 here 15 Failed Timme 20 yrs. avcmman t Lif6 Figure 8-22 ® PAVEMENT LIFE CYCLE D ort~ti'on Systems Plan TA ~5 iateS Lov~ Good tlo~a~ Fit T4~ a -Paa P 217 Y f~~4 5 210 S Q4+N S~ WY 5 RD fill o ~ ~ Fig y IP 09 ~ S Associates NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT Neighborhood Traffic Management (NTM) is a term that has been used to describe traffic control devices typically used in residential neighborhoods to slow traffic or possibly reduce the volume of ® traffic. NTM is descriptively called traffic calming due to its ability to improve neighborhood livability. Tigard has done extensive work in the way of testing and implementing NTM measures such as speed humps, chokers, pavement texturing, circles, chicanes and other elements (Figure 8-24). The City initiated a formalized NTM program in 1995 and expends about $60,000 per year in traffic calming city wide. The following are examples of neighborhood traffic management strategies: ® 0 speed wagon (reader board that displays vehicle speed) ® o speed humps 0 traffic circles ® 0 medians 0 landscaping 0 curb extensions 0 chokers (narrows roadway at spots in street) narrow streets 0 closing streets 0 photo radar 0 on-street parking 0 selective enforcement 0 neighborhood watch Typically, NTM can receive a favorable reception by residents adjacent to streets where vehicles travel at speeds above 30 MPH. However, NTM can also be a very contentious issue within and between neighborhoods, being viewed as moving the problem rather than solving it, impacting emergency travel or raising liability issues. A number of streets in Tigard have been identified in the draft functional classification as neighborhood routes. These streets are typically longer than the average local street and would be appropriate locations for discussion of NTM applications. A wide range of traffic control devices is being tested throughout the region, including such devices as chokers, medians, traffic circles and speed humps. NTM traffic control devices should be tested within the confines of Tigard before guidelines are developed for implementation criteria and applicability. Also, NTM may be considered in an area wide manner to avoid shifting impacts between areas and should only be applied where a majority of neighborhood residents agree that it should be done. Strategies for NTM seek to reduce traffic speeds on neighborhood routes, thereby improving livability. Research of traffic calming measures demonstrates their effectiveness in reducing vehicle speeds. Table 8-11 summarizes nationwide research of over 120 agencies in North America. The City could consider adopting a neighborhood traffic management program. This program would help prioritize implementation and address issues on a systematic basis rather than a reactive basis. Criteria should be established for the appropriate application of NTM in the City. This would address warrants, standards for design, funding, the required public process, use on collectors/arterials (fewer acceptable measures - medians) and how to integrate NTM into all new development design. Tigard Transportation System Plan "DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-60 October 30,2001 ®F ~~,~$tC4t1 -Tra i s plan S~ E)ASWciateS Ala . OW 060 217 T DR FE~ R a a a~ s 21O p,TMER T 8 t r < -rte RD GAARfl ^ ~uv~, 5 wsnE ST r 1 > oR 4 HUE ST f _ ~0 AOL K Associates Table 8-11 NTM Performance Speed Reduction (MPH) Volume Change (ADT) Measures No. of Public Studies Low High Average Low High Ave. Satisfaction Speed Humps 262 1 11.3 7.3 0 2922 328 79% Speed Trailer 63 1.8 5.5 4.2 0 0 0 90% Diverters 39 - - .4 85 3000 1102 72% Circles 26 2.2 15 5.7 50 2000 280 72% Enforcement 16 0 2 2 0 0 0 71% ,may Traffic Watch 85 .5 8.5 3.3 0 0 0 98% ® Chokers 32 2.2 4.6 3.3 45 4100 597 79% Narrow Streets 4 5 7 4.5 0 0 0 83% SOURCE: Survey of Neighborhood Traffic Management Performance and Results, ITE District 6 Annual Meeting, by R S. McCourt, July 1992 PARKING Parking has not typically been a significant transportation issue in the past for Tigard. New land uses were required to provide the code designated number of parking spaces to assure there would be no impact to surrounding land uses (overflow parking). These parking ratios were developed based upon past parking demand characteristics of each land use type. Most recently, parking has become an element of transportation planning policy through two actions. The adoption of the Transportation Planning Rule in 1991, which was updated in November 1998 (sections 660-12-020(2g) and 660-12- 045(5c)) and the Metro Functional Plan of November 1996, Title 2. The City of Tigard has adopted these changes in section 18.765 of its Development Code (refer to Table 18.765.2 Minimum and Maximum Required Off-street Vehicle and Bicycle Parking Requirements). By adopting the minimum and maximum parking ratios outlined in Title 2, the City has addressed the TPR required reduction in parking spaces per capita over time. Several strategies were identified to address the desire to reduce parking needs in Tigard: C Shared parking Y Parking pricing 0 Parking needs should be reviewed by individual developments at the site plan review stage. Parking provisions should be compared to demand, as identified by ITE or DEQ?' Maximum Parking Ratios One of the concerns with parking reduction policies is the impact to adjacent land uses should the vehicle needs of a site exceed the provision of parking. 23 Parking Demand, 2"d Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1987; and Peak Parking Space Demand Study, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, by JHK & Associates, June 1995. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-62 October 30,2001 0 DKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT/ INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Transportation System Management (TS M) focuses on low cost strategies to enhance operational performance of the transportation system. Measures that can optimize performance of the transportation sysiem include signal improvements, intersection channelization, access management (noted in prior section), HOV lanes, ramp metering, rapid incident response, and programs that smooth transit operation (refer to Table 8-7 for samples of intersection-level TSM improvements). The most significant measure that can provide tangible benefits to the traveling public is traffic signal coordination and systems. Traffic signal system improvements can reduce the number of stops by 35 percent, delay by 20 to 30 percent, fuel consumption by 12.5 percent and emissions by 10 percent". This can be done without the major cost of roadway widening. Ramp metering has been proven to improve freeway performance, reducing travel time, reducing accidents, increasing vehicle speed and reducing fuel consumption. ODOT plans to meter all the on-ramps to 1-5 and ORE 217 within Tigard (presently the ORE 217 ramps are metered). As ramp metering is installed in Tigard, the City should work with ODOT to develop ramp meter bypass lanes for high occupancy vehicles and transit. Several of the strategies were elements of an Intelligent Transportation System (]TS) plan being implemented regionally by ODOT and participating agencies. ITS focuses on a coordinated, systematic approach toward managing the region's transportation multi-modal infrastructure. ]TS is the application of new technologies with proven management techniques to reduce congestion, increase safety, reduce fuel consumption and improve air quality. One element of ITS is Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS). ATMS collects, processes and disseminates real-time data on congestion alerting travelers and operating agencies, allowing them to make better transportation decisions. Examples of future ITS applications include routine measures such as "smart" ramp meters, automated vehicle performance (tested recently in San Diego), improved traffic signal systems, improved transit priority options and better trip information prior to making a vehicle trip (condition of roads - weather or congestion, alternative mode options - a current "real time" schedule status, availability/pricing of retail goods). Some of this information will be produced by Tigard, but most will be developed by ODOT or other ITS partners (private and public). The information will be available to drivers in vehicles, people at home, at work, at events or shopping. The Portland region is just starting to implement ITS and the City of Portland, Tri-Met and ODOT have already developed their own ITS strategic plans. TRUCKS Efficient truck movement plays a vital role in maintaining and developing Tigard's economic base. Well planned truck routes can provide for the economical movement of raw materials, finished products and services. Trucks moving from industrial areas to regional highways or traveling through Tigard are different than trucks making local deliveries. The transportation system should be planned to accommodate this goods movement need. The establishment of through truck routes provides for this efficient movement while at the same time maintaining neighborhood livability, public safety and minimizing maintenance costs of the roadway system. A map of proposed through truck routes in Tigard was developed (Figure 8-25). This map is built from the approved Through Truck Route Map 74 Portland Regionwide Advanced Traffic Management System Plan, ODOT, by DKS Associates, October 1993. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-63 October 30,2001 w S Associates in the Washington County Transportation Plan (1988), the recent Metro Regional Freight System (1999) and this plan. The plan is aimed at addressing the through movement of trucks, not local deliveries. The objective of this route designation is to allow these routes to focus on design criteria that is "truck friendly", IND i.e., 12 foot travel lanes, longer access spacing, 35 foot (or larger) curb returns and pavement design that accommodates a larger share of trucks. Because these routes are through routes and relate to 40 regional movement, they should relate to the regional freight system. The Draft Regional 40 Transportation Plan" includes the following routes in the regional freight system in Tigard, which are 10 consistent wiff the city map: • I-5, ORE 217 and ORE 99W Main Roadway Route • 72nd Avenue south of ORE 217 Road Connector Hunziker Street east of Hall Boulevard Road Connector • Scholls Ferry Road from east of Nimbus to ORE 217 Road Connector Key differences from the City TSP truck plan to the to the previously adopted Washington County Plan and Metro RTP include the following- 0 Hall Boulevard south of Hunziker Street is removed from the plan along with Durham Road east of Hall Boulevard as shown in the Washington County Plan. In its place Hunziker Street and 72"d Avenue south of ORE 217 are added (as they are in the Regional Freight System). • Scholls Ferry Road west of Nimbus and east of ORE 217 to Hall Boulevard are retained from the Washington County Plan (although not part of the Regional Freight System) along with Hall Boulevard from ORE 217 to Hunziker. There are other streets in Tigard that due to their adjacent land uses will need to be "truck friendly". Local industrial streets such as Tech Center Drive and Wall Street would represent samples of streets which where the local industrial street cross-section (Figure 8-7) would apply. In the future, industrial land development will need similar connections to the through truck routes. Criteria Tigard's TSP Advisory Committee created a set of goals and policies to guide transportation system development in Tigard (see Chapter 2). Several of these policies pertain specifically to trucks: Goal 2: Multi-Modal Policy I Develop and implement public street standards that recognize the multi-purpose nature of the street right-of-way for utility, pedestrian, bicycle, transit, truck and auto use. " Draft Regional Transportation Plan, Metro, December 1999. Tigard Transportation System Plan DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-64 October 30,2001 0 _J DKS Associates Goal 6. Goods Movement Policy 1 )resign arterial routes, highway access and adjacent land uses in ways that facilitate the efficient movement of goods and services. Policy 2 Require safe routing of hazardous materials consistent with federal and state guidelines. These goals and policies are the criteria that all truck related improvements in Tigard should be measured against to determine if they conform to the intended vision of the City. Tigard Transportation System Plan " DRAFT P99161 Motor Vehicles 8-66 October 30,2001 Ell KS Associates Chapter 9 ® Other Modes CITY OF TIGARD OREGON w This chapter summarizes existing and future rail, air, water and pipeline needs in the City of Tigard. ® While auto, transit, bicycle and pedestrian transportation modes have a more significant effect on the quality of life in Tigard, other modes of transportation must be considered and addressed. ® CRITERIA No goals or policies were developed related to rail, air, water or pipeline transportation systems. RECOMMENDED FACILITIES RAIL Railroad tracks traverse Tigard from its northern boundary to the southeast. There are two adjacent but separate tracks south from north of North Dakota Street to Bonita Road. South of Bonita Road, one set of tracks crosses the Tualatin River to Tualatin and further south (parallel to I-5 to just north of Salem). The other set of tracks turns east to Lake Oswego/Nlilwaukie and Southeast Portland. North of Tigard, both tracks go on into Beaverton and Hillsboro. They are both owned by Portland & Western (P&W), a sister company of Willamette & Pacific (W&P) Railroad. Within the next five years all of the rubberized at-grade crossing panels will be replaced with concrete panels. The concrete panels have longer life and are more skid resistant. Presently all the grade ® crossings of the railroad and roadways in Tigard are controlled by gated crossings. There are a few private crossings which are not gated. Grade separation of the railroad crossings has not been ® determined to be necessary at any of the existing crossings. The highest volume at-grade crossing in ® Tigard is on Scholls Ferry Road. Because of the close proximity of the rail crossing to the ORE 217 interchange, future expansion of ORE 217 should consider the operational need of Scholls Ferry Road south of ORE 2171. A commuter rail system, linking Wilsonville and Beaverton/Hillsboro, has been discussed and preliminary analysis has been conducted to determine possible alignments and station locations. The system would travel through Tigard with at least one or two stops in the City. One of the City's 1 Outside the 20 year perspective of this plan, it may become necessary to consider a grade separation of the railroad crossing. While not part of this TSP, this concept should be considered in future planning of the Scholls Ferry Corridor. A grade separation concept may include a viaduct Scholls Ferry Road from ORE 217 to south of Nimbus. Urban interchanges would need to be designed for Nimbus and Cascade This viaduct approach may preclude the need for seven lanes on Scholls Ferry Road. This type of alternatives analysis would be necessary in the project development of any Scholls Ferry Road widening, ORE 217 widening and/or rail crossing changes. ® Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Other Modes 9-1 October 30, 2001 DS Associates policies is to support the development of a commuter rail system as part of the regional transit network2. The commuter rail project would enhance the rail line by providing sidings (double track) over portions of the alignment. The commuter rail would operate when there is little freight activity. There has been a recent increase in volume to about eight trains per day through Tigard (includes both northbound and southbound trains-total of about four round-trips per day). P & W anticipates changes in freight service in the near future, but the changes are likely to affect timing rather than the number of trains passing through Tigard. AIR Tigard is served by the Portland International Airport, located in Northeast Portland on the Columbia River. The Portland International Airport is a major air transportation and freight facility, which serves Oregon and Southwest Washington. It provides a base for over twenty commercial airlines and air freight operations. The Port of Portland reported nearly 13.7 million passengers were served at the Portland International Airport in 19993. Ground access to Portland International Airport from Tigard is available by automobile, taxi and shuttle (in year 2001 light rail access will be'availsble). Tigard is also served by the Portland-Hillsboro Airport, a general aviation facility located in the north central portion of the City. The airport facility is owned and operated by the Port of Portland as part of the Port's general aviation reliever system of airports. The Port of Portland maintains a Master Plan for this facility which was most recently updated in October 1996. No airports exist or are expected within the City in the future. Therefore, no policies or recommendations in this area of transportation are provided for Tigard. WATER The Tualatin River is located along the southern border of Tigard. It is used primarily for recreational purposes. No policies or recommendations in this area of transportation are provided. PIPELINE There are high pressure natural gas feeder lines owned and operated by Northwest Natural Gas Company along several routes in Tigard. Figure 9-1 shows the feeder line routes for Tigard a No future pipelines are expected within the City. No policies or recommendations in this area of transportation are provided for Tigard. 2 Washington County Commuter Rail Study, Phase II, Prepared by BRW, etc., May, 1999. 3 Based upon Port of Portland web page, http://www.portofportiandor.com/1299month.htm 4 Based on the Portland Area Distribution System Map (Dated September, 1998) received from Northwest Natural Gas Company. 40 Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Other Modes 9-2 October 30, 2001 now I D S ASSociates N A Vl!I II~~ NOT WYOFInGUO TO SCALE ORE Transportation Systems Plan ~J Legend 6dsft Nfph ftssuo Gas Poo* F,k KlnaerAlD W p%,O& e 3 sw WALMH F SH CURMU y Figure 94 MAJOR PIPELINE t r ROUTES K Associates Chapter 10 Transportation Demand CITY OFTIGARD OREGON Management INTRODUCTION Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is the general term used to describe any action that removes single occupant vehicle trips from the roadway network during peak travel demand periods. The Transportation Planning Rule outlines a goal of reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita.I TDM measures applied on a regional basis can be an effective tool in reducing vehicle miles traveled. Samples include: Employers installing bicycle racks e Work with property owners to place parking stalls for carpoolers near building entrances o Provide information regarding commute options to larger employers Encourage linkage of housing, retail and employment centers e Encourage flexible working hours Encourage telecommuting Provide incentives to take transit and use other modes (i.e. free transit pass) e Schedule deliveries outside of peak hours The strategies for transportation demand management were identified in working with the City's TSP Task Force which included the City Planning Commission. These committees provided input regarding the transportation system in Tigard, specifically exploring TDM needs. BACKGROUND In 1993, the Oregon Legislature passed a law to help protect the health of Portland area residents from air pollution and to ensure that the area complies with the federal Clean Air Act. The Employee ® Commute Options (ECO) rules are provisions of the law' The ECO program requires larger employers to provide commute options to encourage employees to reduce auto trips to the work site. It is one of ® several strategies included in the Ozone Maintenance Plan for the Portland Air Quality Maintenance Area (AQMA) which will be in place until the year 2006. Employers in the Portland AQMA with more than 50 employees at a work site must provide commute options that have the potential to reduce employee commute auto trips by 10 percent within three years, and maintain the trip reductions through the life of the plan. TDM can include a wide variety of actions tailored to the individual needs of employers to achieve trip ® reduction. Table 10-1 provides a list of several strategies identified in the ECO program. Research By 10 percent over 20 years Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 340, Division 30. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transportation Demand Management 10-1 October 30, 2001 K Associates Table 10-1 Transportation Demand Management Strategies Potential Trip Strategy Description Reduction Telecommuting Employees perform regular work duties at home or at a work 82-91% (Full Time) center closer to home, rather than commuting from home to work. This can be full time or on selected work days. This can 14-36% (1-2 day/wk) require computer equipment to be-most effective. - Compressed Work Schedule where employees work their regular scheduled number 7-9% (9 day/80 hr) Week of hours in fewer days per week (for example, a 40 hour week in 16-18% (4/40) 4 days or 36 hours in 3 days) 32-36% (3136) Transit Pass Subsidy For employees who take transit to work on a regular basis, the 19-32% (full subsidy, employer pays for all or part of the cost of a monthly transit high transit service) pass. 2-3% (half subsidy, medium transit service) Cash Out Employee An employer that has been subsidizing parking (free parking) 8-20 % (high transit Parking discontinues the subsidy and charges all employees for parking. service available) An amount equivalent to the previous subsidy is then provided 5-9 % (medium transit to each employee, who then can decide which mode of travel to services available) use (with subsidy above the cost of a monthly transit pass, those 2-4% (low transit employees would realize monetary gain for using transit). services available) Reduced Parking Parking costs charged to employees are reduced for high 1-3 % Cost for HOVs occupancy vehicles (HOV) such as carpools and van cols. Alternative Mode For employees that commute to work by modes other than 21-34% (full subsidy of Subsidy driving alone, the employer provides a monetary bonus to the cost, high alt.modes) employee. Most often, the bonus is provided monthly in the 2-4% (half subsidy of employee's paycheck. cost,medium alt.modes) On-Site Services Provide services at the worksite that are frequently used by the employees of that worksite. Examples include cafes, 1-2 % restaurants, d cleaners, day care and bank machines. Bicycle Program Provides support services to those employees that bicycle to work. Examples include: safe/secure bicycle storage, shower 0-10% facilities and subsidy of commute bicycle purchase. On-site Rideshare Employees who are interested in carpooling or vanpooling Matching for HOVs provide information to a transportation coordinator regarding their work hours, availability of a vehicle and place of residence. 1-2 % The coordinator then matches employees who can reasonably rideshare together. Provide Vanpools Employees that live near each other are organized into a vanpool 15-25% (company for their trip to work. The employer may subsidize the cost of provided van with fee) operation and maintaining the van. 30-40% (company subsidized van) Gift/Awards for Employees are offered the opportunity to receive a gift or an Alternative Mode award for using modes other than driving alone. 0-3% Use Provide Buspools Employees that live near each other or along a specified route 3-11 % are or anized into a bus ool for their trip to work Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transportation Demand Management 10-2 October 30, 2001 Ks Associates Potential Trip Strata Description Reduction Walking Program Provide support services for those who walk to work. This 0-3% could include buying walking shoes or providing showers. Company Cats for Employees are allowed to use company cars for business-related 0-1% Business Travel travel during the day. Guaranteed Ride A company owned or leased vehicle or taxi fare is provided in 1-3% Home Program the case of an emergency for employees that use alternative modes. Time off with Pay for Employees are offered time off with pay as an incentive to use 1_2% Alternative Mode alternative modes (rather than monetary, bonus, gift or awards) Use SOURCE: Guidance for Estimating Trip Reductions From Commute Options, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, August 1996. has indicated that a comprehensive set of complementary policies implemented over a large geographic area can have an effect on vehicle miles traveled' However, the emphasis of much of the research indicates that these policies must go well beyond the low-cost, uncontroversial measures commonly attributed to TDM (such as carpooling, transportation coordinators/associations, priority parking ® spaces) to be effective. Elements including parking and congestion pricing, improved services for alternative modes and other market-based measures are needed for TDM to have significant impact on reducing overall vehicle miles traveled. At the same time, the same research indicates that employee trip reduction programs can be an effective instrument of localized congestion relief'. For example, employers can substantially reduce peak hour trips by shifting work schedules, which may not reduce VMT but can effectively manage congestion. In Wilsonville, a Nike warehouse/distribution site generates 80% less vehicle trips than standard similar uses in the evening peak hour by using employee shifts that are outside the peak ® period (4 - 6 PM) This type of congestion management technique can extend the capacity of transportation facilities. CRITERIA Tigard TSP Task Force created/refined a set of goals and policies to guide transportation system development in Tigard (see Chapter 2). Goal 2 directly addresses reduction in travel, forming the basis for TDM. Goal2 Policy 7 Tigard will participate in vehicle trip reduction strategies developed regionally DEO and Metro have developed regional policies regarding trip reduction. Some of these policies are aimed at provision of parking 'The Potential for Land Use Demand Management Policies to Reduce Automobile Trips, ODOT, by ECO Northwest, June 1992. 4Evaluation of Employee Trip Reduction Programs Based upon California's Experience with Regulation XV, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Technical Council Committee 6Y-51, January 1994. ' Nike Parking Lot Expansion Trip Generation Study, City of Wilsonville, by DIGS Associates, May 1997. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transportation Demand Management 10-3 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates and others are aimed at ridesharing (Employee Commute Options- ECO rules). STRATEGIES Several strategies were evaluated by the TSP Task Force for transportation demand management in 40 Tigard. These strategies are aimed at providing the City with priorities toward implementing transportation demand management projects that meet the goals and policies of the City. The ranking of the strategies follows from most important to least important: • Focus programs on high demand districts (ie. Downtown Tigard, Tigard Triangle and 40 Washington Square) • Telecommuting/Fiber Optic to all residents and businesses • Require larger employers to meet DEQ's ECO rules 40 • Encourage linkage of housing with retail and employment centers • Mandate TDM though development review (would reinforce regional DEQ requirements) 40 • Limiting Parking (establish maximum parking ratios) • City funded program to provide information regarding commute options to larger employers (possibly via web page and email) • Support regional pricing policies/strategies • Do nothing related to TDM • Provide business association support for TDM coordination 0 RECOMMENDED FLAN 40 State, regional and county policy' all call for encouraging and promoting transportation demand management. The proposed policy of this plan calls for the city to support TDM. Collectively, the implementation of the modal plans in this TSP, along with the TDM plan, will contribute to the regional VMT reduction goal. Unlike bicycles, pedestrians and motor vehicles, implementation of this policy does not necessarily require capital infrastructure. In fact, much more of TDM is policy and management rather than concrete and asphalt. Because of this, the recommended TDM plan for Tigard consists of the following: • Support continued efforts by Washington County, Metro, ODOT, DEQ, Tri-Met and the Westside 41 Transportation Alliance to develop productive TDM measures that reduce VMT and peak hour 40 trips. Focus attention in Washington Square, downtown Tigard and Tigard Triangle. • Encourage the development of high speed communication in all parts of the city (fiber optic, 40 digital cable, DSL,....). The objective would be to allow employers and residents the maximum 40 opportunity to rely upon other systems for conducting business and activities than the transportation system during peak periods. 40 • Encourage development that effectively mix land uses to reduce vehicle trip generation. These plans may include development of linkages (particularly non-auto) that support greater use of alternative modes. Land use density should be higher at commuter rail transit stations (half stile ' Transportation Planning Rule, Section 660-12-035; Regional Transportation Policy, Metro, July 1996, page 1-39; and Washington County Transportation Plan, October 1988, page 30. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transportation Demand Management 10-4 October 30, 2001 DKs Associates radius) than elsewhere in the community (Tigard Transit Center and Washington Square Station areas). e Mixed land use projects have demonstrated the ability to reduce vehicle trips by capturing internal trips between land use types, encouraging waik/bike trips and producing shorter vehicle trips'. s As vehicle traffic levels increase with the build out of land uses within Tigard, it may become necessary to go beyond the coordination with the regional Employee Commute Options program developed by DEQ. This may include developing localized TDM programs for the city or subareas of the city to address vehicle trip reduction. For example, measures which are appropriate for site planning such as close-in parking for carpools, bicycle parking and convenient transit stops are already part of the Community Development Code (Section 18.765.030(F) calls for close in carpool parking for lots with 20 or more long term spaces and Section 18.360.090 requires pedestrian access to transit). As a capital oriented element, coordinate with ODOT and Tri-Met on the development of park-and -ride transit station or freeway interchange locations in Tigard (these are locations proven to be successful in attracting carpool/transit use). Figure 7-2 shows the current park and ride locations. Expansion of these sites should focus on transit station or freeway interchange locations. Interchange reconstruction projects should be required to identify potential sites for park-and-ride (even small sites of 50 spaces). Over the next 20 years, a reasonable budget for park-and-ride expansion might be about $100,000 per year (about 50 spaces a year, assuming pre-existing ROW). 7 Trip Generation, Sth edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1991, Chapter VIi, indicates potential for PM peak hour capture of between 27% and 66%. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Transportation Demand Management 10-5 October 30, 2001 Aft w4p ®o . Kv onLates Chapter 11 Funding/ CITY OF TIGMD OREGON Implementation This chapter outlines the funding sources that can be used to meet the needs of the transportation system. The costs for the elements of the transportation system plan are outlined and compared to the potential revenue sources. Options are discussed regarding how costs of the plan and revenues can be balanced. ® Transportation funding is commonly viewed as a user fee system where the users of the system pay ® for infrastructure through motor vehicle fees (such as gas tax and registration fees) or transit fares. However, a great share of motor vehicle user fees goes to road maintenance, operation and preservation of the system rather than construction of new system capacity. Much of what the public ® views as new construction is commonly funded (partially or fully) through property tax levies, traffic impact fees and fronting improvements to land development. In Washington County, the Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP) and traffic impact fees (TIF), similar to system development charges (SDC) are key examples. The transportation needs typically out pace dedicated funding sources. The key to balancing needs and funding are user fees. Motor vehicle fees have become a limited source of funding new transportation system capacity due to many factors: ® Gas taxes have been applied on a fixed cents per gallon basis not a percentage basis. Increases in the gasoline tax have not kept pace with cost of transportation needs. The Department of Transportation's Bureau of Transportation Statistics data indicates that in real terms the amount of federal gas tax paid by American households has actually declined by 41 percent from 1965 (when Interstate freeway building was at its peak) to 1995. That occurred with the real dollar gas tax increasing from 4 cents to 18.4 cents in the same time frame. o Oregon gas taxes have not increased since 1992 (currently 24 cents per gallon) and registration fees have been at $15 per vehicle per year for over ten years. Significant new roadway construction particularly that attributed to new development, has increased Tigard's inventory of roads and maintenance during this time. Additionally, the demands of region-wide growth have increased the need for capacity improvements in the system. The most current proposal for increased gas tax (Measure 82) is before the voters in May 2000. Y Significant improvements in fuel economy over the last 15 years have reduced the relationship of user fees to actual use. For example, a passenger car with 12,000 miles of use in a year at 15 miles per gallon could generate about $350 per year in revenue using current federal, state and county gas tax levels (about 44 cents) compared to less than $200 per year with a 27 miles per Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-1 October 30, 2001 D KS Associates gallon vehicle (a 45 percent reduction). Unfortunately the same vehicle does not use less roadway capacity. • The bill is coming due on many roads built 20 years ago in terms of maintenance. As the inventory of roads increased, the use of the roads increased faster. This is evident from national transportation statistics. The number of passenger cars and miles of urban roadways doubled from 1960 to 1995. However, the number of vehicle miles traveled on those roadways increased 470%. -This increased use proportionally increases maintenance needs. - Many of these roads are heavily used and the maintenance activities in the urban area have a substantial impact on operation unless work is conducted in off-peak periods, which increases the cost to maintain these roads. To compound matters, the amount of passenger car fuel consumed from 1960 to 1995 has only increased 66%, reducing the rate that revenue comes in from user fees relative to actual use. FUNDING Funding Sources and Opportunities There are several potential funding sources for transportation improvements. Table 11-1 summarizes several funding options available for transportation improvements. These are sources that have been used in the past by agencies in Oregon. In most cases these funding sources when used collectively are sufficient to fund transportation improvements for local communities. Due to the complexity of today's transportation projects, it is necessary to seek several avenues of funding projects. Unique or hybrid funding of projects generally will include these funding sources combined in a new package. Examples of funding sources which generally do not provide funding for roadways include: Property Tax General Funds, Car Rental Tax, Transient Lodging Tax, Business Income Tax, Business License Tax and Communication Services Tax. The federal gas tax is allocated through Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). The United States Congress has approved reauthorization of transportation funding (TEA 21) for another six years. Federal transportation funds are primarily distributed in the Portland region by Metro (hence the term "regional funds"). ISTEA/TEA 21 funds are much more flexible than state gas tax funds, with an emphasis on multi-modal projects. ISTEA/TEA 21 funds are allocated through several programs including the National Highway System (NHS), Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Programs. NHS funds focus on the interstate highway system and CMAQ funds are targeted for air quality non-attainment areas. Within the Portland region, funding for major transportation projects often is brought to a vote of the public for approval. This is usually for a large project or list of projects. Examples of this public funding includes the Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP) in Washington County, the Westside Light Rail Project and prior transportation bond measures in Tigard. Because of the need to gain public approval for transportation funding, it is important to develop a consensus in the community that supports needed transportation improvements. That is the value of the Transportation System Plan. In most communities where time is taken to build a consensus regarding a transportation plan, funding sources can be developed to meet the needs of the toms-comity. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-2 October 30, 2001 D KS Associates ® Table 11-1 Potential Trans ortation Revenue Sources Type Description Traffic Impact Traffic Impact Fees or System Development Charges (SDCs) have been used in Oregon and throughout the Fees (TIF) & United States. The cornerstone to development of TIF/SDCs involves two principles: 1) there must be a ® System reasonable connection between growth generated by development and the facilities constructed to serve that Development growth (generally determined by level of service or connectivity); and 2) there must be a general system-wide Charges (SDC) connection between the fees collected from the development and the benefits development receives. Charges are typically developed based on a measurement of the demand that new development places on the street system and the capital costs required to meet that demand. Washington County has a traffic impact fee (TIF) which is a voter approved tax. SDCs do not require a vote of the public and are not a tax. Gas Tax The State, cities and counties provide their basic roadway funding through a tax placed on gasoline. State gas tax is approved legislatively while voters approve local gas taxes. State funds are dedicated to roadway construction and maintenance, with one percent allocated to pedestrian and bicycle needs. This tax does not fall under the Measure 5 limits, because it is a pay-as-you-go user tax. Washington County has a one cent gas tax and a recent ballot initiatives to increase this county tax failed. Ink Other Motor The state collects truck weight mile taxes, vehicle registration fees and license fees. These funds are pooled ® Vehicle Fees together with the gas tax in distributing state motor vehicle fees to local agencies. Annual motor vehicle fee ® allocations to Washington County highways amount to about $100 million (including gas tax). Washington County considered raising motor vehicle registration by $15 per year in 1997 but it was not approved. ® Street Utility Certain cities have used street utility fees for maintenance. The fees are typically collected monthly with water or Fees sewer bills. These funds are not for capacity improvements, but for supporting local roadway maintenance based upon land use type and trip generation. This frees other revenue sources for capacity needs. Utility fees can be ® vulnerable to Measure 5 limitations, unless they include provisions for property owners to reduce or eliminate charges based on actual use. Exactions Frontage improvements are common examples of exaction costs passed to developers. These have been used to build much of Tigard's local street system. Developers of sites adjacent to unimproved roadway frontage are responsible for providing those roadway improvements. Developers of sites adjacent to improvements identified as TIF/SDC projects can be credited the value of their frontage work, which is included in the TIF/SDC project- list cost estimate. ® Local LIDS provide a means for funding specific improvements that benefit a specific group of property owners. am I Improvement Assessments are placed against benefiting properties to pay for improvements. LIDS can be matched against other Districts (LID) funds whew a project has system wide benefit beyond benefiting the adjacent properties. Similarly, districts can ~j be created for tax increment type financing. In Tigard, legal and public acceptance issues with LIDs have made them less effective and expense to administer. ® Special A variety of special assessments are available in Oregon to defray costs of sidewalks, curbs, gutters, street lighting, ® Assessments parking and CBD or commercial zone transportation improvements. These assessments would likely fall within the Measure 50 limitations. In Washington County, other examples of transportation assessments include MSTIP lak P (Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program) and the urban road maintenance district property tax levy. 1 Both of these are property tax assessments which have been imposed through votes of the public. A regional aft example would be the Westside LRT where the local share of funding was voter approved as an addition to Aft property tax. Tigard is forwarding a transportation bond measure to the voters in 2000. Driveway Fees Gresham collects a Public Street Charge and a Driveway Approach Permit Fee. These fees are project specific and revenue varies year to year based upon development permits. These funds are used for city maintenance and ® operation. Employment Tri-Met collects a tax for transit operations in the Portland region through payroll and self employment taxes. Taxes Approximately $120 million are collected annually in the Portland region for transit. Oregon Special The Special Public Works Fund (SPWF) Program was created by the legislature in 1985 as an economic Public Works development element of the Oregon Lottery. The program provides grants and loan assistance to eligible lah Fund municipalities. There has been limited use of these funds on urban arterials. These funds are commonly used on state highways (a recent Portland area example being Immediate Opportunity Funds used for the US 26/Shute interchange associated with Nike). 0 Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-3 October30, 2001 KS Associates 40 0 Traffic impact fees (TIF) are used to off set the cost of growth related capacity needs within the transportation system. Washington County oversees administration of the TIF program coundtywide, but each city assesses, collects and spends TIF funds for their own jurisdiction. The fee is updated periodically to adjust for inflation. System development charges (SDCs) are similar to TIF, except TIF require a vote of the public for implementation where SDCs do not. Both SDCs and TIFs rely upon a strong nexus between the impact of growth on the transportation system and the cost for 40 transportation capacity improvements to serve land use growth. For example, maintenance costs or upgrading design without adding capacity are elements that would not be included in a TIF or SDC. SDC can also be placed over districts to address growth related impacts. In Wilsonville, the city has 40 imposed an interchange SDC to provide local matching funds to ODOT for the widening of the I- 5/Wilsonville Road interchange. New development pays a SDC for each trip they add to the I- 5/Wilsonville Road interchange area in the PM peak hour. Table 11-2 provides a comparison of SDC/T1F rates in the Portland region. Table 11-2 Sample TIF in the Region Residential Non-Residential Cost per Dwelling Cost per 1,000 Square Feet Unit Land Use Single Multi- Light Indust Office* Medical Retail* Fast Family Family Office Food ITE Code 210 220 110 710 720 820 834 Lake Oswego $ 3,592 $ 2,573 $ 3,820 $ 6,38 3 $ 13,221 $ 4,002 $ 61 052 Vancouver $ 989 $ 672 $ 313 $ 710 $ 1,844 Traffic Std $ 4,071 $ 17 386 Gresham $ 1,202 $ 750 $ 1,166 $ 2,225 $ 4,855 $ 3,641 $ 24,642 Troutdale $ 588 $ 285 $ 570 $ 1,088 $ 2,37 5 $ 3,393 Wilsonville $ 2,256 $ 1,573, $ 2,547 $ 3,70 0 $ 3,70 0 $ 4,755 $ 14,265 Washougal $ 775 $ 445 $ 752 $ 1,159 $ 3,132 Clark Coun : Mt. Vista $ 2,638 $ 1,787 $ 1,807 $ 3,169 $ 7,415 $ 3,359 $ 32,06 Clark Coun : Orchards $ 1,161 $ 786 $ 795 $ 1,394 $ 3,262 $ 1,478 $ 14,107 Washin ton Coun $ 1,730 $ 1,181 $ 1,199 $ 2,034 $ 5,604 $ 2,998 $ 4,500 Clackamas County $ 1 277 $ 884 $ 985 $ 1,557 $ 5,108 $ 2,874 $ 12 89 Battleground $ 2,8691 $ 1,988 $ 1,955 $ 3,169 $ 8,489 $ 3,894 $ 27,22 Rid efield $ 1,9131 $ 1,099 $ 1,858 $ 4,243 $ 7,728 $ 11,0421 $ 80,19 Camas (proposed) $ 1,4161$ 921 $ 1,348 $ 2,62 6 $ 4,592 $ 2,708 $ 21,63 1 2& West Linn $ 2,170 $ 1,470, $ - $ 2,961 $ - $ 8349 $ - Note: Assumes a 100,000 sf office and a 150,000 sf retail center. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-4 October 30, 2001 Fee K Associates COSTS ® Cost estimates (general order of magnitude) were developed for the projects identified in the motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian elements. Costs estimates from the RTP or MSTIP projects in Tigard were used in this study. Other projects were estimated using general unit costs for transportation ® improvements, but do not reflect the unique project costs that can (on some projects due to right-of- way, environmental mitigation and/or utilities) significantly add to project cost (25 to 75 percent in some cases, due to environmental, utility or right-of-way issues). Development of more detailed project costs can be prepared in the future with project development. Since many of the projects are ® multi-modal, the costs were developed at a project level incorporating all modes, as appropriate. It ® may be desirable to break project mode elements out separately, however, in most cases, there are greater cost efficiencies of undertaking a combined, overall project. Each of these project costs will need further refinement to detail right-of-way requirements and costs associated with special design details as projects are pursued. Table 11-3 summarizes the elements of the plan that were not project specific and how costs will be addressed for these elements. ® It should be noted that all costs are 2000 based. Using the Engineering News Record' research on ® historical construction costs, it can be anticipated that (based on the past ten years) construction costs will increase 2.5 percent per year. Since 1980, construction costs have hicreased 196 percent over 20 years. Tables 11-4, 11-5, 11-6 and 11-7 summarize the key projects in the TSP by three key groups including: ® • Bicycle Improvements • Pedestrian Improvements • Motor Vehicle Improvements Many of the project costs have been developed by Washington County, Metro or ODOT for projects in the RTP. These project costs have been utilized for the purposes of this TSP. 0 ' Engineering News Record, construction cost index data, enr.com. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-5 October 30, 2001 1 DKS Associates Table 11-3 Issues With Non-Auto, Pedestrian and Bicycle Costs Mode Issues Parking The TSP does not define specific projects. Off-street parking will be provided by private property owners as land develops. Neighborhood Traffic Management Specific NTM projects are not defined. Traffic humps can cost $2,000 to $4,000 each and traffic circles can cost $3,000 to $8,000 each. A speed trailer can cost about $10,000. Based upon this continuing the existing City program of about $50,000 per year meet future needs. Public Transportation Tri-Met will continue to develop costs for implementing transit related improvements. The City can supplement this by incorporating transit features through development exactions and roadway project design. Developing new transit services in Tigard similar to the corridor services outlined in the TSP will require Tri-Met to reallocate funding or seek additional sources of o ratio funds. Commuter Rail Washington County is currently in the environmental phase of this project that may cost between $60 and $80 million. The City should work with Washington County and Yamhill County to encourage the development of a western commuter rail line to Yamhill Count and points west. Trucks/Freight Roadway funding will address these needs. Roadway overcrossings of railroads can use special Public Utilities Commission funds set aside for safety im rovements to railroad crossings. Rail Costs to be addressed and funded by private railroad companies and the state. Air, Water, Pipeline Not required by City, Transportation Demand Management DEQ has established regional guidelines. Private business will need to support employee trip reduction programs. In the future, the city may need to support a supplemental program that may have a cost range of $25,000 to $50,000 r year. Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-8 October30, 2001 DKS Associates Table 11-4 Pedestrian Action Plan Project List Rank* Project From To Cost H North Dakota Street 121" Avenue Greenburg Road $230,5W H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard $200,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road $350,000 H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80 Avenue $500,000 ® H ORE 99W McDonalu Street South City Limits $500,000 ® M Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road $1,200,000 M Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road $300,000 ® M 121" Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street $450,000 M Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72 Avenue $250,000 M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements (RTP 6022) $6,000,000 Regional Center ® L Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62 Avenue $1,000,000 ® L. Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road $200,000 Subtotal $11,800,000 ® Sidewalks to be built with Street Improvements ® H Bonita Road West of 72 Avenue 72 Avenue $50,000 ® H Walnut Street 135 Avenue Tiedeman Avenue $570,000 ® H Gaardc Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $620,000 ® H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Waffle Street $1,000,000 ® H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue $120,000 H Tigard Street 115th Street Main Street $350,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $100,000 H Fonner Street walnut Street 121st Avenue $250,000 H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street $50,000 ® M 72 Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road $1,200,000 M Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits $670,000 M Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road $1,000,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (W) Scholls Ferry Road (E) $950,000 L 72 Avenue Carman/Upper BoonesFry. Durham Road $250,000 Subtotal $7,180,000 Annual Sidewalk Program at $50,000 per year for 20 years $1,000,000 Action Plan Total $19,360,000 Tigaid Transportation System Plan P99161 ® Funding and Implementation 11-7 October30, 2001 M ACS Associates Table 11-5 Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost RAMC Project From To Cost H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72 Avenue $250,000 H Bonita Road 72 Avenue West of 72 Ave. $50,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $135,000 H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 90 Avenue $300,000 H 98 Avenue Murdock Stret Durham Road $275,000 H 92 Avenue Durham Road Cook Park $270,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Greenbur Road Walnut Street $250,000 M 121" Avenue Walnut Street Gaarde Street $400,000 L Taylor's Ferry Road Washington Drive City Limits $500,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Rd $100,000 L O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard $275,000 L Frewin Street ORE 99W O'Mara Street $150,000 Subtotal $2 S5 000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $600,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Locust Street $500,000 H Greenbur Road Hall Boulevard Cascade Avenue $300,000 H ORE 99W East City Limits South City Limits $1,300,000 M 72 Avenue ORE 99W South City Limits $960,000 M Hall Boulevard Pfaffle Street Bonita Road $550,000 M Carman Drive I-5 Durham Road $200,000 IP M Walnut Street ORE 99W Barrows Road $1,400,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road Scholls Ferry Rd. (E $900,000 L Bull Mountain Road 150 Avenue Beef Bend Road $550,000 L ' Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Fe Rd. $1,600,000 Subtotal $8,860,000 Multi- Use Pathways H Hunziker Link to LO Linka a to Kruse Way Trail in Lake Oswego $500,000 M Fanno Creek Trail Tualatin River to City Hall, ORE 99W to Tigard $3,600,000 M Tualatin River Trail Adjacent to Cook Park from Powerlines to Fanno $2,600,000 M Tualatin River Crossing Near 108 Avenue $3,000,000 L Powerlines Corridor From Beaverton to Tualatin River Trail $2,500,000 Subtotal $12,200,000 Action Plan Total $24,015,000 * H=High, M=Medium. L--Low Priority Tigard Transpodatlon System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-8 October 30, 2001 DDS Associates Table 11-6 Future Street Improvements (All Projects include sidewalks, bicycle lanes and transit accommodations as required) w- Mae I-5 Widen to 4 plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) $200,000,000 Not Funded ® between ORE 217 and I-205 Not in any plan Provide additional throughput capacity (each $50,000,000 direction) south to Wilsonville ® ORE 217 Widen to 3 lanes plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) $240,000,000 Not Funded between US 26 and 72 4 Avenue In RTP (as widening or HOV or HOT) New ORE 217/1-5 interchange between 72nd Avenue Phase I Funded ® and Bangy Road Phase 2 $39,000,000 Phase 2 & 3 in RTP ® Phase 3 $15,000,000 RTP 6027 & 6028 ® ORE 99W Widen to 7 lanes (total-both directions) between I- $25,000,000 RTP 6039 5 and Greenbur Road 1-5 to ORE 99W Connector linking 1-5 and ORE 99W (model assumed $250,000,000 RTP 6005 connector would be located north of Sherwood-- (Toll Route) ® specific location to be determined b further stud Overcrossings over ORE 5 lane overcrossings linking Washington Square and $40,000,000 RTP 6011 & 6052 217 Cascade Avenue-one north of Scholls Ferry Road, one south of Scholls Ferry Road to Nimbus Connector Road Nimbus south to Greenbur $15,000,000 RTP 6053 Overcrossing of I-5 Widen Carman Drive interchange overcrossing to six $4,000,000 Not Funded lanes from four (two through lanes each way, side by In no Plans side left turn lanes). Scholls Ferry Road Widen to 7 lanes (total-both directions) between $30,000,000 To 125 - RTP 6021 ORE 217 and Barrows Road (East) West of 125x' not 4 funded i TShVCorridor Signal Timing/ITS $500,000 RTP 6025 Greenburg Road Widen to 4 lanes adjacent to cemetery (Hall to $2,500,000 RTP 6015 i Locust) Widen to 5 lanes: Locust to Shady Lane $2,500,000 RTP 6014 Shady Lane to North Dakota $2,000,000 RTP 6016 Tiedeman to ORE 99W $4,800,000 RTP 6031 Walnut Boulevard Widen to 3 lanes between 135 (or where Gaarde $11,800,000 RTP 6033 & 6034 connects) to ORE 99W Extend Walnut east of ORE 99W to meet Not Funded Ash/Scoffins and Hunziker Streets 3 lanes $19,000,000 In no plans Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-9 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates Gaarde Street Extend and widen to 3 lanes Walnut to ORE 99W $4,000,000 RTP 6035 Use access control and 2 lanes in sensitive areas all Boulevard Widen to 5 lanes Scholls Ferry to Locust $4,700,000 RTP 6013 Widen Hall south of Locust $4,700,000 RTP 6030 Extend south to Tualatin (3 lanes-total, both $25,000,000 RTP 6069 directions) Durham Road Widen to 5 lanes (total, both directions) between Hall $8,000,000 RTP 6037 Boulevard and Upper Boones Ferry Road. Reserve right-of-way to the west for 5 lanes Durham Road/Upper Realign intersection so that Durham Road continues $5,000,000 RTP 6043 Boones Ferry Road on continous route to I-5/Carmen interchange- intersection Upper Boones Ferry Road would "tee" into Durham. Road/Upper Boones Ferry Road intersection 72 Avenue Widen to 5 lanes: Tigard Triangle LID ORE 99W to Hunziker $3,000,000 RTP 6040 Hunziker to Bonita $5,000,000 RTP 6041 Bonita to Durham $51000,000 RTP 6042 Hunziker/Hampton Realign Hunziker Road to meet Hampton Road at $10,000,000 RTP 6032 72nd Avenue-requires overcrossing over ORE 217- removes existing 72nd Avenue/Hunziker intersection Atlanta Street Extend Atlanta Street west to meet 72 Avenue $2,500,000 To be funded with development in Tigard Triangle (i.e. LID) Dartmouth Street Widen to five lanes from ORE 99W to I-5 $750,000 RTP 6045 To be funded by fronting improvements 68 Avenue Widen to 3-lanes between Dartmouth/I-5 Ramps and $3,600,000 Not Funded (could ORE 217 partially funded by development in Tigaz Extend 68's Avenue south to meet ORE 217 Triangle-ie. LID) providing right-in/right-out only access to 68`s Avenue from ORE 217, replacing the NB ramps to $15,000,000 RTP 6047 72nd at ORE 217 Scoffins/Hunziker/Hall Realign Scoffins to meet Hunziker at Hall $1,000,000 Not Funded intersection Beef Bend Road 13 V to King Arthur - 3 lanes $5,000,000 RTP 6059 Access Control should be implemented to preserve capacity with 2 lanes (with intersection turn lanes). $500,000 Not Funded Minimum 1,000 foot spacing should be used between Implemented with any driveway(s) and/or public street(s) adjacent developme Beef Bend/Elsner from ORE 99W to Scholls Ferry $24,000,000 RTP 6111 Rd Tigard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-10 October 30, 2001 ACS Associates IBM FWaIlloStreet. ss Ferry Road Extend to Oleson Road $1,900,000 RTP 6017 New roadway connecting Hunziker Street and Hall $10,000,000 Not Funded Boulevard ORE 99W Traffic Signal Signal interconnection from I-5 to Durham $2,000,000 RTP 6054 & 6055 System/Management TOTAL $1,091,750,000 - RTP cost estimates and project numbers utilized where available ® Table 11-7 City of Ti and Future Intersection Im rovements 1 Davies/Scholls Ferry Road • Traffic signal • Northbound right turn lane $3,230,000 • Realign to meet Barrows Road 2 North Dakota/125 /Scholls Ferry • Southbound right turn lane Road a Retain westbound right turn lane when 3rd lane added on Scholls Ferry Road $450,000 • Change from protected left turn phasing to permitted phasing north/south 3 Nimbus/Scholls Ferry Road • Retain eastbound right turn lane when 3-d lane added on Scholls Ferry Road • Retain westbound right turn lane when 3'd lane added on Scholls Ferry Road $1,150,000 v Southbound right turn lane • Reconfigure northbound and southbound lanes to create exclusive left turn lanes • Change from split phasing to protected ® left turn phasing north/south ® 4 121"/Walnut • Traffic signal RTP 6033 • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane $2,150,000 • Eastbound left tarn lane • Westbound left turn lane 5 121 "/North Dakota • Traffic signal $150,000 6 Greenburg/Oleson/Hall a 2°d northbound left turn lane • Extend signal cycle length $550,000 • Assumes Hall widened to 5 lanes 7 GreenburgtWashington Square o Boulevard Treatment Road . RTP 6015 $2500,000 8 Main/Greenburg/ORE 99W • Southbound left turn lane • Retain westbound right turn lane when $700,000 ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 9 GreenburglTiedeman a Extend signal cycle length o m proved geometry/alignment $2,050,000 10 HaIUOak Jo_ Extend signal cycle length 7/gad Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-11 October 30, 2001 DDS Associates • Assumes Hall widened to 5 lanes $50,000 11 Hall/ORE 99W • Southbound right turn lane RTP 6056 • Northbound left turn lane • Westbound right turn overlap $3,700,000 • Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 12 ORE 217 NB Ramps/ORE 99W • Retain eastbound right turn lane when $900,000 ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes • Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes • 2od northbound left turn lane 13 ORE 217 SB Ramps/ORE 99W • 2nd southbound right turn lane $400,000 • Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 14 Dartmouth/ORE 99W • Retain eastbound right turn lane when $200,000 ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 15 72 /ORE 99W • Southbound right turn lane • Northbound right turn overlap • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south $500,000 • Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 16 68 /ORE 99W • 2' westbound left turn lane • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane $1,550,000 • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south 17 72 /Dartmouth • Traffic signal • Assumes 72°d Avenue and Dartmouth $150,000 widened to 5 lanes 18 681°/Atlanta/Haines • Traffic signal $150,000 19 ORE 217 SB Ramps/72 • Assumes 72nd Avenue widened to 5 Roadway Widening lanes 20 72 /Bonita • 72°d Avenue widened to 5 lanes Roadway Widening 21 72 /Carmen o 2nd northbound right turn lane $200,000 22 72 /Upper Boones Ferry Road • Assumes Durham/Upper Boones $1,000,000 Fe /72nd widened to 5 lanes (Also see Table 11-6a) 23 Ha1VSattler/Ross • Traffic signal • Northbound left turn lane $1,150,000 • Southbound left turn lane 24 Hall/Durham • 2' southbound left turn lane • Widen west of intersection to introduce $1,220,000 5-lane section on Durham (include existing westbound ri ht turn lane) 25 ORE 99W/McDonald/Gaarde to Westbound right turn lane $700,000 Tigani Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-12 October 30, 2001 ACS Associates to - • 2nd Northbound left turn lane , 26 ORE 99W/Beef Bend • Southbound right turn lane (on ORE $250,000 99W) • Adjust cycle le gth 27 Tiedeman/Walnut • Completed b 28 Murray/Scholls Ferry Road • 2"d westbound right turn lane • Add additional southbound lane to achieve 2 southbound left turn lanes and two southbound through lanes $800,000 • Extend signal cycle length • Changes to protected left turn phasing north/south and east/west 29 Beef Bend/Scholls Ferry Road • Eastbound right turn lane • Northbound left turn lane • Eastbound right turn overlap $850,000 • Change to protected phasing east/west • Change to split phasing north south 30 Walnut/ORE 99W • Retain westbound right turn lane when $250,000 ORE 99W is widened to 7 lanes • Change to protected left turn phasing on Walnut ® 31 72 /Hampton/13unziker • Southbound right turn lane OR eastbound right turn lane $300,000 • Change to protected left turn phasing all ® directions 32 Durham/Upper Boones Ferry Road • Reconfigure intersection to make $1,000,000 through route between Durham and I- (Also see Table 11-6a) 5/Carmen interchange 33 GaardelWalnut • Traffic signal $350,000 • Eastbound right turn lane 34 68 /Dartmouth a Traffic signal $150,000 35 Carman/I-5 southbound • Eastbound right turn lane $200,000 36 Carman/1-5 northbound • 2°d westbound through lane • 2°d northbound left turn lane $500,000 • Eastbound separate through and left turn (2 lanes Safety Enhancements Several Intersections $20,000,000 Pedestrian Crossings Several Locations $8,000,000 Total Intersection Improvements $57,450,0001 * - Based upon tentative draft RTP preferred improvement list from Metro, reference numbers from November 1998 listing. Planned indicates projects included in the MSTIP, STEP, CEP or approved (1995) RTP funding programs. Not in Plans indicates projects that have not be previously addressed in one of the local or regional transportation improvement plans. 77garti Transportation System Alan P99161 ® Funding and Implementation 11-13 October 30, 2001 K Associates FINANCING ISSUES The collective funding requirements of the Tigard TSP is outlined by mode in Table 11-8. Based upon current sources of funding, the cost of the needs far exceeds the existing funding projected over the next 20 years. It should be noted that elements of the bicycle and pedestrian project lists that are redundant to the street improvement list were deducted to avoid double counting. A small portion of this difference can be made up by land use development exactions, where unimproved frontage is built to the TSP standards as projects are implemented. A rough estimate of the potential value of fronting development exactions is about $50 million dollars over 20 years, assuming that all the unimproved frontages of roadway projects (sidewalk plus 18 feet of street) identified in this plan were exactions. This would assume that the fronting improvements would not be credited to TIF/SDC revenue that is already included in the existing funding outlook. The magnitude of the fronting improvements is such that the City and County will need to develop private/public partnerships to assure the reasonable delivery of future improvements in a timely manner. Table 11-8 Costs for Tigard Transportation Plan over 20 ears (2000 Dollars) Transportation Element Approximate Cost Street Improvement Projects: Current Plans (RTP) $529,350,000 Unfunded/Not in Plans $619,850,000 Signal Coordination/ITS Systems ($100,000/yr) $2,000,000 Road Maintenance (assumes 4% per year growth) $46,000,000 Bicycle Master Plan (Total $24,015,000) $15,155,000 Pedestrian Action Plan (Total $19,436,000) $12,480,000 Pedestrian/School Safety Program ($10,000/yr) $250,000 Sidewalk Grant Program ($50,000/yr) $1,000,000 Park-and-ride Expansion (1,000 spaces) $2,000,000 Commuter Rail (Beaverton-Wilsonville) $71,500,000 Neighborhood Traffic Management ($50,000/yr) $1,000,000 TSP Support Documents (i.e., Design standard update, $1,000,000 TDM Support ($25,000/yr) $500,000 TWENTY YEAR TOTAL in 2000 Dollars $1,302,085,000 • Many of these projects include multi-modal elements built with streets, such as bike lanes and sidewalks. Project costs are included here and not repeated in bicycle and pedestrian costs. While projects in the RTP do not have committed funds, they represent a level of funding that is considered likely over the next 20 years given current funding sources. Of this total, ten projects on I-5, ORE 217, I-5/0RE 99W connector and ORE 99W (state facilities) represent about $900,000,000 of the total. The remaining projects in Tigard represent about $400,000,000. Tigard Transport0on System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-14 October 30, 2001 S Associates The funding sources, which can be used for various modes of transportation are summarized in Table 11-9. Historically, funding sources have been developed to support roadways for automobiles. Few funding sources have been allocated to other travel modes. Other travel modes were commonly implemented as an element of a roadway project, if funded at all. A few funding sources that the City receives for other modes include an allocation of the state motor vehicle fees which come to the City being dedicated to pedestrian/bicycle paths (about $24,000 per year) and a small set aside of the MST1P funds for bikeways (about $20,000 per year). While federal gas tax funds are specifically allocated to multi-modal and balanced investments in transportation, other sources of funds such as state gas tax cannot be used for anything but highway use. To address these other modes the City will need to specifically seek funds for a balanced transportation system, while managing the overall needs and revenues. Table 11-9 Fund Source by Project Type Source Bicycle Pedestrian Streets Maintenance Transit Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) e • ✓ System Development Charges (SDQ Gas Tax/Motor Vehicle Fees STATE • o ✓ ✓ FEDERAL ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Street Utility Fees Exaction's o ✓ ✓ Local Improvement Districts (LID) • • ✓ Tax Increment Financing ✓ ✓ ✓ Special Assessments • ✓ Driveway Fees ✓ ✓ Payroll Employee Tax Oregon Special Public Works Fund • • ✓ ✓ • Typically as part of roadway project where other modes are incorporated ✓ Used as a primary source of funding Tigard Tmnsportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11.15 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates Current transportation revenue for the City of Tigard is summarized in Table 11-10. Presuming a constant funding level for 20 years, this would potentially fund about $250,000,000 of transportation projects (maintenance, operation, construction). As a comparison to this number, the amount of regional funding allocated to transportation projects in Tigard was calculated using the RTP constrained funding scenario. Approximately $150 million of transportation projects have been identified in the current funding programs.' While these numbers are not exactly the same (the numbers from Table 11-10 include all City and local funding sources), they clearly point out that there is a serious shortfall between the cost of the transportation plan and the current funding sources. The transportation plan costs of $1.3 billion are much greater than the best case revenue scenario of about $250 million using existing funding sources. While fronting improvements and exactions have the potential to be roughly $120 million in the best scenario, this leaves a billion dollar gap between needs and reasonably expected revenue. Table 11-10 Estimation of Available Transportation Funding From Existing Sources 2000 Dollars (approximate) Source Approximate Annual Revenue State Motor Vehicle Fees to City $1,500,000 Count Gas Tax to City $100,000 TIF to City $1.200.000 MSTIP with Ch (approximate) $2,000,000 State/Federal Fees use in City $5,000,000 (approximate, assuming 30% capital allocation) ANNUAL TOTAL $9,800,000 20 YEAR Ti and Transportation Bond Potentail $5020002000 20 YEARS OF CURRENT FUNDING $250 000 000 Exploring Funding Concepts The gap between transportation plan costs and existing revenue sources creates the need to explore several other concepts. Several options are outlined below: A. Reduce the transportation plan costs. This can eliminate funding shortfalls by deferring or eliminating projects. While some cost reduction is expected in the normal implementation of transportation projects of this size, to meet the total funding shortfall by this strategy would have negative impacts. Lower service levels for all modes of transportation, more extensive congestion, and impacts on community livability would be expected. Depending how much of the plan is eliminated (assuming land use forecasts occur), this strategy could negatively impact the economic potential of Tigard (businesses relocate,. people move out and development does not reach modified 2015 forecasts). Additionally, by deferring capital costs of significant projects outside of 20 years it can be expected that the same projects will cost multiples of their estimated costs in the short term. This is similar to deferring roadway maintenance and paying 4 to 5 times the cost of the same improvement by waiting years into the future to act. Rising land costs and the development of vacant land adjacent to roadways, which increases mitigation requirements (dealing with hundreds of residents rather than one 'interim Federal Regional Transportation Plan. Metro, July 1995, Table 7-2. 77gard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-16 October 30, 2001 KS Associates landowner). Additionally changing water quality/detention needs with Salmon legislation result in higher project costs with time. These increases in cost erode transportation dollars, ® making deferral of transportation system improvements an unwise choice in managing the public interest. B. Build alternative mode Projects and eliminate costly road Proiects. This strategy is commonly discussed by people as a way to "get people out of their cars". However, the overall future need for transportation in Tigard results from the majority of people using motor vehicles (single occupant vehicles and carpool/vanpools). By not building road projects, the resulting congestion would severely impact bus transit, bicycle and pedestrian travel which all use the same streets as automobiles. The forecast increase in PM peak hour vehicle use in Tigard (about 7,000 to 15,000 additional vehicle trips in 20 years is 5 to 7 times ® the total existing Tri-Met bus ridership in Tigard. While transit will play a significant role in reducing motor vehicle trips, it is unlikely it could eliminate the need for the majority of roadway projects. C. Increase gas tax to meet TSP needs. The gas tax, although assumed to be the major ® transportation funding element is one of many sources of funds. It is primarily used to maintain the transportation system not build new local street system capacity. Presently, the ® state gas tax generates about $2.5 million per year in revenue for the city and the county one cent gas tax generates about $100,000 per year for the city. If all the motor vehicle fees of the state, county and city were increased proportionately to by themselves fund the Tigard transportation (less ODOT projects) shortfall, it would require an increase of over $0.40 per gallon of gasoline in Tigard. Major increases to motor vehicle fees of this type would likely require voter approval. This amount of gas tax increase by itself would not be reasonable today, and points to the fact that funding will need to be from a variety of sources, not just one fee. D. Make development Pay for all the difference in future transportation needs since they are caused by growth. If all the excess funds for Tigard improvements (less ODOT projects) were divided by the increment of trips between 1997 and the year 2015 and Tigard was responsible for the total cost of improvements it would require $8,000 per evening peak trip would need to be charged to all development on top of all existing fees, taxes and exactions. This would double the current TIF by just adding on Tigard's needs. An increase of this type would impact the economic development potential of Tigard since other cities (or states) may not have similar charges. Additionally, many of the transportation projects identified in the TSP serve existing and future users. For example, a roadway connection project with sidewalks and bicycle lanes (such as Walnut Street) is beneficial to all system users. This approach would unfairly impose the entire responsibility of TSP implementation on development. Additionally, some improvements are needed even if no growth were to occur, creating a need to fund at least some transportation improvements by other means. E. Do not allow land development unless all transportation needs can be funded. This concept is known as concurrency. This has been implemented in various forms through level of service code amendments required by state laws (Florida and Washington). The examples over the last 15 years of these policies is clear. Funding policy redirects itself to fix capacity problems. Transit, pedestrian, bicycle and other mode facilities are generally not based on capacity but connectivity and access. The outcome in these communities is always larger 77gard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-17 October 30, 2001 DKS Associates roads - from Clark County, Washington to Contra Costa County, California to Boward County, Florida. A balanced transportation system is difficult to develop under concurrency assumptions. Outright development moratoria based upon transportation are difficult to impose given Oregon Planning and property rights laws. Creating extraordinary requirements for development would impact economic vitality and likely move the problem rather than fix it. ODOT has taken positions recently that have opposed rezoning of land if state facilities do not have adequate capacity and funding is not programmed. This is similar to concurrency. It 'blends assumptions that Comprehensive Plan land uses could be adequately served and that all new/additional vehicle trips are bad for the transportation system. Again, the linkage of concurrency in any form, no matter how simple or appealing, does not produce the most effective or efficient transportation system. This approach defers improvements increasing their eventual cost of implementation. It is a reactive policy, not a progressive plan to reduce overall transportation system costs. F. Use bonds to fund transportation needs. Bonds are commonly used for financing transportation projects (the Westside LRT project property tax levy uses tax receipts to fund bond payments to fund the project). The use of public bonds would require a vote of the public. This type of program would include a list of transportation projects that would be funded and a general time frame for completion. Based upon an estimate of property value in Tigard, the funding gap would require an increase in property tax approximately $500 per year over 20 years for a homeowner of a $200,000 home. If all the transportation improvement in the Tigard area were pass on via bonds to Tigard property owners it would represent over $2,000 per year to a $200,000 home. Because increases to property tax are not generally viewed positively by the public, an extensive public involvement effort would be necessary to coordinate the understanding of need, the extent that the bonds should fund transportation needs and what the actual program elements would include. In studying various strategies, it is clear a "one size fits all" plan will not succeed. It is recommended that a diversified and pragmatic strategy be developed that reflects political realities, economic needs, community livability and a balanced transportation system. Since transportation funding is not controlled locally, it will require steps to be taken at the state, regional, county and city level to be effective and fair. The following steps are necessary to implement the Tigard TSP. • Prioritize all transportation projects in Tigard so that the Regional Transportation Plan includes the projects of greatest need. The other projects should be included in preferred and strategic project lists to be eligible to compete for future regional funding. Additionally, as conditions change in the future the need for certain projects may change. • Use the priority listing to create City of Tigard transportation bond measures - this would have the potential to fund $50 to $100 million over 20 years. The current bond measure would be part of this implementation step. • Start with funding the highest priority TSP needs on the anticipation that over the next 20 years, new and complementary funding programs will be developed. This is more pragmatic than presuming all projects must have funding commitments today and accommodates changing needs and priorities over time. It is important not to stop everything today until a plan to fully fund all the. transportation, needs . approved. Over time policies and programs in the plan which are intended to reduce vehicle demand can mature and new technologies that improve transportation T7gard Transportatfon System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-18 October 30, 2001 T DKS Associates efficiency can evolve that may change how much or when funding becomes needed. o Given the relative size of a gas tax increase to fund transportation improvements in Tigard, a more diverse source of state and regional funding will be needed. Assuming that funding shortfalls can best be paid by gas tax statewide ignores the fact that the rest of the state may not share Tigard's or the Portland region's need to fund transportation. Three steps can be taken including: Statewide: Support gradual and incremental increases to the state gas tax are made (about $0.06 to $0.10 per gallon each six to eight years (assumes three increases in 20 years). Support statewide collection and proportional increases to tiuck fees (presently weight- mile tax and diesel tax in other states). Regionally: Support increases to motor vehicle registration and air quality surcharges (payable every two years at DEQ inspection or upon sale of vehicle based upon actual miles driven). These relate the urban needs and problems. However, if air quality improves the nexus of higher fees may be difficult. County: Update the TIF to better reflect arterial and collector needs in the county. Credits ® and fronting improvements will need to be reevaluated, particularly with more and more potential for redevelopment. It can almost be assured that TIF's would need to be increased given the county wide transportation needs. In addition, a program similar to ® the MSTIP where a property tax levy is used to fund the most significant projects in Tigard (or regionally, as in Washington County) could be done over the next 20 years, potentially funding up to a quarter to a half of the funding shortfall. Additionally, county ® gas tax and vehicle registration fees could be increased or created. • Maximize the use of funding sources from smaller pedestrian and bicycle projects. Over a twenty year period the following funding sources could generate a few million dollars which is significant for those modes of travel: 1. Obtain planning assistance money from the Transportation/Growth Management Program. This could include project grants or planning assistance through "Quick Response" teams. The TGM program is administered by ODOT/DLCD. 2. ODOT's Bicycle and Pedestrian Program administers two grant programs to assist in the development of walking and bicycling options. Local grants up to $100,000 are shared 80% state/20% local can be useful in filling gaps. 3. The Oregon Livability Initiative could be a source of funds for further commuter rail planning to Yamhill County. 4. TEA-21 Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program is a source of funds administered by Metro that provides a regional source of money for smaller pedestrian/bicycle projects. ® At a city level, consider needed city code/charter changes to allow broad use of local improvement districts, area SDC's and bond measures to fund elements of the transportation plan. One of the toughest problems for development of concurrency are initial costs for street improvements. Tax increment financing commonly used for redevelopment has nearly been discontinued by public agencies due to tax reduction measures. Tax increment refers to selling bonds to pay for infrastructure that are paid off by the net income of increased tax revenues TTgar+d Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-19 October 30, 2001 SAS fA a~► created by increased property value. Tax increment financing can be very effective in district level master plans or redevelopment. • Another bonding concept requiring legislative change, would be to bond sidewalk/fronting improvements in already-developed areas with net proceeds tied to the title on the land such that upon transfer or resale the city is paid back, including interest. Current property owners would benefit from the improvements and could pay off the assessment earlier at their discretion. The city would need- to front and back the bonds and'if over the bond life resale/transfer does not occur the city would be responsible. Given that the great majority of homes change ownership over 20 years the risks should be minimal. This concept requires further study and legislative review before testing the application. • Using the development review process to protect the needed right-of-way in the next twenty years to meet transportation system demands is another possible tool. This can reduce the ultimate cost of street improvements. This requires an analysis process (build out assessment or frequent updates) to stay current of future right-of-way needs based upon changing land use (for example, three lanes in 2015 may need to be 5 lanes in 2025). Also known as a corridor set back strategy, this approach helps preserve long term right-of-way needs. • Develop funding programs (using new motor vehicle fees or other funding sources) to encourage private/public cooperation in funding transportation improvements. This may take several forms and will require more assessment. One example would be establishing a city funding source that can be matched with private funding sources to implement elements of the TSP. • Roadway pricing strategies may become necessary for the large deficit in ODOT projects in not only the Tigard area, but the Portland region. While tolls would not represent the full deficit, they would (like all the above measures) contribute to funding the needed transportation system. Any road pricing strategy would not be predicated upon past "toll booth" approaches, but would be built on new technology that would not require people to stop and pay (automatic vehicle identification and debiting). TJgard Transportation System Plan P99161 Funding and Implementation 11-20 October 30, 2001 ACKNOWLEGEMENTS City of Tigard Julia Hajduk City Project Manager James Hendryx Community Development Director Gus Duenas Brian Rager Engineering Department DKS Associates Ransfford S. McCourt, PE, PTOE Project Manager Julie Sosnovske, PE Assistant Project Manager Chris Maclejewski Danella Whitt Jennifer Hoffman Transportation System Plan Task Force 0 Nick Wilson i Judith Anderson James Griffith 40 Lisa Incalcaterra 40 Glenn Mores 40 John Olsen Mark Padgett Shel Scolar Steven Topp ® Joe Schweiz Dennis Kruger Dean Williams ATTACHMENT 3 PROPOSED 171 /CAI f-WAKlrGL`t3 LUMI~tCCrlt:1vo V C ~ru r v~ of 8. TRANSPORTATION This chapter addresses Statewide Planning Goal #12: Transportation which requires local jurisdictions "to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." Transportation planning has been defined as "...the process by which transportation improvements or new facilities are systematically conceived, tested as to present and future adequacy, and programmed for future construction. Modern transportation planning emphasizes the total transportation system. It considers all modes of transport which are economically feasible to a state, region or urban area." (Goodman & Freund, Principals and Practices of Urban Planning, "Transportation Planning") The transportation plan for Tigard reaches beyond the Tigard Planning Area and includes traffic and transportation impacts within other areas of the southwest subregion of the Portland Metropolitan Area. METRO acts as the regional coordinator for transportation planning throughout the Portland Metropolitan Area. The other major service district impacting Tigard is Tri-Met which is charged with the responsibility for providing public transportation throughout the metropolitan area. The Comprehensive Plan proposes a land use plan that encourages and facilitates balanced transportation development for the City. The plan recognizes that land use and transportation investments are interconnected and that relationship should be reinforced to produce an acceptable urban environment. Detailed historical information concerning transportation in the Tigard Urban Planning Area is available in the "Comprehensive Plan Report: Transportation." Detailed current information is available in the 2001 Tigard Transportation Svstem Plan. The 2001 Tigard Transportation System Plan updates the comprehensive plan and policies. However. it does not Fully replace all elements of the comprehensive plan adopted prior to the 2001 TSP. For this reason a new Section has been added to the beainnim-, of the Tran~~on a Policies Section to encompass the system wide changes developed as part of the TSP process. i Some of this information is repeated and expanded upon in other policy sections. Where a policy or implementation strategy specifically conflicts with the updated TSP, the specific policy or implementation strategy has been deleted. 1 8.1 TRANSPOR-rATION SYS"fEM Find • Much of the traffic within Tigard is through traffic with origins and destinations outside of Tigmrd. There are no reasonable alternate routes for the 99W corridor traffic Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 1 of 17 • There are 22 intersections near or at capacity based on the 2001 Tigard Transportation System Plan. • There is no continuous bicycle network in Tigard. • There are significant gags in the sidewalk system with few interconnected locations linkin- to schools, retail, parks and transit. • Segments of Highway 217 and I-5 are over capacity and ORE 99W will continue to serve more through traffic in the future. • Future traffic models indicate ORE 99W and half of the si- alized traffic intersections fail within 20 years assuming no improvements are made. • Travel time data on Highway 217 indicates that some of the slowest travel speed on the facility occurs in Tigard due to existing capacity issues and the need for in_terchan_ge improvments. • In the development of the transportation system plan, seven goals were identified which were used as the guidelines for the development of the policies and implemenation strategies. The goals were: livibility, balanced transportation system, safety, performance, accessibility, goods movement, and coordination. POLICIES 8.1.1 PLAN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES IN A MANNER WHICH ENHANCES THE LIVABILITY OF TIGARD BY: A. PROPER LOCATION AND DESIGN OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES. B. ENCOURAGING PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY BY PROVIDING SAFE, SECURE AND DESIRABLE PEDESTRIAN ROUTES. C. ADDRESSING ISSUES OF EXCESSIVE SPEEDING AND THROUGH + TRAFFIC ON LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREETS THROUGH A NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC PROGRAM. THE PROGRAM SHOULD , + ADDRESS CORRECTIVE MEASURES FOR EXISTING PROBLEMS AND ASSURE THAT DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATES TRAFFIC i CALMING. I 8.1.2 PROVIDE A BALANCED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INCORPORATING ALL MODES OF TRANSPORTATION (INCLUDING MOTOR VEHICLE, BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, TRANSIT AND OTHER MODEST BY: Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 2 of 17 A. THE DEVELOPMENT OF AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PUBLIC STREET STANDARDS THAT RECOGNIZE THE MULTI-PURPOSE NATURE OF THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR UTILITY, PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, TRANSIT, TRUCK AND AUTO USE. B COORDINATION WITH TRI-MET AND/OR ANY OTHER TRANSIT PROVIDERS SERVING TIGARD, TO IMPROVE TRANSIT SERVICE TO TIGARD. FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT WILL PRIMARILY USE ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS IN TIGARD. DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO TRANSIT ROUTES WILL PROVIDE DIRECT PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY. C. CONSTRUCTION OF BICYCLE LANES ON ALL ARTERIALS AND COLLECTORS WITHIN TIGARD CONSISTENT WITH THE BICYCLE MASTER. ALL SCHOOLS, PARKS, PUBLIC FACILITIES AND RETAIL AREAS SHALL STRIVE TO HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO A BIKEWAY. D. CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS ON ALL STREETS WITHIN TIGARD ALL SCHOOLS PARKS PUBLIC FACILITIES AND RETAIL AREAS SHALL STRIVE TO HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO A SIDEWALK. E. DEVELOPMENT OF BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLANS WHICH LINK TO RECREATIONAL TRAILS. F. DESIGN LOCAL STREETS TO ENCOURAGE A REDUCTION IN TRIP LENGTH BY PROVIDING CONNECTIVITY AND LIMITING OUT-OF-DIRECTION TRAVEL AND PROVIDE CONNECTIVITY TO ACTIVITY CENTERS AND DESTINATIONS WITH A PRIORITY FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS. G. TIGARD WILL PARTICIPATE IN VEHICLE TRIP REDUCTION STRATEGIES DEVELOPED REGIONALLY TARGETED TO ACHIEVE NON-SINGLE OCCUPANT VEHICEL LEVELS OUTLINED IN TABLE 1.3 OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN. H. TIGARD WILL SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM AS PART OF THE REGIONAL TRANSIT NETWORK. 8.1.3 STRIVE TO ACHIEVE A SAFE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM BY THE DEVELOPMENT OF STREET STANDARDS ACCESS MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND SPEED CONTROLS WHEN CONSTRUCTING STREETS AND BY MAKING STREET MAINTENANCE A PRIORITY AND THROUGH A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM GF ENGINEERING, EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT. A. DESIGN OF STREETS SHOULD RELATE TO THEIR INTENDED USE. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 3 of 17 B. DESIGN SAFE AND SECURE PEDESTRAIN AND BIKEWAYS BETWEEN PARKS AND OTHER ACTIVITY CENTERS IN TIGARD. C. DESIGNATE SAFE AND SECURE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS FOR EACH SCHOOL. ANY NEW RESIDENTIAL PROJECT SHOULD IDENTIFY THE SAFE PATH TO SCHOOL FOR CHILDREN D. REFINE AND MAINTAIN ACCECSS MANAGEMENT STANDARDS FOR ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS TO IMPROVE SAFETY IN TIGARD. E. ESTABLISH A CITI' MONITORING SYSTEM THAT REGULARLY EVALUATES PRIORITIZES AND MITIGATES HIGH ACCIDENT LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY. F. NEW ROADWAYS SHALL MEET APPROPRIATE LIGHTING STANDARDS. EXISTING ROADWAYS SHALL BE SYSTEMATICALLY RETROFITTED WITH ROADWAY LIGHTING. H REQUIRE NEW DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE SAFE ACCESS TO AND TO GAIN SAFE ACCESS FROMA-B-IL-T A PUBLICALLY DEDICATED AND IMPROVED STREET G.E. DEDICATE RIGHT- OF-WAY IF NOT ALREADY ON A PUBLIC STREET, AND INSTALL IMPROVEMENTS IN ROUGH PROPORTIONALITY TO THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACT) AND PROVIDE SAFE ACCESS. 8.1.4 SET AND MAINTAIN TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE MEASURES THAT: A. SET A MINIMUM INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD AND REQUIRES ALL PUBLIC FACILITIES TO BE DESIGNED TO MEET THIS STANDARD. B SET PARKING RATIOS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE PARKING, WHILE PROVIDING AN INCENTIVE TO LIMIT THE USE OF THE SINGLE OCCUPANT VEHICLE. C. ENCOURAGE WORKING WITH OTHER TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY, INCLUDING TRI-MET, METRO AND ODOT TO DEVELOP OPERATE AND MAINTAIN INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, INCLUDING COORDINATION OF TRAFFIC 8.1.5 DEVELOP TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES WHICH ARE ACCESSIBLE TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND MINIMIZE OUT OF DIRECTION TRAVEL BY: Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 4 of 17 A. THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT. B. THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND LOCAL CONNECTIONS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE CIRCULATION IN AND OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS. C. WORK WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY AND MOT TO DEVELOP AN EFFICIENT ARTERIAL GRID SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES ACCESS WITHIN THE CITY AND SERVES THROUGH CITY TRAFFIC. 8.1.6 PROVIDE FOR EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND SERVICES THROUGH THE DESIGN OF ARTERIAL ROUTES, HIGHWAY ACCESS AND ADJACENT LAND USES IN WAYS THAT FACILITATE THE EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF GOODS AND SERVICES AND THE SAFE ROUTING OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CONSISTENT WITH FEDERAL. AND STATE GUIDELINES. 8.1.7 IMPLEMENT THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN (TSP) IN A COORDINATED MANNER BY COORDINATING AND COOPERATING WITH ADJACENT AGENCIES (INCLUDING WASHINGTON COUNTY, BEAVERTON TUALATIN LAKE OSWEGO CITY OF PORTLAND TRl- MET, METRO AND ODOT) WHEN NECESSARY TO DEVELOP TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS WHICH BENEFIT THE REGION AS A WHOLE IN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF TIGARD. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. Design streets and highways to respect the characteristics of the surrounding, land uses, natural Icatures, and other community amenities. 2. jht - J-dDcvelop and maintain a pedestrian plan in Tigard, outlining pedestrian i routes. Sidewalk standafds will Developed sidewalk standards to define various I widths as necessary fbr City street t ies. 3. Develop and maintain a program of street design standards and criteria for neighborhood traffic management (NTM) liar use in new development and existing neighborhoods. Measures to be developed may include (but arc not limited to) narrower streets, speed humps, traffic circles, curb/sidewalk extensions, curving streets, diverters and/or other measures, as developed as part of a City NTM plan. 4. Develop and maintain a series of_system maps and design standards for motor vehicles, bicycle, pedestrian, transit and truck facilities in Tigard. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 5 of 17 ^l I- I INI Is I Jill 5. The Regional 'T'ransportation Plan (RTP) and Tri-Met service plans will be the guiding documents for development of Tigard's transit plan. The City should provide input to Tri- Met regarding their specific needs as they annually review their system. This input should locus on improving service (coverage and frequency) to under-served areas. New transit service should be considered concurrent to street improvements when significant street extensions are completed. The City should encourage land intensive uses to locate near transitways and require high intensity uses (i.e. large emplo)rnent, commercial sites) to provide transit facilities-. When bus stops reach 75 hoardings per day, bus hselters should be considered in development review. Sidewalks should be available within '/4 mile from all transit routes and transit should be provided to schools and parks. 6. Develop a bicycle plan which connects key activity centers (such as schools, parks public facilities and retail areas) with adjacent access. Standards for bicycle facilities within Tigard will be developed and maintained. Where activity centers are on local streets, connections to bicycle lanes shall be desigHated. 7. Develop a pedestrian plan which connects key activity centers with adjacent access. Require sidewalks to be constructed on all streets within within Tigard. 8. Standards for pedestrian facilities within Tigard will be developed and maintained. 9. The bicycle and pedestrian plans will need to indicate linkages between recreational and basic pedestrian networks. A primary facility in Tigard should link together Fanno Creek Tualatin River and the BPA right-of-way in the west of Tigard. Design standards for recreational elements will need to be developed and maintained. 10. Revise the Code to require new streets built to provide connectivity to incorporate traffic management design elements, particularly those which inhibit speeding. As a planning standard, require local streets to have connections every 530 feet in plannin,,= local and neighborhood streets. The purpose of this policy is to provide accessibility within Tigard with a focus on pedestrian connectivity. Pedestrian connectivity can be provided via pedestrian bike paths between cul-de-sacs and/or,(., avs where auto connectivity does not exist or is not feasible. H. Support development of a commuter rail system connecting the south Metro area to the Beaverton/Hilishoro area, with stop(s) in Tigard. 12. A functional classification system shall he developed for Tigard which meets the City's needs and respects needs of other agencies (Washington County, Metro, ODOT). Appropriate design standards for these roadways will be developed by the appropriate iurisctiction. 13. Place a high priority on routine street maintenance to preserve its infrastructure investment and improve safety. 14. Undertake a process of defining school routes for pedestrians by working with the School District, citizens and developers. 15. Develop guidelines to provide access control standards and apply these standards to all new road construction and new development. For roadway reconstruction, existing Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 6 of 1,7 driveways shall be compared with the standards and a reasonable attempt shall be made to comply (consolidating driveway accesses or relocating driveways to a lower classification street are examples). 16. Develop a process to review traffic accident information regularly to systematically identify, prioritize and remedy safety problems. Working with the County, develop a list of high collision sites and projects necessary to eliminate such problems. Require development applications to identify and mitigate for high collision locations ifthev generate 10% increase to existing traffic on an approach to a hjgh collision intersection. Washington County's SPIS (Safety Priority Indexing System) could be used as a basis for determining high collision locations. 17. Include paths to schools, narks, and town center areas as priority roadway lighting locations. 18. Require development to provide right-ol=way (if needed) and sale access as detennined by application of the City's development code and standards for design. Require that the minimum City standards he met for half-street adiacent to dcvcloning property for a development to proceed (with consideration ol'rough proportionality). Apply this 12Wky to both pedestrians and motor vehicles. 19. Monitor Metro and Washington Count 's current work to develop a level of service standard. Level of service-DE (and demand-to-capacity ratio of 1.0 or less), Highway Capacity Manual, Chanters 15, 16, and 17 (or subsequent undated references) js recommended to balance provision ol'roadwa capacity with level of'service and ftmding. ODOT, Metro and Washington County performance standards should be considered on state or Countv facilities and for 2040 Concept Areas (as defined in Table 1.2 of the he desi,fiated .,.hefe the eitN..,ide l . el 61, S" E Feasible O ORF-- 4 The Citv will work to make the arterial & collector street systems operate effectively to discourage "cut-through" traffic on neighborhood and local streets. 20. Work toward the eventual connection of streets identified on the Transportation plan man as development occurs. as funds are available and opsortunities arise. 21. As outlined in Title 6 ofthc Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, develop access connection standards. The arterial street system should facilitate street and pedestrian connectivity. 22 Work with federal a<zencies, the Public Utility Commission, the Oregon Department of Energy and ODOT to assure consistent laws and regulations for the transport of hazardous materials. 23. Maintain plan and policy confonnance to the Regional Transportation Plan and Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012). Seek compatibility with all adjacent county and city jurisdiction plans. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 7 of 17 8.4-2 TRAFFICWAYS Findinl?s • A need exists to place all of the existing public local and collector streets in the Tigard City Limits under the City's jurisdiction. • According to a Washington County computer study 48-60% of Tigard residents work outside of the Washington County area. • Between 77-83% of Tigard residents commute to work by auto as single occupants. • Major congestion problems within the City have resulted from the rapid population growth since 1970, creating a need for major street improvements. • A corridor study for Pacific Highway (99W) has not been prepared by-M&BMetro. It is the only major trafficway within the region which has not been studied. Pacific Highway, the major trafficway through the City, has the highest traffic volumes, congestion and accident[s] rates within the City. There is a need to prepare a corridor study for Pacific Highway. The City, Metropolitan Service District and [the] State should coordinate such a study. • Many of the streets in Tigard are dead-ended which adds to the congestion on existing completed streets. Therefore, a number of street connections need to be constructed. • A major concern of the community regarding transportation is the need to maintain and improve the livability of residential areas in the face of increasing population and transportation requirements. • The City needs to develop a strategy to coordinate public street improvements with private sector improvements to achieve the most effective use of the limited dollars available for road development and improvement. • Major residential growth during the planning period is expected to occur in the westerly and southerly areas of Tigard. Both of these areas lack adequate improved trafficways. • A need exists during the planning period to complete a collector street system between Scholls Ferry Road, Walnut Street, Gaarde Street, Bull Mountain Road and Pacific Highway. The location of these connections needs to be coordinated between the City, County, State and [the] Metropolitan Service District. • A need exists to complete the collector street system within the Tigard Triangle area to make more of this area accessible to developers, employers and employees. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 8 of 17 POLICIES 842.1 THE CITY SHALL PLAN FOR A SAFE AND EFFICIENT STREET AND ROADWAY SYSTEM THAT MEETS CURRENT NEEDS AND ANTICIPATED FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT. 8.4-2.2 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. 8.4-2.3 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; 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 CARS 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 p A WHEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED PLAN.. 8 .1.4 E2 T-14E ACT44AL R7C"I'LS OF FUTURE TRANSPORTATION !M R$3.LIrMI NTS 14 n 3I NOT BEEN DET-EPA404D, THE C-ITY SHALL DESIGNATE s:R Tim AREAS ON THE GOMPPUEHE NSIVE PL Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 9 of 17 ry I All NINE I TRANSPORTATION----1' A42 AND-iRO X "I$£ GE?II IP1, DD /l EGT- i1L'SC IPTIONS TO. 1DENTI-rFYT14E- APPROXIMATEAREAS WIfHPI~WIC-H T1 ESE DDO E12TC WILL !GG TD f AND; TO--EXPLAPI--'I 'I-14E TYPE- ATIM EXTENT OF-T4ESE F TTT TDB TA P OV E I ENT-S 8.15 WHEN zn ~~+TlY1[EVI E7ilTl~IG E EILO M TT~TTT 7~ *APPLICATIONS ~A t~'271TgTH! rC.OMPRY'L"2"'KCIVE TRANSPORTATION YY7A rSTTi7TJvrTiZEr., THE /I SHALL WORK WIT-14 A DDT W A NTC TO AVOID 11001 WJ T/"' T 3ATIT14 T17H_ ~ x Ix xxx xxxt= _ LOGA TION OF F TT1 TD t TD A NSPOD T A TION IMPROVEMENTS. 842.6 A CHANGE IN ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION, OR LOCATION SHALL REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION MAP, AZD; 1`i4EN THE-LAr A TION OF ALL OR - A `I IT-H I1 A TDA-NISP 1DT A T! N MAD CTTO DY I-iZT2Trit TI lp IrS11Ta'~O r PORTION OF A ROADWAY 71•- A RE A u A C BEE?4 DETERMINED, THE MAP WILL BE AMENDED BY: a. DESIGNATING THE LOCATION OF THE ROADWAY. b. DESIGNATING ITS CLASSIFICATION, AND; e-DELETPiG THE- APPROPRIATE PORTION OF T14E-STUDY AREA 8.4-2.7 THE CITY SHALL SUPPORT THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC FLOW AND CAPACITY AT THE INTERCHANGE OF I-5 AND HIGHWAY 217/KRUSE WAY. HOWEVER, THE CITY RETAINS THE PREROGATIVE TO REVIEW, COMMENT AND CONCUR WITH THE ACTUAL ALIGNMENTS OF THE PROJECT. 8.4-2.8 THE CITY SHALL ADOPT THE FOLLOWING TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT STRATEGY IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE PLANNED LAND USES IN THE TIGARD TRIANGLE: a. Highway 99W should be widened to 6 lanes throughout the study area (tool box). This improvement should be constructed in the short term. In the event that widening Highway 99 to six lanes is prohibitive due to physical constraints, the Dartmouth extension could potentially provide needed northeast-to-southwest travel demand. b. 72nd Avenue should be widened to four lanes with left turn lanes at major intersections and the Hunziker/Hampton overcrossing should be constructed. These two improvements will provide additional roadway capacity for circulation within the Triangle and for access to and from the triangle via 72nd Avenue. Construction of the Hunziker/Hampton overcrossing would have the additional advantages of eliminating geometric deficiencies at the Highway Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 10 of 17 217/72nd Avenue interchange; thereby providing further additional capacity at this interchange. For the buildout scenario (2015), these improvements will provide adequate capacity in the vicinity of the Highway 217/72nd Avenue interchange. C. The Hampton/Hunziker connection is only justified based on its operational relief to the 72nd interchange. Further study should be conducted to examine alternative measures to relieve this situation in a more cost effective way. Further study may indicate that extending Hampton further southwesterly (to connect with Hall Boulevard in the vicinity of McDonald Street) may better accommodate projected travel demand. Short of constructing this structure, a direct ramp instead of a loop ramp from southbound 72nd Avenue to northbound Highway 217 would provide additional capacity in the vicinity of the Highway 217/72nd Avenue interchange. d. Access from Dartmouth to northbound Highway 217 is critical to Tigard Triangle traffic circulation, therefore, it should be studied as part of the Highway 217 corridor analysis to be performed by ODOT and Metro. Under existing conditions, there is significant roadway congestion near the Highway 99W/Highway 217 interchange. Construction of the Dartmouth Extension and access to northbound Highway 217 would mitigate congestion at this interchange because motorists in this area of the Tigard Triangle would have the option to access northbound Highway 217 from Dartmouth or Highway 99W. e. Analysis indicates that there is a long term (20-30 years) need for Dartmouth Road to continue over Highway 217 and potentially south to Hall Boulevard as well as for extending the collector-distributor roads from the Highway 217/72nd Avenue interchange through the Highway 217/Highway 99W interchange. The Highway 217 corridor analysis to be performed by Metro and ODOT should consider the advantages and disadvantages of these improvements. The Dartmouth extension to Hall Boulevard should be constructed only if further system improvements to Hall Boulevard are made concurrently. If additional capacity is not added to Hall Boulevard south of where the Dartmouth extension would be connected, the effectiveness of this connection would be diminished. Alternatively, another roadway could be constructed that provides a connection from the Dartmouth extension to Hall Boulevard in the vicinity of McDonald Street. f. Adopt the functional classification plan for streets internal to the Tigard Triangle as shown on Figure 1. The following policies apply to local streets within the Tigard Triangle: 1. Local street spacing shall be a maximum of 660 feet. 2. Access way spacing shall be a maximum of 330 feet. 3. Spacing of signalized intersections on Major Arterials shall be a minimum of 600 feet. 4. Existing rights of way will, to the greatest extent possible, be utilized for a local street system. Right of way vacations will be considered only when all other policies in this subsection are met. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 11 of 17 g. The transportation projects described in this section should be added to the City of Tigard's Transportation System Plan. The City, ODOT and Metro should work to include these improvements in regional and state implementation programs. (Rev. Ord. 91-13; Ord. 96-42) IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City shall develop, adopt and implement a master street plan that anticipates all needed trafficway improvements so as to plan for the necessary available resources to develop these streets when they are needed. 2. The City shall develop, maintain and implement a capital improvements program which: a. Is consistent with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan; b. Encourages a safe, convenient and economical transportation system; C. Furthers the policies and implementation strategies of the City's Comprehensive Plan; d. Considers a variety of transit modes within the rights-of-way; e. Meets local needs for improved transportation services; f. Pursues and establishes other funding sources from the federal, state, regional and/or local agencies; and g. Designates the timing of such projects to ensure their installation when those facilities are needed. 3. The City shall specify street design standards within the Tigard Community Development Code. 4. The City shall maintain the carrying capacity of arterials and collectors by reducing curb cuts and other means of direct access, and requiring adequate right-of-way and setback lines as part of the development process. The Community Development Code shall state the access requirements for each street classification. 5. The City's Tigard Community Development Code shall require developers of land to dedicate necessary rights-of-way[s] and install necessary street improvements to the City's standards when such improvements have not been done prior to the developer's proposals. These necessary dedications may be required upon approval of any development proposal. 6. The City shall control and limit the number of access points and will signalize trafficways in a manner that provides for a consistent flow of traffic and therefore minimizes or reduces vehicular emissions. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 12 of 17 7. The City shall include provisions in the Tigard Community Development Code which addresses the aesthetic quality of the transportation system to ensure community livability and to minimize the effects on abutting properties. This can be accomplished through: a. Building setback requirements; b. Requirements for landscaping and screening and through other site design criteria for visual enhancement; C. Limiting residential land uses along major arterial trafficways; and d. Sign controls. 8. The City shall coordinate their planning efforts with adjacent cities and other agencies e.g., Beaverton, Portland and Tualatin, Washington County, DistfietM ETRO, Tri-Met and ODOT. 9. The City shall work out reciprocal agreements with other agencies for exchanging information pertinent to local transportation planning. 8 2-3 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Findings • Since the oil embargos of the 1970s, the cost of motor fuels has increased fourfold. • The Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (Tri-Met) is responsible for providing public transportation to the residents of Multnomah, Washington and Clackamas Counties. • Presently, there are fex+t-(~Elcvcn (I 1) bus lines that service the Tigard area. • Public transit offers the community an opportunity to reduce traffic and pollution as well as increase energy efficiency. • Work trips and shopping trips are most conducive to mass transportation. • The proposed downtown Tri-Met Tigard transfer center will increase service and lessen travel time for riders. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 13 of 17 17 POLICIES 8.23.1 THE CITY SHALL COORDINATE WITH TRI-MET TO PROVIDE FOR A PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA WHICH: a. MEETS THE NEEDS OF BOTH THE CURRENT AND PROJECTED, FOR THE TIGARD COMMUNITY; b. ADDRESSES THE SPECIAL NEEDS OF A TRANSIT DEPENDENT POPULATION; C. REDUCES POLLUTION AND TRAFFIC; AND d. REDUCES ENERGY CONSUMPTION. 8.23.2 THE CITY SHALL ENCOURAGE THE EXPANSION AND USE OF PUBLIC TRANSIT BY: a. LOCATING LAND INTENSIVE USES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO TRANSITWAYS; b. INCORPORATING PROVISIONS INTO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH REQUIRE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS TO PROVIDE TRANSIT FACILITIES; AND C. SUPPORTING EFFORTS BY TRI-MET AND OTHER GROUPS TO PROVIDE FOR THE NEEDS OF THE TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City shall request Tri-Met to extend service to areas within the City that do not currently have service. 2. In the City's Community Development Code, the City shall require large developments to provide transit facilities e.g., pull-offs and shelters, if such developments are located adjacent to transit routes. 1 4-1. The City shall propose land use densities, within the Comprehensive Plan, along transit oriented corridors that support public transportation service. 3-4. The City shall work with Tri-Met and other transit providers to encourage transit service for the transit dependent population e.g., the poor and handicapped. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 14 of 17 i IN 65. The City shall encourage its citizens to use mass transit systems, where possible, to make greater effectiveness of the transit system while reducing automobile usage. 36. The City shall coordinate with the transit providers to encourage carpooling and investigate if there is a local need for carpooling in the Tigard area. 8.3--4 TRANSPORTATION FOR THE DISADVANTAGED Findings • Tri-Met is responsible for providing handicapped transit accessibility including coordination of special transit services by social service agencies. • Tri-Met conducts the detailed special handicapped transit planning necessary to identify required service improvements and adopt a plan for meeting federal requirements for handicapped accessibility. POLICY 8.34.1 THE CITY SHALL COORDINATE WITH WASHINGTON COUNTY, TRI-MET AND OTHER REGIONAL AND STATE AGENCIES IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND ACCOMMODATION OF INDIVIDUALS WITH SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City shall require, through the implementation process, that parking spaces be set aside and marked for disabled persons [parking] and that such spaces be located in convenient locations, 2. The City shall continue to coordinate with [the] appropriate agencies in the identification and accommodation of those individuals with special transportation needs. 8.4-i PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATHWAYS Findings • As the City of Tigard continues to grow, more people may rely on the bicycle and pedestrian pathways for utilitarian as well as for recreational purposes. • in 1974, the City Council adopted a Comprehensive Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Plan. • The City has required adjacent development to install that portion of the bicycle/pedestrian pathways shown on the adopted plan which abuts the development. • The City has implemented portions of the adopted plan through the City's overlay program. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 15 of 17 • The adopted Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan provides for a dual function pathway system; bicycles and pedestrians use the same system. POLICY 8.45.1 THE CITY SHALL LOCATE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CORRIDORS IN A MANNER WHICH PROVIDES FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE USERS, SAFE AND CONVENIENT MOVEMENT IN ALL PARTS OF THE CITY, BY DEVELOPING THE PATHWAY SYSTEM SHOWN ON THE ADOPTED PEDESTRIAN/BIKEWAY PLAN. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES 1. The City shall review each development request adjacent to areas proposed for pedestrian/bike pathways to ensure that the adopted plan is properly implemented, and require the necessary easement or dedications for the pedestrian/bicycle pathways. 2. The City shall review and update the adopted Pedestrian/Bikeway Plan on a regular basis to ensure all developing areas have accessibility to the Pedestrian/Bikeway system. 3. The City shall coordinate with Washington County to connect the City's Pedestrian/Bike Pathway system to the County's system. 4. City codes shall include provisions which prohibit motor driven vehicles on designated and maintained pedestrian/bicycle pathways. 8.3-6 RAILROADS Findings • Tigard is serviced by Southern Pacific and Burlington Northern railroad lines which carry strictly freight through the City Limits. • Within the downtown area each railroad company has its own trackage and the usage of those lines is based on the railroads' needs. • There should only be one set of railroad tracks traversing the downtown area. The City is in the process of discussing this issue with both railroads. • Many of the commercial and industrial businesses within Tigard rely on the railroads for the shipping and receiving of goods. • The City is currently coordinating the upgrading of all the railroad crossings within Tigard with the railroads. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 16 of 17 POLICY 8.-6.1 THE CITY SHALL COOPERATE WITH THE RAILROADS IN FACILITATING RAIL FREIGHT SERVICE TO THOSE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES WITHIN THE CITY THAT DEPEND ON RAILROAD SERVICE. IMPLEMENTATING STRATEGIES 1. The City shall continue to coordinate with the Southern Pacific and Burlington Northern railroads to provide adequate railroad service. 2. The City shall designate adequate commercial and industrial land within close proximity to existing railroad service lines to ease railroad accessibility to those businesses that rely on the service. 3. The City shall coordinate with the railroads to combine the trackage within the downtown area. Proposed Comprehensive Plan changes, page 17 of 17 Tigard Transportation System Plan Master Plan for t/ie no" 20 years CITY OF TIGARD OREGON T19" DKS Associates aN TrM^-"tlen sv~ Min What is a TSP? Blue print for Transportation Investment - Enables City to make prudent and effective choices regarding land use - Coordination tool with regional and nearby agencies - Fulfills State mandate (Goal 12) & RTP Addresses Existing and Future needs - lra~.p« d, ebm M.n DKS Associates 1-1 Why do a plan now? H - To get ready for the future - Now i - Growth H - Forecasts call for 6,000 more Dwelling Units and 15,000 H more employees In the next 20 years - Metro RTP completed in 2000 - State Requirements (new highway plan) - New Funding Opportunities *wva DKS Associates m~ Trwpx4tlm sy.c«n n.n 7 SIR Elm Steps Taken So Far to Get Here • TSP Task Force Approved TSP Spring 2000 • Planning Commission Recommended Approval of TSP Winter 2000 • CIT & Public Open Houses- Nov 2000 • City Council Workshops- Nov 2000, March 2001, November 2001 • City Council Adoption - Early 2002 T~ •w• T4wt n.• DKS Associates Fundy McCourt, DKS Associates atalS - Trwp•rbd• O -Mw DKS Associates Existing Conditions • Key bottlenecks 4. today: ' - ORE 99W/MCDorWd - ORE 99W"l-aeenbu9 - Hall/McDonald - Sehels Feny/Wmbus ;t - Schcl:I Fe"/HaIl - i-5/Cam~an IMerct~arge 7 r-sp~ DKS Associates Transportation Goals • Livability • Balanced Transportation System • Safety • Performance • Accessibility • Goods Movement • Coordination _,a_ Trwp• Uti • nan DKS Associates Future Travel Forecast • Based upon regional travel modeling - Assessed both 2015 and 2020 forecasts • Disaggregated Tigard into nearly 200 Transportation Analysis Zones • Looked at build out condition in Tigard • Established a modified 2015 forecast that resulted in 8% greater vehicle trip generation in Tigard than 2020 TJO-d DKS Associates - Trwpx,Ud-S"t-Man Capacity and Circulation Key issues • ORE 217 and I-5 are over capacity • Tigard serves more ORE 991W through traffic in future • ORE 99W fails in future • Half of the traffic signalized intersection fail in 20 years assuming no improvements are made TI•rd DKS Associates aa, Trwpprtatlon •Tarm plan 3 Key Solution Concepts for Tigard • Connectivity/Circulation Enhancement - Washington Square - Tigard Triangle - Westem Tigard - East/West • Traffic Operational Improvements - Street Improvement Plan - Intersection capadty upgrades TIwd T sy"- DKS Associates Motor Vehicle Plan IM tili•pf ilkt rfir a T ~ Pt- DKS Associates ropev- Other Modes in TSP • !tail • Air • Water • Pipeline • Freight T~•P>r+tla•• b~~n DKS Associates Preliminary Cost Summary Mod 20 year Costs Motor Vehicle: ODOT $900 M Motor Vehicle: City $250 M Maintenance $45 M Commuter hail $75 M Bicycle $25 M Pedestrian $13 M T%Wd TL ~ DKS Associates Why are these estimates so large? Mo[or Vehlde Ped/Bike/Tianslt • Significant new • Commuter Rail roadway connections . Significant right-of- and wldenings way and topography • Major regional needs to establish bike lanes in the vicinity of and sidewalks Tigard . Lack of on-going programs for sidewalks,TDM, Traffic Signals T w~ T%" ry~ DKS Associates Potential Transportation Funding • Over 20 years current programs would only fund $250,000,000 • Substantial shortfall due to regional nature of improvements • Key sources of future funds: - Bond Measures (local, MSfIP, regional) - Increase existing fees commensurate with needs (SDQ - Focus on high priority needs - Exactions - Roadway pricing Taw DKS Associates Trn.p d-•na-run 5 Jim Hendryx T4" DKSAssociates TrwyxhHM,ybnl,Ir, Additional Issues and Major Impacts • Walnut Extension • Scholis Ferry Road Widening • Hall Boulevard Widening • New Functional Classification (Neighborhood Route) • transit • Measure 7 DKS Associates -p• , n.n T,Walnut/Ash Street Connection • Will create a new collector in the downtown area. • Perceived Impact on the downtown integrity. • Connection will require the crossing of wetlands and Fanno Creek. • Connection key to contributing to resolving capacity issues on 99W. • With this connection removed, portions of 99W and Main Street go to level of service •F' or worse. L\ T d DKS Associates 6 III, 1111;111111 Scholls Ferry Road Widening • Scholls Ferry Road to be widened to 7 lanes. • Concern that this will create physical barrier for pedestrians and visual barrier between the City of Tigard and Beaverton • Identified in the Regional Transportation Plan • Needed to accommodate the capacity • As development occurs, dedication of land will be acquired and, if justified, improvements made. -A. - rrarwp a eeo~apw„ Plan DKS Associates DI(SAisoo.l AL 7 Transportation 1 _t•~ Systems Plan FYI ~.o.r 1 L L ~ •NM~i / 3 ~ L~7 ~TM•n war DKS Associates rrwo•rt,aw~, arw• PI Ball Boulevard Widening • Hall Boulevard to be widened to 4/5 lanes, consistent with the Washington Square Regional Center Plan (WSRCP) and RTP • WSRCP calls for widening only if needed after other capacity improvements • Residents vocal in their opposition to widening • Modeling indicates Hall will need to be widened as capacity increases Developers required to dedicate the land for ultimate right of way (if justified) Ina" DKS Associates nwPw~ no~sy.ar.n.. 7 1 1111 1~ 11~111gi~lll 11111 11 11 111 SHE Functional Classification CLASSIFICATION EXAMPLE • Freeways • I-5/ORE 217 • Principal Arterials • ORE 99W/Schoils • Arterials • Hall/Gaarde/Durham • Collectors • Walnut/Bull Mountain • Neighborhood • 130th/Watklns • Local • Cul-de-sacs/ redundant streets Tkwd Spar pun DKS Associates - A. Trrra•rb• OKSMCOCaf•r r r4E'lyd*+ Transportation k ,,{mdry~ Systems Plan Tlgard DKS Associates Trwve.r+l-III. rr.• Transit Plan • Key Strategies - Commuter Rail - Provide more frequent service, more tours of day - Express routes - Circulator Service in Tigard - Transit Amenities • New Transit Center at Murray/Scholls • New Service Coverage: Durham/ Gaarde/ Barrows/ Bonita/ Hall • Complimentary Land Use Actions - Transit Center/Rail Station Development Tra-parbTdlWd rh.n DKS Associates liy~ 8 DNgAiiotl•t•t A ~ Ir Tr•nSPO ton S arm Plan .r+ N- _ D N l L ,f 11•wD Ing" a spd K^ DKS Associates Trraponad • Questions or comments?? • Next Step: - Public Hearirg Scheduled for January 8, 2001 L~ DKS Associates si i 9 OEM= Drab Tgp re, during and 000 ~ed bef nd at the CI t1~~nent Log onses on s re" mp Co Comments and ResP a anent Tigard Draft g Agen Y resents Cote FegruafY 2001 Summary of Public ®rnntent log tibiic hearing ®n ~ im rovung aft c ~ 10/12101 rs6on of the issio h Z0~ 2®09 , ~afftc This Ve nnlng `Oo~ rarc ine5seve~alalteg30es for twouughg ,nen°for, the Pla ion on fheTSPoutl 99w• pages vesandreco eg-35. S after §ess O an are listed onPa ®r~ rr ate the elation on altern ors volving Cou c what oP be the issues, mmendati federal n s doomed - TSp descri ven reco lex subJect in ide levies B 99W seem oving• ORE 99N Se comp nds, cou t the deficiency r? lion fuunclung is a state fu • 1113100 options to, mp Transpo nal allocations, Tcleanly Pi future demand. Steps CIT work-wullutbe legto rtes, fhe draft to sustainu hest priorities sources, and 1 ndung sources to fun 1 lan fu nclutg ocal sou entally d T d w ork of funds. gow willthl p of the cuzTenbfu ken iucnetn f the draft Y) all ter 1 0 1113100 to rtes inctementa ' will have Chap local sou eet the outlined in to regional ana necessa draft T draft TSP CIT first (as with s, willb the a at all levels efiued un of the 2 coopeta"v tbnding ice levels d It ould Increased at servDurham Road. ASDa IJTham k oad w ent. forecast needlowed on h Ec nmovem ,frocks ate has been developed. oug t 1-2 Percent Aze h truck map es but not s owed abou eak urham R°ad • twoug deliveri in the PM pea making 199~ consistentty erc to ent trucks aze ou D allow . 1994 and eri ks od and about 5 P Kow many counts in~e PM Peak p City Plans 1113100 they allowed? Tuc in there ate no thrs issue up TSP andhowever,bzing eriod eluded uu the may estions• 3 CIT This is not m roject. Gitzzen to* ect su tntecsecti0n din e sharp curves complete thus pasks for CIP h1n e location of • rioritaed correct th Ci ws th willbe P will be gute w ll be die ped • starting ost list hese pr soulces over tue Is there a PTOSect °Road? Tw able 8 8 and t "s ounta ~ evelo M nding sourc on gull M ents are improvererrs. aced and local fu 1113100 rover funding sources county veloPed, e~tion trop h regional, airs uncle GIT tnterse as 4 what types °f when. funded t oug s area on the lan. The ke 1113100 one and the next 2p ears. ost of thi rem being d because to of identified Yes, wever, were n CIT ho 5 s ecific cations streets plam1ed west of150 south sweet lo Are locaountainRoad. 10112(01 1113100 of Bull \LRPI.N\.lutia\TSp\TSp Commen0G09•doc CIT 6 \ospTS page 1 \\TtC,333\USR ment Log Qi'J STN T,S ~d't~ Tigard Draft TSP Com City of Trgatd strategy in this area identified in the draft TSP is for access management to preserve the operational integrity of key arterial (Beef Bend) and collectors (150°i) in the area. Any new development in this area will be required to provide streets with connectivity that meets the standards of the Tigard Development Code and addresses the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 7 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 Three Planned CUP projects (page 8-42) widen The future travel forecasts show the demand and need for five Administrator the roads to 5 lanes with the exception of the lanes between Durham Road and the I-5 Carman Drive City of Durham Durham Road section between UBFR and interchange (which is why a major realignment is proposed to Via letter 72nd. If people traveling east on Durham Rd. service demand in that area). There are three routes for traffic to wanted to go south to 1-5 or the potential new spread out on going south from Durham - Durham itself, 72nd and development on the quarry site, I would think Upper Boones Ferry Road. The arterial route is to the regional extending the 5 lanes on Durham would be freeway interchange (as determined in the capacity analysis and beneficial. Also, having this section travel forecasts). Other arterials (72"d and Upper Boones Ferry designated as a Collector (Figure 8-3) does Road) service the interchange to the south. Durham east of Upper not follow the definition listed in page 8-2; Boones Ferry Road only serves to collect traffic in the adjacent feels it goes beyond a citywide circulation business park, which is why it is designated a collector. function and is a Minor Arterial. 8 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 Area from Carmen Drive to Bridgeport needs The draft TSP outlines the need improvements in the next twenty Administrator to be viewed as a special area since years for this area in Tigard. City of Durham development of the quarry site is anticipated. Via letter Widening 72"d to 5 lanes would provide some mitigation of this existing bottleneck. 9 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 TSP is not consistent in how it shows 72"d. Figure 8-11 will be edited to make it consistent with Figure 8-19 Administrator Figure 8-11 has it listed for 2/3 lands between and Tables 8-7 and 8-8 (five lanes). City of Durham Bonita and Bridgeport. Figure 8-19 shows Via letter roadway widening to 5 lanes for most of 72"d but stops just south of the Carmen Intersection. 10 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 Questions assumptions that 72"d would be 72"d serves a wide range of traffic ranging from fronting industrial Administrator serving "mostly local traffic". land access to district circulation to key citywide/subarea north- City of Durham south capacity. In the future, 72"d serves all three of these Via letter functions. 11 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 There are 2 conflicting options for the See no. 9 above. Administrator Durham Road/UBFR intersection. Can not City of Durham comment without more detail. Via letter 12 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 Quarry site should be factored into the 72"d, The regional travel forecasts include housing and employment for Administrator UBFR and Durham Road option analysis the future (2020). The regional land use data does not specifically City of Durham identify site developments, but incorporates increases in Via letter households and employment. The future forecast has several Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 2 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLN\Julia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc hundred employees and households in that area, increasing from the base existing conditions. 13 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 Signage at the 72"d/UBFR intersection to The realignment of Durham Road in the draft TSP will address the Administrator indicate 72nd would be the most direct route to route to I-5 issue. In the short term, coordination with Tigard and City of Durham the I-5/Bridgeport interchange may help the ODOT staff to modify signing in this area is possible through Via letter performance of the 72"d/Durham Road maintenance activities. intersection 14 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 While option to realign the UBFR/Durham The impact to the business park in the area east of Upper Booties Administrator intersection so that Durham would be a Ferry Road would be significant and with little capacity benefits. City of Durham continuous route to Carmen (figure 8-46) is That is why the Durham/Carman realignment is recommended in Via letter interesting, it seems more feasible to proceed this location. with the 5 lane improvements that are also listed as an option. 15 Roel Lundquist, City 11/7/00 Would like more information on the extension The 2020 projections for this crossing are between 15,000 and Administrator of Hall to Tualatin. If feasible, it would 20,000 vehicles per day. It does provide significant circulation City of Durham provide another north/south route that would and capacity enhancement between Tigard and Tualatin, reducing Via letter alleviate some of the traffic pressures on the need to wide Upper Boones Ferry Road. UBFR. 16 Alexander Craghead 11/27/00 TSP seems to focus too much on widening Freeway system improvements are a key element of the overall via letter roads to solve the capacity issue. Feels that strategy to balance the future needs, capacity and service Improvements to the freeway system would standards for Tigard. Pages 8-33 through 8-35 of the draft TSP go a long way to solving Tigard's traffic specifically mention the need for the freeway improvements. problems However, freeway improvements by themselves will not alleviate the need for other motor vehicle improvements in Tigard. The draft TSP outlines the balance between all the modes of transportation improvements that would be necessary to meet Ti ard's future needs. 17 Alexander Craghead 11/27/00 Heavy emphasis on capacity erodes Improvements to Hall Boulevard at these locations are part of the via letter effectiveness in safety and flow improvements identified in the draft TSP. The reason capacity improvements. Questions the safety of the improvements outweigh the other modes is the cost to implement Hall/Commercial and O'Mara/Hall these improvements. This is balanced by the motor vehicle intersections due to heavy foot traffic and the system's function that services over 90 percent of the trip making fact that darkness factor during evening rush in Tigard. Improvements to each mode of transportation are ` hour. TSP does not address this. Concern outlined and summarized in Chapters 1 and 11 of the draft TSP. i that capacity improvements far outweigh connectivity and transit improvements in the TSP 18 Alexander Craghead 11/27/00 Wider roads lead to greater community Congestion and travel delay also result in lower quality of life. via letter divisiveness between the citizens of the City. The draft TSP balances the future needs and improvements by setting a service standard that minimally meets the needs for mobility at peak times with the desire to minimize improvement Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 3 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLNWulia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc mill now 9 and actions d►e and acts. erred tl►tou~h' altemanves pies tats stly Fundng w ad pt+on fd n of potential efforts d are very CO following a extent e rOjects lisle seems to 'TS? oude e- action that th p of list reda ublicture n d a& alternat ejWe «notin nal le capacity an Craghead 11,21100 ected as a the additio ve,nir cap havebeen r e~ in the all the motor simply widening Alexander of oaidin owevet, cannotbe met by draft-Ts? 19 via letter interest„es~ outhned that thes ent noted Kin& ture • scheva feel the fu eats note . , PTOVemenis Does nof COtnm • Beds of e imF rOVero resulting more complex Projects. ~i circula~On nsystem• entally~ way revert of die to flee. '1 lemented incr td to costs w ide e em ue inters est tion AU the b m Bening rojects ~ fast .gyp (Table g-g). 0 proposal: t five land tus and vrillbe at intersection umerous later. N 1112?10 Reduce Taos , thbikewPa be made in being Inade eB the draU eds ,,,,It aghead • to three lane 'E eons ects being wide dined ess future pe °u act to addr will ander sidewalks• gxc Tid Avenuerelat Venee FrOj ents are e 20 Alex I jpjovements cOents of ibis imPrOvemend o eiei rovemeve.being aletter the case of die t2 . Dvmuoutu A i widenings aim g le our r ° and to Re imp moving el eets ~congesh eTadonally ox cost effecti widening, fr act to othe swt be as oP surface tluough route janesi necessary that may no Tnalatin• ost 3 lane pTO je Is to oil east Iks • Reduce m and sidewa Plus bike Paths ects for oue side lane ydening prO~ • Uliminata the j's Ferry ents to 115 and to 99' au SCUO ed ~Provenn • Reef P air 211 d Ill of the I-5121? Fundphasesll sect • eFrO3 dingfor a greatel intercbaug u • Utilize freer erpection reang~o improve scope of and signalize aver redesigns, a and l}ow ects ~s~ ectivit)' FrOI c cap rojects~ersialprojects and • F achy to contto cult to • Elirnina t wivbe g-- Lit extension Projects such ameet extension to lement, o Ash~aa,& Comnnuter Rail Ball rioritiza .On of to a frill scale gher p non 10112101 • More serous c ~idtam to better serve • trans intro-ci ~mment Lo9•doc S\t RPLNWUtia\TSP\'iSP page 4 \\T1G333\l7SR\DE~ ~ Dra" TSP Comment Log Tig8rd YET T n T TTflT C1W 0 -ftgerd City 111111 IV, internal transportation needs. 21 Public meeting 12/4/00 If you make a street easier to get to and drive The objectives outlined in the goals and policies of the TSP on, won't more people want to drive on it? develop a balanced approach to modes, connectivity and capacity. Addressing these together as a system results in greater use of all mode and more options. In many cases the additional connectivity outlined in the draft TSP is aimed at the opposite result - balancing demand on several routes to reduce the impact to an one street. 22 Public meeting 12/4/00 Did the City work with Beaverton regarding This improvement is in both City's TSPs. There are many extending Murray Blvd? environmental issues to work out and it may take several years to address the specific environmental and funding details. '23 Public meeting 12/4/00 Are you certain Western By-pass won't work? It would allow more direct traffic but would not eliminate local We thought that about 217 and look at it now. traffic issues in Tigard. The approach being taken is more toward management of existing system instead of building more freeways given the existing understanding of growth in the next 20 years. Significant changes to the urban growth boundary could change this understanding, but it is speculative at this time to guess where those changes may occur in the next 20 to 50 ears. 24 Tom Coffee, Assistant 12/4/00 Given the general level of congestion, Bonita Road is the key linkage in this area. It serves as a collector City Manager function and types of land uses between Hall route between Tigard and Lake Oswego. This designation is City of Lake Oswego Blvd and Bangy Road, both Tigard and Lake consistent with the Metro RTP. Because Bonita does not serve a Via letter Oswego may want to consider future regional function in terms of what is connects, it does not meet the designation of this corridor as a Minor criteria of an arterial designation. Arterial. 25 Tom Coffee, Assistant 12/4/00 Carmen drive has a different classification in The difference stems from the uses, function and connectivity of City Manager Lake Oswego (Major Collector) than in Carman and Durham in Tigard. The connectivity to the regional City of Lake Oswego Tigard (Arterial Truck Route) highway system and 72"d Avenue defines the function of Carmen Via letter to Durham in Tigard. This designation is consistent with Metro RTP designations. 26 Tom Coffee, Assistant 12/4/00 Concern that the proposed intersection Roosevelt is in the City of Lake Oswego and does not meet the City Manager improvements at Carmen and 1-5 will impact ODOT prescribed access spacing standard in an interchange area City of Lake Oswego the intersection of Roosevelt and Carmen (1,320 feet). In Tigard, Sequoia Parkway would fall into this Via letter Drive due to ODOT's new ORS for access same condition. As pre-existing access points, these intersections spacing. will remain. Over time, should major redevelopment occur, ODOT may desire to coordinate with the cities to improve the access spacing in this area should condition provide the 0 ortuni . 27 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Figure 8-3: The new street configuration has been reflected in the updated Tigard Development revise the configuration of 132nd at Walnut. mapping of Figure 8-3 for this street. The amended figure 8-3 is Review Engineer This should not be a neighborhood route. SW attached 132"d was realigned and renamed to be a art Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 5 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLNUulia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc SRI of SW Greenfield drive, and now intersects with SW Gaarde. SW Greenfield should be the neighborhood route. 28 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 The proposed connection between SW Gaarde Existing stub streets and right-of-way exist for this connection. It Tigard Development and the southerly portion of SW Greenfield is not likely that this connection will be given priority over several Review Engineer looks unrealistic due to the large drainage other significant improvements needed in Tigard. This condition ravine. will be presented specifically to the Planning Commission for their recommendation. 29 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Given the topography, SW 133rd , north of Existing right-of-way exists for this roadway. Depending upon Tigard Development Beef Bend is really not realistic. This should site development of adjacent lands, a roadway could be built in Review Engineer be looked at again this locations (as part of development access needs) but it is likely to be built with road standards sensitive to its hillside setting. 30 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 The Woodhue, 141` avenue and the Peachtree Figure 8-3 has been revised to reflect the finished street locations. Tigard Development avenue connections are now finished The amended figure 8-3 is attached Review Engineer 31 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Why are they not showing the SW Atlanta The Tigard Triangle plan is not being amended. All TSP maps Tigard Development connection over to Dartmouth? If this is will be amended to reflect Atlanta as shown on the Triangle Plan. Review Engineer going away, the Tigard Triangle Plan will This connection was shown in the TSP local connector maps, but need to be revised as well. will in be included in the functional classification maps (consistent with the Triangle study). 32 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Royalty Parkway, east of 99W should be part The amended Figure 8-3 (attached) reflects the finished street Tigard Development of a neighborhood route. locations, with Royalty Parkway as a neighborhood route. Review En meer 33 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Page 8-13, Table 8-2: The table will be changed to show that the minimum turn lane Tigard Development Turn lanes should be a minimum of 12 feet width is 12 feet with a foot note that will state: "In constrained Review Engineer wide on collectors and arterials. conditions on collectors, neighborhood and local routes, a minimum width of 10 feet may be considered (except on bus routes)" 34 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 1 think 6 feet is too narrow for parking lanes. Parking lanes should be planned for 8 feet. The 6 foot designation Tigard Development The City has been going with 8 feet for some was listed only for the 32 foot street where the removal of two 8 Review Engineer time now. foot parking lane areas leaves less than 20 feet for traveled way. Current City standards call for 32 feet of right of way with 8 foot travel lanes, therefore staff agrees that it would be misleading to state the parking lane width is 6 feet when in all reality, 8 feet would still be required. A footnote is suggested under Table 8-2 on page 8-13 which states "For 32 foot wide streets, the City recognizes that in some instances, there will not be 20 feet of unobstructed pavement". 35 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Medians should be defined in the table. Are The intent is for medians and/or center turn lanes. This will be Tigard Development they simply left turn lanes? Figure 8-5 and clarified in the final TSP document by changing "Medians" to Review Engineer others seem to imply this. "Medians or center turn lane" Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 6 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLNUulia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc anted to ae byee ek tree sPecif icallyww be ma the The TSF task force com nudecision that must The direction ofhere is is a cil. t casesw sidewalks, therefore dn'd Cry Coupe strip, excep requixed a design Commission Figvte 8-9, be changed to show the Punning Commi clude a 1 okrac feature d 0 ant's should curb-tight TaskForce was to in This issue Wa' of 11J2910 The diagrams iscussed in City to have a enVIT01. ntaCofonditop g The , lions. meeting* d Brian Rager, Typ1CP L section 'anted behind the Physical ht g Commission oTce dicate 36 Development trees p e the deviation to curb ttg 01 Flannin of the task {rce nh if Tigard for this hs becaus detail at the 2-$- who were pa's not oncerned ft't En ;Weer sidewalk, Wye reason and local streets a were concern~ c Review g sidewalk. ,Monty of rig think more mg o ssion aesthetics and th Y helming s config n°n' 1 Planning was for they wo~lConunissiou bunt to thi to a planter that the concern sidewalks requirement to ate al1eaay shifting d„ pile setback the planning we are too late to begin the , trees behin they did not sin this in more de ort°o of changing . with setback Also, ° e supp lion. exible on configu avow to be more fl r discus were" to g oalTSP document. Th Strip onfigunta figuration ,For instance, we ha the a indicated with pe Ple'ha"016 the option be change the ROW width- laced curb g s will d street trees to be placed the ROW . sidewalks- Tw g is attache allowed the ent" outside of th tructionlutility to provide .`landscape easem wide street, with anhended fhgunre g- was to have a cons and you Could have S,des and only leave a 42 f th be done an onboth e 1 foot gap work needed to nth so alks engineering sidew The intent o h space in erha s e sidewalk easement m the event rBased on copiers Lov de enoug OW for utilities. an wide R between we do ent would not p The 1-foot wide gap ide of what flexibility d wine 11129J00 the l foot wide OW line is Outside confusing staff, a 1 foot wide e coon was needed this ern City of and the would throw in do away with the even that consf c sion. With this in schemes. Rag now and if we tha Died from the cross sec i curb street could additional level °f on 31 Bean Besides, o this becomes moot. But 2 foot cur Tigard Development element scen'Ari , with a Planter a will be rem fora 3 dscape strips- 1 A foot lap ona Review Fngineer Planter strip decides to go ht-of-way additi the City foot a • A 50 foot rig in the draftTSP was for an even if or the they wan a one foot larger stri there is pOneed t to include a five f feet an 3.5 feet e city decided 3'Jlto 4 additional four ction easement area e and if tb scenario . aconfmnedby Jconstru would leave only l l J2gl0Q Even to a planter strip irate as ape foot utility the 4 foot strip strips are ger curb ' ar Ra, City of shift hater strip is adeq We should try to landscape strip t inch Briann wide p Forester. a 50 foot ROW out the 6 dicate that lapdscape 39 Tigard Development the City 's urban subtractin as Figure 8-9 any larger than Table g-2 will be edited to in Review Engineer avoid %1609 landscape strips ei hbor od sheets noted in s that th table required for n g The.criteria" table say to conflict wi 11129100 require This seems they are not require City are req a saying Brian g-2, where we ai streets. Therefore 39 Tigard $evelopment hborhood on locals, but not on ineer for neig Review Eng Would We want them ? Nit' vote is to stay above. and nent #36 neighborhood streets locals to corni away from them °n both See r -esPonce Wei hborhood streets. lamer striout ps i of n a the" lain above they step People come becaus ass. n City of 11129(00 c ~a hwoko uP to their ankles in soggy grass. Ra erg hi her order 10112(04 Tig more sense on QO and Development es The stri T°ak Review Engineer Comment L°9•doc page 7 p.(1G333\lfSR\DEPTS\LRPLN~uIiaXTSPtfSP graft TSP Comment Log and C AY of Tigard like coltectoxs and aztenals, where the pedestrian naffic is above. the critea ~g awe Se Parking sweets' higher and p ent # 34 a on-street onse to comun speeds are waking See xe.,P ended to state that th ched. hi hex. the On-sweet p 8.g will be ended figure 8-8 is atta Under the criteria table, Avoid is g feet. The amend Bn should be set at a constant value with gager, City of 11!29(00 It only adds to Staff s 41 Development ranges at all costsj «hagg Tigard grief when we have to Not many Engineer 6 feet . too narrOW. the Review developers- with their cars when they eel' of 15 feet be they still are hug t curb parked car is &R to determine ing driver p . Assum park,eople and a he ri close sing b the by aarked car. Staff to hu to will contact T\rF ssion and city median and the curb is in ,the PlanningtableCO . lane issue in not oin pT allow for mountable curb, Policy l1 !29100 Regarding the notes: g We do N asking current city p ote #1 mean- o there. ake the decision (like n with City of What does N and e not wish tog Council must m Whether to be cons 42 Brian RageL, rr►ent mountable curbs an edian, a.) comment #34) of whe Whethere oozes or to follow TuF&R Tigard Develop about a center ul t for very and not require m Staff bad not behenm able were ineex If there is talking on locals, excep nun and require them- report and War- Review Eng we don't have them d b even if we did, 19 endations an e the staff at the public hearing Review table reco &R at the tim, table curb note Will rare circuu»sttances an contact T\1F zovtde infOrmarion feet is excessive- feet has been accep however, we will p eeable, the moue to TVFR. W e need some clarity here. on due, dlis matter- if MFR is agreeable, removed. Ce of note #2 will be de not 2 ss sections provided. ay in the cro because he Iast semen dote #2 is "Tong options given for side-'w 0 T1►e last sentence in option f°r the width is additional. C drawings show only This note should the curb 11!2910 of the lamer strip- one with odified to reflect 43 Bn~ Rager, ity meet sidewalk and p This note will be m Tigard Develop Review Engineer be altered accon (Q at least inconsistent Note #3 is wr g ve a curb City of 11129/00 what we do) because when we Ifeet fox the ire S 44 Brian RageT, went tight sidewalk, we requDITI~N to the curb- will be deleted- TigardDevelop have 5.5 feet of cussion ent #37, this note sidewalk IN ou actually Review Engineer Therefore,, the curb. Based on the dis in c° „concrete includin ate because Figure 8-9: Note #6 have is not accux gap, even if 11129 00 ically a 1 r the curb Briangager, City of we do NOT tyP crated from ent. 45 and Development We have a sidewalk se p in the final TSP doou►m Tigard This is not needed. this will be changed Review Engineer e 8_10: Azterial Collector ctor ,,d to say "Coll' 11124100 Figm g, City of I suggest the title be chang » for clan 46 Brian RageT, and nt Arterial Sam le Sweet....... 10112!01 Tigard Developme Review En ineer Page 8 s 933\USR\DEP7S\LRPWwulia\TSP~TSF C°mmeat~o9• °C \\.IG Tigard Draft TSP DOmment Log City of Tigard Someone may ask what an "arterial collector" is. 47 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Page 8-20: In second paragraph the reference The fmal TSP will refer to the City of Tigard "Public Tigard Development should be City of Tigard "Public Improvement Design Standards" instead of the "Standard Review Engineer Improvement Design Standards". Specifications for Public Works construction' that is referred to in the draft. 48 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Figure 8-16: The map will be revised to reflect existing streets constructed and Tigard Development Add connection for Walnut Lane (north of to show a connection in the area of Walnut Lane, north of Fem. Review Engineer Fern) 49 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Revise map to reflect what is now built in The map will be revised to reflect existing streets that have been Tigard Development Quail Hollow East and West. constructed. Review Engineer The Peachtree connection down at Beef Bend Road is now completed. 50 Brian Rager, City of 11/29/00 Page 8-55, 56: Access Management Staff will have to come back at a later to date to propose revisions Tigard Development I am glad to see this section in here. I support to the development code to reflect the standards being developed Review Engineer the City adopting access management in the TSP and Comprehensive Plan. At that time, additional standards. What we have now is very weak. attention can be given to the specific standards and whether However, we may want to look at the County exceptions are appropriate to be written into the code or if and ODOT standards to make sure we are not variances are the action needed. The ODOT Highway Plan setting our Staff up for multiple variance spacing standards will apply to ORE 99W (530 - 740 feet), Hall requests. I say this because I OFTEN see Boulevard (400 - 475 feet) and streets/driveways within 1,320 feet projects not meeting WACO or ODOT of ORE 217 or 1-5 interchanges. For Washington County roads spacing standards, only to see the applicants access spacing standards would be 1,000 feet for major arterials, drag through a variance process. Often the 600 feet for minor arterials and 150 feet for major collectors. The developers are eventually granted the access, spacing standards outlined in the TSP would apply for City streets but it takes a lot of time. There should be 1,000 feet maximum/600 feet minimum for arterials and 400 feet very clear criteria for being granted a variance maximum/200 feet minimum for collectors. The maximum and to the spacing standard, to assist Staff in minimum standards balance safety needs and connectivity needs. reviewing the requests. Additionally, two other standards are recommended. First, a restriction of direct access of new single family units on arterials and collectors (this would include an exception process that addresses safety and neighborhood traffic management needs). Second, an access report with new land development that requires applicants to verify design of their driveways and streets are safe meeting adequate stacking needs, sight distance and deceleration standards as set by ODOT, Washington County, the City and AASHTO (utilizing future traffic volumes from this TSP as a future base for evaluation). 51 Brian Ra er, City of 11/29/00 We should also add a criteria fors acin of a See response to comment #50. Sites with limited frontage may be Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 9 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLN\Julia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc Tri T T M T T TrrTrrTrl r.Trr (local) e should be to space access or place access on lower level ( This isS with required acts to public safety n Standards reduce imp tovement Desig agement as driveway of collectors or sweets to e public ImP this TSP for access man t►e altersection 04,080.c allows Orated in ended by TMC l5. incorp arten ls R from ight now, feet from the revisions recomeet Code. evelopment to be as close as 30 street. I have well as the Develop Tigard D En irteer a driveway ROVJ lines of any while, and Review g intersecting about this one for a rs I had heartburn i to cot Yeda at now maybe an oPPp1 va a scan know •nm Tualatin, they erials. says shall be at least 150 ar tbac from m a the driveway intersection . collectors or a i50 where a project has less than tennat In a case a would look at feet of frontage, th y were not practical, or if that driveway as far e would will be revised shared access, P ut his make 'he developer e frontag jSF i eline locations The ammended from the itrtersectiohe as operty line), document. 5 feet from The figures that refer to exte aj elme m ched. allow ( eline t eline ure 3-14 major Pip to reflect this p P this P P is atta uTe 9-1 (also Fig figure 3-I$ sh°wwg 11129100 Frg City Routes add the line that runs ust east Bean Rager, of 52 Tigard Development They need to the BPA RO northlsouth along arkup of Review Engineer of SW 150' Avenue (seem rs TSP. It with th and Hall. as been done a near Greenburg figure)' d reduced At several location;this lar to ORE 99W to delays a less congestion going to Level E reflects congestion stmestion would add e impact of g reater cong . Ti mod), erty Allowing eutal) what wouldbe th Allowing g utes g euvironm es (5 to 10 mrn cast, Prop, and cost? travel times acts ( b double or trifle. ice ft sere ose substantial imp a dra TSP Y B will imp the costs in tr` a between the benefits of the 53 Dick ewersdorff ent city of Tigard Curr that could multiply and im m d °TSP seeks a balance with costs anager acts. Planning The Propose tiosere with the final TSP. level of trans This is a tYP° and will be edited says rainy day conditions map will be utilized in the revision of the draft Existing ~t?) differential Pattern sitrtulation (mrsp where does A 54 Dick Bewe azd Current le colored ends like TSP to final. City of Ttg e rttaps with g ° Al wbe the area. Tualatin Nfana er pssum Oregon ggW g on draft trail maps to dated their Plann traffic on was shown ct THPRD has u Bewecsdocff, ise they are useless. This linkage 5 Dick 5 City B Tigard Gt went othety+ Plan shows an ecreation Distri anager O O to ,all. Is Hills Parks and R 10j 12101 m and Transportation S s t Planning Trg act from Nun dorff, off street 56 Dick Q Ti ~dCurrent Comment Lo9•doc 0 page 14 \dEP?S\LRPLwuIia\TSP\TSP \\,TtG333\USR Comment Log Tigard Draft TSP Ciry of Tigard Planning Manager this in Washington Square Plan? And is it on trail map and those off-street routes will be reflected in the fmal the improvement list? Also shown on Figure edits to Figure 5-1. The specific off-street trail referenced is not in S7 Dick Bewersdorff, 5-1 the current THPRD master lan. Proposed functional classification system has The summary map in Chapter I of the draft TSP will be edited to City of Tigard Current local streets on it inconsistently. Where is Planning Manager be consistent with the updated Figure 8-3 in Chapter 8 of the TSP. Atlanta Street connection and the O'Mara- 58 Dick $ewersdorff, Hunziker connection? It would be extremely helpful to label and Figure 8-10 will be amended to indicate 2 lane, 3 lane, 5 lane and City of Tigard Current identify types of streets on the 7 lane street cross sections. The lane width for specific collectors i arterial/collector cross section. and arterials is determined by Figure 8-11 of the TSP. 59 Dick Bewersdorff, Figwe 8-11 adds cross over at Hunziker to All maps will show these connections Cha ter 1 City of Tigard Current Hampton and Walnut connection to 8-3 and Figure 8-11). P graphics, Figure Planning Manager Hunziker? 60 Dick $ewersdorff, On 8-19 in front, the location of the O'Mara- This is correct. The Chapter I summary portion will be amended City of Tigard Current Hunziker is different from that in 8-19 in to be consistent with the Chapter 8 text portion. Planning Manager back. 61 Dick Bewersdorff, 8-19 does not show Nimbus connection to Figure 8-191ists improvements anticipated to be completed City of Tigard Current Greenburg. It is on 8-3. This brie s u the Planning Manager g P 20 years. This figure should be amended to show the within question, which map do planners use to Nimbus/Greenburg connections because it is anticipated within determine where to build new streets? the 20 year timeframe as part of the Washington Square Plan. In addition, the Figure title will be amended to read "20 year street 62 Dick Bewersdorff, im rovement plan" Comments heard. Write a letter to Laurie This section is a summary of the plan and process. The final TSP City of Tigard Current Nicholson - should be changed. Plannin Mana er document will be revised to delete the last 2 pages of Chapter 1. 63 Dick Bewersdorff, Policy 2, Goal 1: Says will develop sidewalk The sidewalk standards will have to be developed and City of Tigard Current standards to define various widths. incorporated into both the Engineering standards and the Planning Manager Development Code or Engineering Standards? Development Code. This will be completed in the future. 64 Dick Bewersdorff, Policy 2, Goa 12: Says fixed route transit will No. This policy establishes a frame for planning transit City of Tigard Current use arterial and collectors, will we have to Planning Manager cooperatively between the City and Tri-met. The objective is for ticket buses if they travel on a local street? transit services to utilize arterials and collectors whenever possible. To clarify this further, the second he of Goal 2, policy shall be amended to read "Fixed route transit will primarily use 65 Dick Bewersdorff, arterial and collector streets in Ti ard." Policy 3: Bicycle lanes must be constructed This is the same as any other requirement on arterials and City of Tigard Current on all arterials and collectors. Who a s - Plannin Mana er rou h ro ortionaIi ? P y collectors. It is a City requirement, we require what we can justify Isn t this an issue of and the Ci will have to look at makin u differences if there is Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log City of Tigard Page 11 UTIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLNUulialTSP\TSP Comment Log.doc 10/12/01 over-sizing for community use? one. It is important to note that facilities are not oversized, they are sized appropriately to address the future modal needs. Chapter I 1 discusses firndin o lions. adjace to already re mires insidewa stances where street or 66 Dick Bewersdorff, Policy 4: Says sidewalks shall be constructed he Dtructee%eloprnent City Tigard Current on all streets with construction or re-consd Planning Manager construction projects. Will we be in violation sidewalk improvements can not be jthe Development Code will of plan for single-family's built by partition? ould not to be an. led to fullyamplement the Comprehensive Plan changes and T. 'Lt that time, exceptions for flexibility may be added to uni ue unstan such as artitions. Dick Bewersdorff, Policy 5, Goal 2: Guidel who will do? ccess ~ o the Engm enr bg sdtandards and specifications and the incorporated 67 control. What are they and wh City of Tigard Current Development Code. Access management limits the number of planning Manager access points (driveways) to preserve the functional integrity and safety of a roadway. Allowing frequent access points can impact the ca aci safe and function of a roadwa (e g. ORE 99W). ess Dick Bewersdorff, Policy 6: Required to identif iand10tigate mynga°e tmhe u ~applications IS caseuimprovementswould beand 68 high collision location if genate City of Tigard Current planning Manager increase in traffic. Put in code, but what proportional because the development would be creating a 10% or about rough proportionality and then is it more increase to traffic safety problems. denial if not rou hl ro ortional? Policy 8: Reword. 69 Dick Bewersdorff, City of Tigard Current Plannin Mana er 70 Dick Bewersdorff, Po licy 1, Goal 4: What is meant by "special Special Transport ation Areas (STA) are allowed by ODOT in the districts" and how would they work? Highway Plan to apply unique service standards to City of Tigard Current downtown/district areas. While the TSP does not define any planning Manager STA's in Tigard, these areas could be developed in the future should it be deemed in the interest of the City. Page 3-14, Table is not labeled. This is a continuation of table 3-1 from the previous page. 71 Dick Bewersdorff, City of Tigard Current Plannin Mana er An updated map will be included in the final TSP. 72 Dick Bewersdorff, Existing land use map is poor. City of Tigard Current Mor the show ded to Plannin Mana er en amen gan 73 Dick Bewersdorff, Major pipeline map does not include This leap has be line from Scholls Ferry Road Kinderouth near 135's south City of Tigard Current petroleum line. through Tigard generally along the BPA easement line. The Planning Manager ammended fi ure 3-18 is attached. Strategy 3: If there are existing sidewalks in This strategy (on page 5-4) shall be amended by adding the Cu 74 Dick Bewersdorff, Ci of Ti a rd Current close roximi either develo er or Ci will followin language- 10f12/01 Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 12 \\TIG333%USR\OEPTS\LRPLN\Julia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc City of Tigard Milli Planning Manager be required to extend to meet. Funding - Distance Standard - 300 feet? To effectively implement this strategy, close proximity shall be determined to be within 300 feet of the proposed development. In addition, if extension is not found to be roughly proportional to the development, the City shall add this to future years CIP consideration list. 75 Dick Bewersdorff, Strategy 8: Code enforcement - sidewalk Sidewalk maintenance is an existing requirement in the Municipal City of Tigard Current maintenance. Code, therefore, this does not result in any increase requirements Planning Manager of standards. Code Enforcement would be the appropriate contact in the event of sidewalk dis-re air. 76 Dick Bewersdorff, Complimenting land development actions The intent of this strategy is to require improvements when the City of Tigard Current (page 5-12). Therefore, fronting change increases demand on the facility. In cases where the Planning Manager improvements involving sidewalks are demand is the same or decreased, no improvements can be required on every change of land use or justified. This will be addressed with the Development Code roadway project. Do we want that in Code or changes to implement the TSP and Comprehensive Plan changes in relationship to construction? Funding. in the future. 77 Dick Bewersdorff, All commercial projects generating over 1,000 It is anticipated that at some point in the future, the Development City of Tigard Current trip ends should provide a pedestrian Code will be amended to reflect the changes required by the TSP. Planning Manager connection plan. Will be new code requirement. 78 Dick Bewersdorff, Figure 6-2: Bicycle Master Plan, 74' trail - This will be determined at the time of project development. City of Tigard Current which side of creek? Several factors will need to be considered including Planning Manager environmental impacts, wetland areas and access to adjacent lands. 79 Dick Bewersdorff, Page 7-4: (Strategy 2) Need for bus shelter. There is already language in the Development Code for Tri-met City of Tigard Current Code requirement or use existing? facility upgrades to be considered when a new project abuts a Planning Manager transit facility, therefore, no additional Development Code changes will be necessary. 80 Dick Bewersdorff, Page 8-1: Type spacing. This is a formatting issue which will be corrected with the final City of Tigard Current TSP document. Planning Manager 81 Dick Bewersdorff, Page 8-3: Maximum intersection level of Goal 4, policy 1 on page 8-3 addresses minimum (not maximum) City of Tigard Current service standard. What, who and where intersection LOS. Engineering will have to establish the criteria. Planning Manager should it be placed? Code or Engineering When traffic studies are required, they will evaluate the LOS at spec book? key intersections and provide recommendations to meet LOS criteria, if necessary. 82 Dick Bewersdorff, Figure 8-3: Shows a connection of 68t°? Figure 8-3 has been updated to reflect these streets that have been City of Tigard Current Connection at Bull Mountain to Gaarde? finished since the draft TSP was published. The amended figure Planning Manager Explain? Why not Ames Orchard? One 8-3 is attached. Peachtree to Beef Bend - done. Erickson Heights - connection done. Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 13 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLN1Julia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc process of being updated. Washington Coun consideration mom IN ty's TSP is in the °is in process of es have been take into in their TSP page 8-10: Says C These Chang rocess. th prior plans because they 83 Dick BewersdOrff, reviewing. What did they say? These streets were not classified in e City of Tigard Current were not constructed yet TVFD) needs. Plannui Mana el Table 8-1: Not classified. Local? Fire Di.n the TSF will need 84 Dick BewerSd rff, and This space is to meet Tualatin Valley City of Tigard 1 Space between curb The engineering standards develop Plannin Man, er Figure 8-8 O: to address any guidelines. (2): to 85 Dick Bewersdorff, median 19 feet? Actual width can be which City of Tigard Current uideline? modified. What g uaga will be develop will be planning Manager modi The Development Code tang -10: Where appTOpnate, mediaa deg addresses medians and situations where flexibility Figure 8 rovided -what well guide?. Provided. 86 DickBewersdorff, may not be p label collectors and City of Tigard Current Engineering standards Planning Manager arterials. 9 Yes. Cross section. To be in Public Works specs.. ht-of-way dedicationstsetbacks will these areas, rig These will 87 Dick Bewersd11 For pro}ects in act of roadway projects- city of iard Current wire dedication ment review- be needed to avoid future unp pi in Mana er Figure 8-ll: Do we now rea d for turn lanes wersdorff, for 7 lanes on Pacific HwY need to be addressed at the rime of develop Dick Be 4 5111all, 4- Current for 500 feet? Greenburg, 5(17urham, 4-5 Summ ownas edestrian 88 5lDartmouth, 4-5172 erfield is sh p City of planning MTigardanager setbacks ossible . e connection within 12: Need definitive state and con nection only. Figure intent and meaning 89 Dick Bewersdorff, regardi 8ng- of Tigard Current applicability of local street access Crosse . ro ects are regional. city erfield, numbered p j planning Manager Golf course in Summ ' Lettered projects are CIP, Table 8-b: Which are metro and C1P? general Projects or go Dick Bewersdorff, specific projects ith have the costs called out. O er City li Tigard Current ement for arterials. Some sp ement projects will occur w roadway Plal Maria er Specific access snag access evelO meat as it occurs. ure 8-25 which will be adopted Dick Be~versdorff, Funding needs to be established. s The intent is to have 91 ent Truck routes are identified Plan maP ~ 1~ foot travel city of Tigard Curr lement trucK routes9 as part of the comprehensive "~ck friendly , i.e., Plar►nin Mana er How do we ned to be ,,truck these toads desig , 35 foot curb returns and p not 92 Dick Bewersdorff, longer access spacing r share of trucks. This does and Curr lanes, long ust that the streets of Tig ent design that accommodates a large City planning Manager mean that trucks can not travel on other scree > 10112101 mment Lo9•doc omment Log Page 14 \\TIG333UJSR\DEPTS\LRPLN\JJ3NTSP\TSP Co City of Tigard Tigard Draft TSP D -~~otnntodatehighe~ uougl' OrSmance' tes are destgped w,hicb ld , tl ck rou cou designated as traffic. yep tough tmck routes as ehveries onl rehensive plan amounts of tm eets d Hate specific str to local e comp w11 b adapted as part Of ~ dwou d limim s e All ofth maps?' Adopt the following Master Plan ersdotif, ore 5-1 Pedestrian looked at? sweet Dick$ew d Curreut Fig gas Duane f proposed off 93 City of Tig anager ♦ Feasibility e? PlanningM ! palks side of creek onlan pe estrian Pcdonp Figures- Bicycle Master a`ryn Figure 6-2' Duane looked Framework OPnonP Is Ian S Y, igure 6-3: gicycl ~r a1 ClassificationRo tes Figure 8-3: functional o cal Sheet ore 8-4 ProP _ 8-1? Fig g-12 ores ent Plan s ConneCtivityapetlmProvem Improvement Figure 8.19: S Intersection Figure 8_20' aster Plan Locations • Traffic SignackRoutes Ivd. ore 8-21. u h Tru all B 1g ore 8-25 othe altern ative °x t the two Tualatin supports the south to c 1-31-01 eAended to also support rite along lure being unities. They es and sidewalks offer a schedule of fuOnce Iason Tuck comet of bike lan ort the to notset. 94 Coordinator connec ation ey also suPP coon to t1'e aced at tlvs time e the TS? urt is an d Protected . of co - program that c non of a bicycle locatio110 108s • Staff is noteactual adopti,l evaluate the c to the Develop nt I Sa . $t polic1ese activity as red, staf if w ule for upda", eheuslve Plan- 11 i the TSP is adop are a sched SP ansouth of the C rehensive P Ian ce th d Camp, The proposed no strategies refer e rep e T the wor el to eft and the changes'u 2-5-01 d impleme"' but no t code od ect R requirements will adop to adopt Steve Oulmau whenTigard s action 95 Land use no planner Provided measured. The cs hedule of future trans ~C requSP should inclethe city to fullends that for D the T that will ove m R Recomm m it 1011210 actions the TP olic 'n'ail o p is a, o d t an interin► °lia\TSP\TSP Comore°1Lo9'doG Page 15\\T1G333WSR\QEPTS\LRPLM~ ement Log Tigard Draft TSP D T T?`" City of Tigard clear that until it adopts the required land use regulations changes, provisions of the TPR i apply directly to all land use decisions and limited land use decisions. 96 Michaa Hoglund, 02-20-01 Metro recommends that Goal 2 of the draft Under Goal 2, Policy 7 should have text added to the sentence e Director plan be expanded to include die 2040 non- "...reduction strategies developed regionally, targeted to achieve Metro LLnd Use and single occupancy vehicle modal targets non-single occupant vehicle levels outlined in Table 1.3 of the Transportation contained in Table 1.3 of the 2000 RTP. The RTP." Planning Division Chapter 10 description of specific strategies already provides a good complement to the modal targets, but should be linked to a specific policy statement that is consistent with the regional TDM policy. 97 Michael Hoglund, 02-20-01 Concern about the level of service "D" The actual improvements outlined in the Tigard TSP reflect level Director standard for congestion which is much more of service at the boundary between E and F with demand to Metro Land Use and aggressive than the minimum two-hour level capacity ratios of 1.0 at key intersections. The policy in Chapter Transportation of service in the RTP. The RTP standard is 2, Goal 4, Policy I should be edited to reflect this and the recent Planning Division not a requirement as long as the local TSP regional recommendations to state: Level of service E (and demonstrates that it will not result in major demand to capacity ratio of 1.0 or less), Highway Capacity motor vehicle capacity improvements that Manual Chapters 15, 16 and 17 (or subsequent updated have the effect of shifting unacceptable levels references) is recommended to balance provision of roadway of congestion into neighboring jurisdictions, capacity with level of service and funding. ODOT, Metro and result in capacity improvements to the Washington County performance standards should be considered principal arterial system that are not on state or county facilities and for 2040 Concept Areas (as recommended in the RTP and increase SOV defined in Table 1.2 of the RTP). travel to a measurable degree that affects local consistency with modal targets. Proposal in the TSP to expand I-5 to 8 lanes between 217 and Wilsonville conflicts with the 2' criterion specified above since it is not included in the RTP - recommends revising the assumption to acknowledge that the 2000 RTP has deferred a decision in the I-5 corridor until a more detailed corridor study can be completed. Metro strongly supports the combination of capacity improvements and other measures called for in the draft TSP for Highway 99W from 217 to Tualatin Road. However, Metro Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 16 10/12/01 City of Tigard \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLN\Julia\TSP\TSP Comment Log.doc suggests consideration of a more specific adoption of the special Highway 99W level of service criteria called foro o the 2000 R'I'P. There are four di addressed below between t with response to the and the Suggests revising them 2000 RTP. Each is 9g Michael Hoglund, 02-20-01 classifications to be more consistent with the difference: Road Director 2000 RTP by differentiating between major 1) principal Arterial status is removed from as of Ferry Metro Land Use and and minor arterials. and ORE 99W in Tigard in the RTP• This has no functional Transportation impact on these route and the draft Tigard TSP has been changed planning Division to be consist with the RTP. Tig 2) RTP has here oernmended arterial status for Beef Bend Road will retain the consist with RTP designation to the west of the clatydlimit since it provides for through traffic in the same capacity specifically targeted for access manmrot o edrgrowth in the functional integrity of this route, given prop area and to avoid the impacts that have occurred on Bull Mountain Road with growth in the past 15 years. 3) Gaarde Street is shown in the R'I'P as a collector of regional arterial. Based upon the definitions in the draft TSP for arterial routes (as routes that connect between hies and e Tonal ORE 99W routes) the segment from the Walnut/Murray meets this functional designation. It is recommended to retain the arterial designation in the Tigard TSP. 4) The RTP has major and minor arterial designations. While designations are useful for the regional level planning in the these hey are not part of the draft Tigard TSP functional RTP, they classifications. This is described in detail on pages 8-4 through 8 20 in the TSP. In summary, the functional classification in the n by its level of Tigard TSP defines urban designoor other features which are tstre not its size, volume, elements of a roadway but not its function. Without u connec tivity neither mobility nor access can be served. Disting erial than another" at the local i ng"more of an art as between be level does not accomplish anything that designation as arterial and minor arela r tans but not does not already are left for the RTP and one reasons, desi na 10/12/01 Tigard Draft TSP Comment Log Page 17 \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\LRPLN\Julia\TSP\TSP comment Log. oc City of Tigard i TTU-T Q A .T.TrrTgTX,%1WT foot note that re wh;ngton the TSP 'be amended tole Ti$azd Tri gle aous and i t mgu ~theTSP for All maFs motion facilities ~ ecific ae e s ecific ••Transp° ing areas have SP sli h y ere ate F Sauaze plane fat may differ g areas, 1e lations" Q1e5e overlay Marion desi the Cmtcut classificattooses. Finp for trans consistency documents concise S dewalks) Oveila Cross sections avem 99 COAl~IEr1TS! lannf aITSP will sh°WSO,,ROW, 347 F ards The GES d after the tmensional scan states: "Ti'e exact CHI t and staff realize fat there is cl a g-3 which control, consuC SSion meeting ercial and as been added t° fi physical, access The ll as pal°el ess Ylannin oss section for local A footnote dashed lines to ad ; constra>r'ts, Me amended ftg"re 8- ADDITIO 5t not al Streets. realized after position Of an d env development. 100 STApF CO~ residenri staff that the right-0f-`11ay l- The ent CF~+NGBS consul Coeissi andon movm, ~y prevent consolidation, in a d ,110 Planning s a aligmneut of the parcel abhua the 3 is attache ONE' 11T 101 D OIL St efic;entdevelopm s ff c°mrnentedectsHalt CHANGES gall. Engine wag Street as it inte ddress d'th eut of eXible t° a in a ws a fine aligmn ouldbe fi lidati°n which shO Boulevard sh ds of Farcel cons s acing needs 5 attached dated ecific nee access p , . feet amended ~ includes uF In sp which area,On OT pos~ttp I3 e 7 _2 has been and which and the 1LTP hed) adjac y sical constraints- te Aacre table. a Figm ection on Bonita 10 year plan 3 atta sed and p ara wou th transit Conn Om Tri-met s f'gpl. - ' r e OS'-, d• south °f O M cif woTlcsession ° d given TSP~, e fonnation fT e will be added eas FinaUy, w , finding in v o the City Conn new fitrn it coverage s bullet, 3 20-01 cil was presented the pl amend provide addition, a a trans Coun sk aaesflovs the concern shows the fu tan text, CO~cil Opportuntrl to ail ra ensive comprehensive p 102 C~tY ents. The CouncrOposea compreh fhe con u-4. e do not adeauat- adlhe proposed plan chug the Co"nmun to tat there aanst T hen i e ply' findings s *ke cOmm~'tyComp rt service m m`e. several S~ f ~'t t erceived to - f, areas ihat also is n° p w cil members cite of shown lei a The C will call es°b2 s~nd !S a uoialtigar dTin Ouncrl ne lanwhich an action po et increased e Bo IorthD °ta, ~a tesentm%d' le Of a of developing in F' ~ 135 to see a map Tep within rocess Td-met s with als°s Ned areas that are not gaff ie le rc ershi If -met were for fors 14112141 a meem' ~apsit facili rOVidedbration Of 5.16-01 The Sy 3 we r RPLM~ur~TSP~TS C°mmentLo9 doc P Saate Pa9g 1a ~a 103 LyPicPlant `\T1G333\USR~S~TS1L Comment Log C~JW rd graft TSP 0f Tigard action plan will anent of this met's Tigard. The develop ed as discussed in Tri- service within cil to priont~ submitted so late in the it service requite staff and Coon ents being it is not 4, 2p01 to discuss trans red to pull Due to the Comm to be resolved, TSP at on MaY 2 d Staff has attemP conunents• and issues still needing es to th Ti ar a ral however, a additional Chang Tri-met issues in g cuts from th gene process, staff m creation of the action Plan manage" out the TSP comet ar8in7, service. recommended by ed after the O rovided reg met that specific a ddead" n conuuen P e detem13n can this time. if it is wigs mri- m1endments e TSP is a 20 working identified, Tri-met indicated that w~105interested in riorities need to be year document i ~ n be implemented in the be made at a later date. ements that p should identify improv therefore the TS amet to next 5 years, met can be a p proiects where Tri- help implement. e TSP create et would like to see th aonrAueue op nines for s,,,., Pre-emp imp lanes on or arsenals to help maj cated Tri-met has indi line corridors viewnsit streamthat they hope to seethe city the same way tlmat we view tential imProvements in th by identifying Poand road improvement funding resour ces vements, transit irnpro priorities. element o f the TSP should ect pedestrian pedestrian hest ections that conn prioritize Conn it stops, and place big loges to trans connections that connect to priority on th°se Conn c rail andlor commuter transit stops, jig d-ride major 'it centers annP~y b stops fall stations. tranidentify P lots. The city mad the RTP and identify how above and beY lemented. The s will be imP the TSP these stop it should be reflected m ection commuter ra bus Conn with s adnd w ether the city believes the rai1 needs hued as an all day service in line shouldbe p the ibis Corridor over lon 10112101 \USR\DEP rS~ RPLutia\TSP\TSP Comment Lo9•doc page 19 \\TiG333 graft TSp Comment Log rd Otya of Tigard 01 DISAewciates AP\ ~lv NOT CITY OF TIGr4Rl? TO SCALE > A s RD Transportation B~~ > Systems Plan > a > J i W ST T z Legend m Z Wing Hgh Pressure Gas Pirdine V Kmder Morgan Pipeline :1 T T 217 > > GAF T 210 Q~ e ¢ P RO S1 > epee°~ ~ W y r ~ 99W GAARDE ~ F LL MOUN /N i RD aD suuu lELD ~ DURHAM EF 4 ~ i I W Figure 3-18 MAJOR PIPELINE ROUTES D'K As30cbte3 l~]- Taylors Ferry Rd 6 TOSCALE Garden Hotrs Schols vqAny Rd CITY OF TIGARD ®-m klurray Bhd ` EM-Beaveror,Twatin CR Trc°'nSPortatiQn ~]•Beaverton-.aksOswego S Systems PI •TrardLheTraw D 217 •@Q°~ •PotenWlFDlureTr8ns4Route 210 Pbmed Fuhirs Transit Rotm 5 ~ P • Indicates Transit Une Roule Number -Transit Center Locdon Q Rp Future Transit Center Opport,4 A - R - Pads d Ride Lot location ® •PotentialCDmnuterRaifatafion ®'119aJaTranst$top 99W G~ UnervadAreas _ d Pt~6c Trans ortatlon Deli • Frerauan; sus s~ - - ~ ->teeiona, Bus o = _ • Rapid acs . ~~i' [~•BarburB)titf Kirl City . 4~ Garden Home ®M1~ar~Hlu Figure 7.2 " ®•Beaverton-Tuabb FUTURE TRAM Q~- averton-lake Qswego SIT SERVICE DKS Associates CITY OF TIGARD r~ o OREGON ii Transportation Systems Plan Q R - N t: •:rr %i•r:: 8 ~ ~E%% f~cE' • : • TO SCALE I - . lii SB . . Legend R `?9 iiml _ 0 N AIN 2015 Transrt 5upportry Alai CQ-WW By B ffx j 2015 ~ : • Transrt Swooruw Zanas Nd CowaO By Burlr _ Facture Transrt Buhr Eusury Transrt Semce PR e Q C:^ ~ j';~%~~%7% ~0 Future Transrt Sr+tesYaae . W ti Propo 4Comnutr Rai W ~F BE D D m E 5 ON IL ::J • 7.1... (F. •ry.. • I Figure X-X W RD Future Transit _aiv 9g 'H! S~ Coverage -TTU T Cl T T TfTffTr a1 r-re-a- ®!S dates cirf of TIGARD Transportation NOT CALE O. GS~~ a AYLORS FERRY RD NOT TO S $~`o Systems flan > ~ ~ Legend 0 o N ° v ® RDA Closure 1 Ze .14TDxs indiate spLC+`k y •e nwteyettobeidenxied. a ' 217 Planned Proposed Road r no=l .FREEWAY 210 Y • . PRINCIPALARTERIAL S KATHE J sl ~y ! ® s a f-ARTERIAL ay J vmmwaw ■ ■ e ■ • • • COLLECTOR 5G~ T 5 - .e -NEIGFIBORHOODROUTE iRp • • sr Tgard Triangle and Washington Square Reg'wnal Center Plans include specdre 99W o a ° e tundgnaldassika5mdesignaW x _ ~p , • • (Majoft wr Aneral) that are irworporeted ¢ " • by reference to Ibis plan. 3 F MISTLETOE MOUy ~N F 80NITA RD BULL Q' ~RD a 5 q SATT ER ST UE Sr : DP w •.:~µp suMM IELD m gFJJD ~ > o BEEF U 4 ~ a 4 RNef..._.. ® W s ~t Figure 8.3 " W 4R7 PROPOSED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM DS Associates CITY OF TIGARD Transp®rtation System Flan a One Side Access ~ 20' S' 1.55.5' , 36' 7' R/W 25' r R/W 50' r Industrial/Commercial Local (No parking) n 4 5.5' 24' i5.545-6, R/W 46 Cul-de-sac/Residential Local Street ~ (No parking) p b p V 5.5' 5.5' P7 28' 5.5't 5.5'i 3 5.5'. P~ 32' 5.5'3.5', R/W 5Cr i R/W 50' Residential Local Street/Cul-de-sac On-street Parking One Side On-street Parking ° ' ' * CEO= if parking on both sides, block length not to exceed 600 feet Notes: 1. Selection of placement of sidewalk and planter specific to application. 2. Width of curb is included in sidewalk width when adjacent to street. 3. Samples show the desirable applications given number of lanes; Criteria minimum standards can be applied case by case. Vehicle Lane Widths: 9 to 10 ft. i 4. Actual width of street and sidewalk area can be adjusted within (minimum widths) PoW based on modal priorities and adjacent land use. On-Street Parking 8 ft. 5. Volume guides represent estimated Full Buildout Conditions, not just Sidewalks: 5 ft. existing or project needs. (minimum width) i 6. The 36' street shall be used in any area adjacent to commercial or Landscape Strips: Where Appropriate ! industrial zoning. Sidewalk would be T curb tight in Commercial Nel hborhood Traffic Should not be necessa under 1 areas and 5.5' for industrial areas (cross section shows both samples). Management: special conditions & over 1600 r vpd) 7. Where existing street curb to curb widths vary from those shown, the minimum length of new cross section should be (or have the potential to be) 500 feet contiguous. 12 - On-street Parking Figure 8.$ i - Guide for Traffic Volume Per Day (does not require conversion of existing routes) AL.L.EY. CUL-DE-SAC AND LOCAL. STREET Where volume exceeds 1500 vpd, this cross section may still be SAMPLE STREET CROSS SECTIONS utilized however land use actions or roadway projects impacting such streets may require additional connectivity to reduce volume and/or REQUIRED ROW WIDTH neighborhood traffic management measures to reduce impacts. D K Associates C11Y OF TIGARD Transportation System Plan r 5 5 5.6. 28' 5.6 5.& 3~5 5' 11=7 32 A , 5.5' . 3.5'. F R/W 59 i R/W 50' No Parking on One Side With Parking on Both Sides O O Q p' 36' 6.5' 5.5' 6 Bice 12' 12' & B ke 5.5' 6.5' F- R/W 60' With Bike Lanes /No Parking Notes. Criteria 1. Selection of placement of sidewalk and planter specific to application. Vehicle Lane Widths: (minimum widths) 9-10 R. 2. Width of curb is included in sidewalk width when adjacent to street On-Street Parking 81 3. Samples show the desirable applications given number of lanes; Curb Extensions for Pedestrians: Consider on Pedestrian Routes minimum standards can be applied case by case. Sidewalks: (minimum width) 5 R. 4. Actual width of street and sidewalk area can be adjusted within Landscape Strips: Where Appropriate RAW based on modal priorities and adjacent land use. Neighborhood Traffic Management: Appropriate when Warranted 5. These are guidelines for future neighborhood route development and does not require changes/conversion to existing streets. Figure 8-9 NEIGHBORHOOD SAMPLE STREET CROSS SECTIONS - On-sfreetParking REQUIRED ROW WIDTH AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 20, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Tri-Met Action Update PREPARED BY: Jim HendM DEPT HEAD OK Ai *TY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Receive Tri-Met action update from staff. RECOMMENDATION No action necessary. INFORMATION SUMMARY Staff provided Council an update on June 19, 2001 where Council prioritized transit service delivery to specific populations, i.e., senior, low income and minority, and youth. Since that time, working with information provided by Tri-Met and with Council's goals for increased intra-city transit service in mind, staff has begun analyzing needed service routes, census data, and capital needs. With this effort, a clearer strategy is developing on how best to work with Tri-Met and Metro to meet the community's needs for improved transit service. Staff has initiated an action plan prioritizing needed capital improvements in order to leverage maximum transit dollars and service. Working in unison with the Westside Transportation Alliance, approaches are being developed to best present the City's needs for improved transit service to residents. Staff will provide a PowerPoint presentation on progress to date and provide an overview of the Tri-Met Action Plan. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Not applicable. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Transportation and Traffic Goal # 1, Identify alternate transportation modes, encourage uses of alternate modes and encourage development of alternative modes. ATTACHMENT LIST No attachments. FISCAL NOTES Not applicable at this point. f cr~10~4 T'nT T n iljjliijlow COUIRCA's -Direction alternatie ncil's goal is t01dent1 encourage . Cau odes, and odes. .~a~,sportation m of alternate m and uses lie seeds, developmenl • ~ioritized transit ser~' and youth. . council p e eider1y on 10,W incom ~ that need yew or foc,usin~ routs ~arg~t Council i ed ke"y t serve the V-L iority nsit servl bl'fteT pson" own Pill, P,pproach to convey Council's concerns. • Staff continuing ive detailed o Developing an Actione needs and provide a information on sere for future, .finding foundation and road map Opportunities. and in ion from Trl-Met, • Utilizing informat Transportation Alliance, coordination with Westside , to effectively gathering detailed information communicate transit needs to outside sources. •n gather~d~ laformallO-a bel g withln 114 tulle of the S~15111f01"1na~'1011 ~Cl~ wlt~l Cjeta1~0C1 . den roads identified by e~ pop.Ala$ions non ~n ~a g iafoTna deficiencies o I~,~~tifying exl~tin~ that alxeady ~rviceS areas ntl.~~ing exlSting s~ et ~op.~lations andds a pIde ice to tiaxg lce 'lee eting sere rovide sexy and in Mee can assist Tlg SoAIrceS and p~0~esses s Identifying ~ndi~g lilliggilill Evaluated: ~e SPeci~ic Roads being (99-W-iiall) • DuThamBoacl _ ualatin Transit Centex) poad (Mall ~ ham ton) • '72nd (99)XHamp Transit Center) 2nd (RulazikeTW.,Tuatatin . Boilta (~~11-72nd) G aarde (99)9..BaTTOWs~ ~-Iall) . McDonald ( 99w -Ba~ows via Roshak) Bull Mountilla (99W Information Obtained Census • Total within 1/4 mile of identified VopIllation roads 1Vlinority population count, total youth Nam (b,,W,,n 0 and 19) and elderly (65+) • income information not yet available for 2000 census that • Looking into social serv,ce Programs already target low income for information on population. numbers Existing Deficiencies Identified For each road being evaluated, we have identified whether there are: • Sidewalk access to neighborhood • Access to existing transit routes e Lights fight of way needs for future bus turn opts and amenities .~ogra~~. tin services and p axis g 3ob Access . dial-~--R~de n commllnlty Shuttle s ode COT ectlo lliance (wTA) tside Transp°~atio~ A ~1es cc~s~ pr°~~a .~vate Job no~-- COIIIICdloll~ ~ p operated by Ydde access to profit ageillCy with -incopeople orting empjoyrae'A ow l ~do S or locations Supp In ~lgard 01,1,j with M . demand • p~ovideS access on ice h~u~s jq~f 6A ~obs Xccess ding PTOVidedbyfedeTal et . ~~R bursa by dollars distri S dial-A ode erica Red Cross . Operated by the Am icle Service to seniors and provides Cou'W people With disabilities Door to door service e State funded ~T.c zat•rtcrtn~t 1 ~.1de C011"ect'On COM,,,Ility Shuttle ides door to door shuttle serviCe° Select o prov with disabllitges in seniors and people, a$ch during operating areas bY Calling lisp hours. City area. ed route shuttle services or King area FjX i de local are Contracted by Tr1'Met toProv oline recently te lnated in service in place King City area. i-falisPortation 1hance W.'StSICVe T1~ omotion resources on using • provides Pr ortation alternative modes of transeeds at local, o Advocate for mew ber regional and state stawith assistance on ex~s~n~ • provides and advocacy needs services, funding, 1 [action ~Lll"pose' of Play Go~ attain ies that, if corrected, can help • Identi~' iclenc increased sen'ice. ice needs for u~xe Prioritize iclentifted Serv wi h Tri Met. and needs to coordination anon on pTioTity provide detailed fuading Considerations. un~ca$e in j-.met fog futuTe a s to comnl timely and effective w a act n~Xt round of • Identify ding arena to imp the regional fun the CIP sion in funding allocations. projects for inclu • Identify appropriate NeXt steps n with , • ection and Action Pla l s dir Discuss Collaci Tr1 Nlet. Sit needs With Tualatin• al funding . coordinate trap 1 pa~~cipat~ in region actl~~ y . Continue to ses• vocate f or proces additional ort and a a Continue to Cupp nities• ice 0pportu anon on eXls~'in~ transit Se~~ys to get in~o~m o laellIfIfy citizen~• service S. to AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF November 20, 2001 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Review Draft Ag eernents for Cij3L-Sbonsored Events for the Tigard Festival of Balloons Tigard 4th of and Broadway Rose Theater PREPARED Cghy Wneattey DEPT HEAD OK , TY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Review the draft agreements for the three City of Tigard sponsored events. STAFF RECOMMENTDATION Representatives from the three events will be present at the November 20 meeting to discuss the Agreement. After discussion, staff recommends that Council direct staff to make changes to the Agreements if needed. Staff will then prepare resolutions and final agreements for formal approval by the City Council. INFORMATION SUMMARY The attached memo highlights the similarities and differences among the three Agreements. These Agreements clarify expectations and responsibilities of the event organizers and the City. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Modify the Agreements. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Community Character and Quality of Life - Community Events Goal: "Develop overall approach for sponsoring community events...." ATTACHMENT LIST 1. November 15, 2001, Memorandum from Cathy Wheatley 2. Sponsorship Agreement - Balloon Festival i 3. Sponsorship Agreement - 4ch of July 4. Sponsorship Agreement - Broadway Rose Theater FISCAL NOTES N/A UADWCATHY\EVENTSIAGREEMENTS NOVEMBER 01 AISMOC MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recordeo" RE: Sponsorship Agreements DATE: November 15, 2001 1 have visited with representatives from the three City-sponsored events: The Balloon Festival, 4t' of duly and Broadway Rose Theater. As you may recall at the time the "boilerplate" Sponsorship Agreement was presented to the City Council, it was the Council's desire that the agreements be tailored for each of the events. Staffs goal was to satisfy the requirements for the City and the Event representative(s). Here are some comments on each of the Agreements: Balloon Festival: o This Event, when compared to other events, requests a significant amount of in- kind services from the City. (In excess of $40,000 of salaried labor is devoted by the City of Tigard. In addition, in the past year, over 400 hours of volunteer service from outside police agencies was contirbuted.) o This Event has a vari9ty of activities and entertainment (e.g., hot air balloons, food vendors, carnival, music, wine garden.) The Event also makes use of City facilities, staff and volunteers over several days. The Agreement for this event defines the responsibilities for the Organizer and the City. o The Event must show proof of insurance before payment of funds or use of City property. (Page 1, Section 3, and Page 7, Section 14 G.) o An information and communication plan is needed to assure sufficient means for the public to obtain information and has been required. (Page 3, Section 8). o Because alcohol is served (wine garden), requirements have been set. (Page 4, Section 9 B and C). o Insurance Requirements have been tailored to the activities offered in this event. (Beginning on Page 6, Section 13 A). 4'" of July e The 4t' of July, in the past, has used City facilities to launch the fireworks. The Agreement clarifies use of the facilities and expectations/responsibilities of the Organizer and the City. No alcohol is served at the event and it is so noted in the Agreement. ® As part of the City's contribution, the City names the 4"' of July as an additional insured on its insurance policy. Broadway Dose e No City facilities are required for this event, so language about City facilities contained in the boilerplate Agreement was deleted. ♦ No alcohol is served at the event and it is so noted in the Agreement. Some of the "common themes" in all of the Agreements include: How and when City funds will be disbursed. o The requirement that the City be identified as a sponsor of the event in publications and advertisement when other sponsors are listed. c- The relation ship between the Organizer and the City is contractual and the Organizer is not an agent of the City. o The Organizer is responsible for the organization of the Event. s How records and reporting shall be maintained and communicated to the City. 11ADM\CATHYkEVENTSEVENTS MEMO.DOC Mei Agenda Item No. 7 For Agenda of November 20, 2001 MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor & City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder Lxl~ RE: Sponsorship Agreement Discussion - Agenda Item No. 7 November 20, 2001, Council Meeting DATE: November 13, 2001 Packet material for this discussion item will be delivered in the Council Newsletter that will be prepared and sent out on Friday, November 16, 2001. Staff has met with representatives of all three sponsored events (Balloon Festival, 4t' of July, Broadway Rose Theater). All three agreements have been tailored to meet the needs of the City and the special requirements or circumstances for each of the events. Representatives from all three organizations plan to attend the November 20, 2001, City Council meeting to answer any questions the Council might have. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT This Sponsorship Agreement (Agreement is between the City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation ("City") and the Tigard 41` of July, Inc. ("Organizer"). RECITALS a. Organizer is the planner of the 4a' of July Fireworks (the "Event") and has asked the City to be a sponsor of the Event. Although open to the public, the Event put on by Organizer is a private event and not an official City event. b. City has passed a resolution that provides procedures and policies for City sponsorship of events. C. City has passed a resolution that authorized City sponsorship of the Event, subject to execution of this Sponsorship Agreement. d. City and Organizer have agreed to the scope of the City sponsorship and the relationship between the City and Organizer as set forth below. AGREEMENT 1. This Agreement shall remain in effect until terminated as provided in Section 21 below. 2. The City shall advance monies towards some of the costs to put on the Event. If the Event does not take place in a location allowing viewing of the fireworks in the City of Tigard, a refund shall be paid by the Organizer to the City as specified in this Sponsorship Agreement. 3. City shall make City facilities available for use by Organizer as specified on a map approved by the Public Works Director or his designee. During the period that Organizer has the right to use these areas, Organizer may exclude others from these areas in order to ensure public safety. { ? For all other areas Organizer shall have no right to exclude persons or prevent them from a engaging in commercial activity. i 4. City shall provide the following in-kind services to the Organizer: a. City shall include the Event as a covered event under its general liability policy as provided in Section 10 and 11 below. 5. If the Event does not take place because of weather or other reason outside the control of the Organizer, Organizer shall repay the City the amount paid pursuant to Section 2, SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 0 of July Fireworks Page 1 provided, however, that Organizer shall not be required to refund any amount actually expended for the Event before cancellation. In determining whether proceeds from the City have been expended, Organizer shall balance expenditures for the Event against revenue related to the Event, and all excess income up to the total amount contributed to the Organizer by the City shall be used to repay the City on a pro-rata basis when compared to other major contributors to the Event. If the Event is canceled for any reason, the City shall not provide any in-kind services after the date of cancellation. If the Event is canceled for any reason, the City's facilities shall be available to the Organizer on the same basis that they are available to any other person or entity. If the main location of the Event moves outside the City limits of the City of Tigard for a given year, the City may terminate or reduce payments and/or the provision of services as it determines appropriate. The termination or reduction shall be decided by the City Council in its sole discretion. 6. Organizer shall identify City as a sponsor of the Event and Organizer shall provide the following rights to City: A. The right to have a booth at the Event, a courtesy tent or host a similar area at the Event at a location designated by Organizer. B. The right to have banners at Locations mutually agreed upon by the Organizer and the City. The City would provide banners. C. The right to have additional signs at locations mutually agreed upon by the Organizer. The City would provide signs. D. The right to signage on all courtesy vehicles, if any, used by Organizer in connection with the Event. E. The right to credit (listing the City as a sponsor) in all print advertising placed by Organizer. F. The right to be named in all press releases issued by Organizer. G. The right to be listed in any list of sponsors or to be included in any acknowledgment of sponsors. H. The right to be acknowledged in any official program produced by the Organizer. 1. The right to have the city logo displayed on an equal basis with other sponsors. J. The right to use photographs and film of this Event generated by the City, its employees, agents or volunteers. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 4`t' of July Fireworks Page 2 K. The right to make public address announcements during the Event. Nothing in the identification of the City as a sponsor shall state or imply that the Organizer is an agent of the City or that the City is responsible in any way for the Event. 7. Food and Beverage Service. A. Organizer represents and warrants that it will cause all food and beverage vendors to represent and warrant, as a condition of their participation in the Event, that they will comply with all food service, sanitation and other regulations applicable to their services at the Event. B. No alcohol is served at the Event. C. Organizer represents and warrants that all music played at the Event, whether live, recorded or publicly broadcast, will be duly licensed for public performance by ASCAP, 13M1, SESAC or such other performing rights societies or copyright owners as may be required by law, or else in the public domain. Organizer will indemnify and hold City harmless from and against any liability arising out of the performance of music at the Event. 8. The City and Organizer enter into this Agreement at arms-length and their only relationship is contractual. Neither party is an employee, agent, partner, or co-venturer in relationship to the other. Organizer is and remains an independent entity and has no authority whatsoever to act for the City. Organizer is not an officer, employee or agent of City as those terms are used in ORS 30.265. Organizer's officers, employees and agents are not the officers, employees, or agents of City as those terms are used in ORS 30.265. Organizer, its employees and officers shall not hold themselves out either explicitly or implicitly as officers, employees or agents of City for any purpose whatsoever, nor are ® they authorized to do so. Organizer shall include a provision that it is not an agent of the City in all contracts it enters into with third parties. 9. Organizer is solely responsible for the organization of the Event and accepts responsibility and liability for all personal injury, property damage, and other damages arising from or related to the Event. The City has no responsibility for the organization or operation of the Event to the extent the liability is not covered in the City's insurance as provided in Section 11. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Organizer agrees to fully indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its elected and appointed officials, and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses incidental to the investigation and defense thereof, based upon or arising out of or incidental to damages or injuries to persons or property, in any way related to the Event, or any activity associated with the Event, except for claims, damages, losses and expenses that are solely attributable to the actions of the City or that are covered by the City's insurance as provided in Section 11. Organizer's agreement to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City extends to all claims, damages, losses and expenses caused by or alleged SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 4`h of July Fireworks Page 3 to be caused by the fault or negligence in whole or in part of Organizer's agents, contractors, sub-contractors, employees or any third parties that are in any way related to the Event. Nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted or applied to reduce or limit in any way the insurance coverage provided by the City under Section 11. 10. Organizer shall include in all Event-related contracts with third parties, if any, a provision requiring the third party to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the City as to any claim arising from the actions or negligence of the third party and shall include in those contracts a provision requiring the third parties to maintain adequate liability insurance naming the City as an additional insured. Organizer shall require contracts of all third parties that provide food or beverage service, rides or other entertainment at the site and shall require that the insurance cover the type of service or goods provided. Organizer shall provide City with the name, address and phone number of all third parties with which it contracts, a general description of the work the contractor will perform and a copy of each contract. 11. Organizer has chosen to use City property and facilities for the Event based on Organizer's inspection of the property and facilities and determination that the property and facilities are appropriate for the Event. Organizer accepts that the City is not responsible for any defects, imperfections, or lack of suitability of the City property and facilities. The City agrees to include the Event as an insured activity under its existing liability insurance, workers compensation and other relevant policies. Persons involved in putting on the Event shall be considered volunteers for purposes of insurance coverage. 12. Organizer shall adhere to all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances and obtain all required permits. Required permits may include but are not limited to: Park Reservation Permit Parade Permit Food Handler Permits Fees for permits for the Event may be waived. 13. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be made under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered or sent by prepaid certified or registered mail or fax: If to Organizer, to: (Address) (Fax) If to City, to: (Address) (Fax) SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 40 of July Fireworks Page 4 or such other address as either party may designate in writing to the other party for this purpose. 14. Other Warranties. Organizer represents and warrants that: A. Organizer has the full right and legal authority to enter into and fully perform this Agreement in accordance with its terms without violating the rights of any other person; B. Organizer's trademarks, if any, do not infringe the trademarks or trade names or other rights of any other person; C. Organizer has all government licenses, permits or other authorizations necessary to conduct the Event as contemplated under this Agreement; and D. Organizer will comply with all applicable laws, regulations and ordinances pertaining to the promotion and conduct of the Event. E. Organizer will ensure that all persons and entities it contracts with to provide services or goods at the Event shall have the knowledge, experience and capacity to provide the goods and services. 15. Records and Reporting A. Organizer shall maintain a complete set of financial records relating to the Event in a form acceptable the City's Finance Director. The records must be maintained for at least three years from the date they are generated. Organizer shall permit the authorized representatives of the City to inspect and audit all work, materials, payrolls, books, accounts, and other data and records of Organizer relating to the Event while this Agreement is in effect and for three years after termination of this Agreement. The obligations imposed by this section shall survive termination of this Agreement. B. Organizer shall request funding on an annual basis for future years within the City's established budget cycle. The request for funding shall include: i. Financial statements from the previous year's Event. ii. The amount of funds requested and the purpose for which the funds will be used. iii. A list of all other services, facilities, or other benefits, that Organizer is requesting from City. iv. A list of the names, addresses and telephone numbers of all other sponsors of the Event. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 4' of July Fireworks Page 5 C. Failure to comply with subsections A or B of this section shall constitute cause for termination of this Agreement by the City. 16. Governing Law and Consent to Jurisdiction. This Agreement is subject to and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon, except for choice of law provisions. City and Organizer both consent to jurisdiction in the state and federal courts located in Oregon. Organizer shall comply with the clauses required in every public contract entered into in the State of Oregon-as set forth in ORS 279.312, 279.314, 279.316 and 279.320, which are hereby incorporated by reference. 17. Non-Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement without the prior written approval of the other party, except that City may assign this Agreement to any successor entity. 18. Complete Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all other agreements, if any, express or implied, whether written or oral. Organizer has made and makes no representations of any kind except those specifically set forth herein. 19. Binding Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their successors and assigns. 20. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, either party may, within 30 days of the court decision, request that the parties meet to negotiate an amendment to compensate for the loss of the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable. If the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable is one that this Agreement provides is not severable, the parties shall meet as soon as possible to attempt to renegotiate this Agreement. If after good faith efforts to renegotiate the Agreement the parties cannot agree on an amendment, either party may declare the Agreement terminated. In that event, all obligations intended to survive termination, including indemnification obligations and records inspection requirements, shall remain effective but the Agreement shall be otherwise be terminated. In the event of termination under this provision, any payments made by the City to Organizer shall be refunded, except that Organizer shall not be required to refund any amount actually expended for the Event. In the event that neither party requests renegotiation within 30 days and the provision declared void, invalid or unenforceable is not one that the Agreement provides is non-severable, the Agreement shall remain in effect except for the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable. 21. This Agreement may be, terminated by mutual agreement of the parties. The City may terminate this Agreement for no reason by providing notice of termination one year prior to termination. The Organizer may terminate this Agreement up to three months prior to the Event for no reason and all funds advanced by the City to the Organizer shall be returned to the City. Either party may terminate this Agreement for default by providing 30 days' notice. If the other party may cure the default and does so within 30 days, the Agreement shall not terminate. City may terminate this Agreement without notice by SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 4`h of July Fireworks Page 6 Emma= vote of the City Council if the City Council determines that it is in the public interest to do so. Any breach of this Agreement shall be considered a default. The indemnification provisions shall survive termination. 22. Except for those responsibilities expressly reserved to the City Council, all rights and duties of the City may be exercised by the City Manager or designee. ORGANIZER SPONSOR [Name] City of Tigard [Signature] [Signature] [Date] [Date] I:WDM%CATHY%EVENTS%SPONSORWO - 4TH OF JULY - SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT -11-01.DOC i I I I II 1 f SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - 4 h of July Fireworks Page 77 SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT This Sponsorship Agreement ("Agreement") is between the City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation ("City") and the Northwest News Channel 8 Tigard Festival of Balloons, a non-profit organization ("Organizer"). RECITALS a. Organizer is the organizer of the Balloon Festival (the "Event") and has asked the City to be a sponsor of the Event. Although open to the public, the Event put on by Organizer is a private event and not an official City event. b. City has passed a resolution that provides procedures and policies for City sponsorship of events. C. City has passed a resolution that authorized City sponsorship of the Event, subject to execution of this Sponsorship Agreement. d. City and Organizer have agreed to the scope of the City sponsorship and the relationship between the City and Organizer as set forth below. AGREEMENT 1. This Agreement shall be effective when Organizer provides certificates of insurance as required by Section 13 G. 2. This Agreement shall remain in effect until terminated as provided in Section 24 below. 3. City shall reimburse (pay) Organizer up to for fiscal year , for costs incurred to put on the Event. Payment shall be made only after Organizer provides proof that the costs have been incurred and paid by the Organizer and were costs of the Event. (Payment shall be made no more than 60 days prior to the Event to pay costs of the Event.) The amount of funds, if any, that the City will provide for future fiscal years shall be determined by the Tigard City Council in its sole discretion. 4. City shall make City facilities available for use by Organizer as specified on a map approved by the Public Works Director or his designee. The dates and times of use of the City facilities shall be specified in a permit that must be applied for at least (Public Works to supply # of days) days before the Event. All fees for the permit may be waived. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 1 During the period that Organizer has the right to use these areas, Organizer may determine who may engage in commercial activities within these areas. For all other areas Organizer shall have no right to exclude persons or prevent them from engaging in commercial activity. To provide security for equipment, goods and other property of Organizer during the Event, camping within the exclusive area is permitted to Organizer and those permitted to camp by Organizer. This section constitutes the camping permit authorized by TMC §7.80.020. 5. City shall provide the following in-kind services to the Organizer: City shall police Cook Park during the Event. Organizer shall have no right to control or direct City police operations and City employees. Nothing in this section relieves Organizer from responsibility for damage to City property or other property resulting from the Event. City shall provide litter clean up for the Event within Cook Park. Organizer shall have no right to control or direct City employees. Nothing in this section relieves Organizer from responsibility for damage to City property or other property resulting from the Event. 6. If the Event does not take place because of weather or other reason outside the control of the Organizer, the City may reimburse Organizer for expenses incurred by Organizer prior to the cancellation up to the amount stated in Section 2. If the Event is canceled by Organizer for reasons within Organizer's control, the City shall not pay any funds to Organizer and Organizer shall return to the City all funds paid by the City to Organizer in connection with the canceled Event within ten (10) business days of the cancellation. If the Event is canceled for any reason, the City shall not provide any in-kind services after the date of cancellation. If the Event is canceled for any reason, the City's facilities shall be available to the Organizer on the same basis that they are available to any other person or entity. If the main location of the Event moves outside the City limits of the City of Tigard for a given year, the City may terminate or reduce payments and/or the provision of services as it determines appropriate. The termination or reduction shall be decided by the City Council in its sole discretion. 7. Organizer shall identify City as a sponsor of the Event and Organizer shall provide the following rights to City: A. The right to have a booth paid for by the Organizer at the Event at a location acceptable and mutually agreed upon by the City and Organizer. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 2 B. The right to have banners of a size and design chosen by the City and placed at locations mutually agreed upon. City's banners are to be located at site with other major sponsors. The City would provide banners. C. The right to signage on any courtesy vehicles used by Organizer in connection with the Event. It is understood that no courtesy vehicles have been used in recent years. D. The City's logo is to be used in all paid advertising purchased by the organizer when other sponsor logos are used. The size of the City's logo shall be comparable to those corporate sponsors making similar financial contributions. E. The right to be named in all press releases issued by Organizer. F. The right to be listed in any list of sponsors or to be included in any acknowledgment of sponsors. G. The right to advertise in the official program produced by Organizer. H. The right to use photographs and film of this Event generated by the City, its employees, agents or volunteers. I. The right to make public address announcements during the Event. (Emergency announcements may be made at any time and generic public service announcements as mutually agreed upon.) Nothing in the identification of the City as a sponsor shall state or imply that the Organizer is an agent of the City or that the City is responsible in any way for the Event. 8. Organizer shall provide sufficient means by which the public may obtain information about the Event, including but not limited to adequate phone lines to handle inquiries about the Event. The information phone lines shall be answered by a person or by a message that includes Event location, schedule and pricing information. Organizer shall provide City a written public information and communication plan at least 90 days before the Event. The City may require revisions to the plan. If Organizer fails to provide a plan or to comply with the plan, the City may terminate this Agreement, suspend or reduce payments, or deny Organizer the use of City facilities or services. City's only obligation to provide information about the Event shall be to provide the Event's information telephone number and/or web site address. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 3 led 9. Food, Beverages and Music. A. Organizer represents and warrants that it will cause all food and beverage vendors to represent and warrant, as a condition of their participation in the Event, that they will comply with all food service, sanitation and other regulations applicable to their services at the Event. B. If alcohol is served at the Event, Organizer will use its best efforts, and will cause its vendors to use their best efforts, to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including City regulations, regarding the service of alcohol to intoxicated or underage persons, and to encourage the safe use of alcohol. C. If alcohol is served at the Event, Contractor shall provide proof of Liquor Liability coverage required by Sections 12 and 14 of this Agreement. D. Organizer represents and warrants that all music played at the Event, whether live, recorded or publicly broadcast, will be duly licensed for public performance by ASCAP, BMI, SESAC or such other performing rights societies or copyright owners as may be required by law, or else in the public domain. Organizer will indemnify and hold City harmless from and against any liability arising out of the performance of music at the Event. 10. The City and Organizer enter into this Agreement at arms-length and their only relationship is contractual. Neither party is an employee, agent, partner, or co-venturer in relationship to the other. Organizer is and remains an independent entity and has no authority whatsoever to act for the City. Organizer is not an officer, employee or agent of City as those terms are used in ORS 30.265. Organizer's officers, employees and agents are not the officers, employees, or agents of City those terms are used in ORS 30.265. Organizer, its employees and officers shall not hold themselves out either explicitly or implicitly as officers, employees or agents of City for any purpose whatsoever, nor are they authorized to do so. Organizer shall include a provision that it is not an agent of the City in all contracts it enters into with third parties. Organizer is solely responsible for the organization of the Event and accepts responsibility and liability for all personal injury, property damage, and other damages arising from or related to the Event. The City has no responsibility for the organization or operation of the Event. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Organizer agrees to fully indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and volunteers from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses incidental to the investigation and defense thereof, based upon or arising out of or incidental to damages or injuries to persons or property, in any way related to the Event, or any activity associated with the Event, except for claims, damages, losses and expenses that are solely attributable to the actions of the City. Organizer's agreement to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City extends to all claims damages, losses and expenses caused by or alleged to be caused by the fault or negligence in whole or in part SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 4 of Organizer's agents; contractors; sub-contractors, employees or any third-parties that are in any way related to the Event. This provision is essential to the City's agreement to sponsor the Event and may not be severed from this Agreement. This indemnity extends to all claims, damages, losses and expenses relating to operation of hot-air balloons, the operation of any carnival rides or games, and the sale or consumption of food or drink in connection with the Event. 11. Organizer shall include in all Event-related contracts with third parties a provision requiring the third party to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the City as to any claim arising from the actions or negligence of the third party and shall include in those contracts a provision requiring the third parties to maintain adequate liability insurance. Organizer shall require contracts of all balloon owners and operators, and third parties that provide food or beverage service, rides or other entertainment at the site and shall require that the insurance covers the type of service or goods provided. Organizer shall require any third party serving alcohol at the Event to obtain Liquor Liability coverage. Limits for Liquor Liability coverage must match the limits required of Organizer for Commercial General Liability coverage. The Liquor Liability endorsement must be attached to the certificate of insurance provided to the City. Organizer shall provide City with the name, address and phone number of all third parties with which it contracts, a general description of the work the contractor will perform and a copy of each contract. Organizer shall also provide City with the name, address and phone number of all other sponsors of the Event. 12. Organizer has chosen to use City property and facilities for the Event based on Organizer's inspection of the property and facilities and determination that the property and facilities are appropriate for the Event. Organizer accepts that the City is not responsible for any defects, imperfections, or lack of suitability of the City property and facilities. 13. During the term of this Sponsorship Agreement, Organizer shall purchase and maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts specified in this section. Organizer shall furnish acceptable certificates of insurance to City at least 10 days before commencement of the event. Organizer shall indemnify City for any liability or damages that City may incur due to Organizer's failure to purchase or maintain any required insurance. Organizer shall indemnify City for any liability or damages that City may incur due to Organizer's failure to purchase or maintain any required insurance. Organizer shall be responsible for the payment of all premiums and deductibles. Organizer shall maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts described below. A. General Liability Insurance Organizer shall obtain, at Organizer's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this Agreement, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or equivalent). SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 5 This coverage shall include Contractual Liability insurance for the indemnity provided under this Agreement. The following limits of insurance will be carried: overa a Limit General Aggregate $1,000,000 Products - Completed Operations Aggregate 2,000,000 Personal and Advertising Injury 1,000,000 Each Occurrence 1,000,000 Fire Damage (Any one Fire) 50,000 Medical Expense (Any one Person) 5,000 Special Event Liability 1,000,000 each occurrence/ 2,000,000 aggregate B. Aviation Event Coverage Organizer shall obtain, at organizer's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this contract, Aviation Event Liability coverage including coverage for premises. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. C. Liquor Liability Coverage If alcohol is to be served at the Event, Liquor Liability coverage will be endorsed to the Commercial General Liability coverage. Limits for Liquor Liability coverage will match the limits provided for the Commercial General Liability coverage. The endorsement must be attached to the certificate of insurance provided to the City. D. Commercial Automobile Insurance Organizer shall also obtain, at Organizer's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this Agreement, "Symbol V Commercial Automobile Liability coverage including coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. This requirement applies if the Organizer provides transportation to or from the Event for participants. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 6 E. Workers Compensation Insurance Organizer shall provide coverage for all employees coming under the scope of State Workers Compensation laws. This shall include Employers Liability Insurance with coverage of not less than $500,000 per incident. F. Additional Insured Requirement The City of Tigard, its officers, directors, employees, and volunteers shall be added as additional insured with respect to the Event. All Commercial General Liability insurance policies and aviation Event coverage policies will be endorsed to show this additional coverage. G. Insurance Carrier Acceptability An insurance company acceptable to the City of Tigard must underwrite coverages provided by the Organizer. H. Evidence of Insurance As evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Agreement, the Organizer shall provide a certificate of insurance to the City. No use of City facilities, payment or other benefit will be provided by the City to the Organizer until the required certificates have been received and approved by the City. The certificate will specify and document all provisions required by this Agreement. A renewal certificate will be sent to the City 10 days prior to coverage expiration. I. Cancellation Provisions Coverage may not be canceled or materially changed without 30 days' written notice to the City. The notice of cancellation provision shall be physically endorsed on the Commercial General Liability policy. Failure of City to demand such certificate or other evidence of full compliance with these insurance requirements or failure of City to identify a deficiency from evidence that is provided shall not be construed as a waiver of Organizer's obligation to maintain such insurance. 15. Organizer shall adhere to all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances and obtain all required permits. Required permits may include but are not limited to: Park Reservation Permit Parade Permit Liquor Licenses SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 7 _ Food Handler Permits Public Assembly Permits Fees for permits for the Event may be waived. 16. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be made under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered or sent by prepaid certified or registered mail or fax: If to Organizer, to: (Address) (Fax) If to City, to: (Address) (Fax) or such other address as either party may designate in writing to the other party for this purpose. 17. Other Warranties. Organizer represents and warrants that: A. Organizer has the full right and legal authority to enter into and fully perform this Agreement in accordance with its terms without violating the rights of any other person; B. Organizer's trademarks do not infringe the trademarks or trade names or other rights of any other person; C. Organizer has all government licenses, permits or other authorizations necessary to conduct the Event as contemplated under this Agreement; and D. Organizer will comply with all applicable laws, regulations and ordinances pertaining to the promotion and conduct of the Event. E. Organizer will ensure that all persons and entities it contracts with to provide services or goods at the Event shall have the knowledge, experience and capacity to provide the goods and services. 18. Records and Reporting A. Organizer shall maintain a complete set of records relating to the Event, in accordance with generally accepted accounting procedures. The records must be maintained for at least three years from the date they are generated. Organizer shall permit the authorized representatives of the City to inspect and audit all work, materials, payrolls, books, accounts, and other data and records of Organizer relating to the Event while this Agreement is in effect and for three years after termination of this Agreement. The obligations imposed by this SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 8 section shall survive termination of this Agreement. B. Organizer shall request funding on an annual basis for future years within the City's established budget cycle. The request for funding shall include: i. Financial statements from the previous year's Event. ii. The budget for the Event to the year for which funding is requested. iii. An Event schedule. iv. A list of events associated with the Event. V. The amount of funds requested and the purpose for which the funds will be used. vi. A list of all other services, facilities, or other benefits, that Organizer is requesting from City. C. Failure to comply with subsections A or B of this section shall constitute cause for termination of this Agreement by the City. 19. Governing Law and Consent to Jurisdiction. This Agreement is subject to and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon, except for choice of law provisions. City and Organizer both consent to jurisdiction in the state and federal courts located in Oregon. Organizer shall comply with the clauses required in every public contract entered into in the State of Oregon as set forth in ORS 279.312, 279.314, 279.315 and 279.320, which are hereby incorporated by reference. 20. Non-Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement without the prior written approval of the other party, except that City may assign this Agreement to any successor entity. 21. Complete Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all other agreements, if any, express or implied, whether written or oral. Organizer has made and makes no representations of any kind except those specifically set forth herein. 22. Binding Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their successors and assigns. 23. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, either party may, within. 30 days of the court decision, request that the parties meet to negotiate an amendment to compensate for the loss of the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable. If the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable is one that this Agreement provides is not severable, the parties shall meet as soon as possible to attempt to renegotiate this Agreement. If after good faith efforts to renegotiate the Agreement the parties camiot agree on an amendment, either party may declare the Agreement terminated. In that event, all obligations intended to survive termination, including indemnification obligations and records inspection requirements, shall remain effective but the Agreement shall be otherwise be terminated. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 9 In the event of termination under this provision, any payments made by the City to Organizer shall be refunded, except that Organizer shall not be required to refund any amount actually expended for the Event. In the event that neither party requests renegotiation within 30 days and the provision declared void, invalid or unenforceable is not one that the Agreement provides is non-severable, the Agreement shall remain in effect except for the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable. 24. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties. Either party may terminate this Agreement for no reason by providing notice of termination one year prior to termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement for default by providing 30 days' notice. If the other party may cure the default and does so within 30 days, the Agreement shall not terminate. City may terminate this Agreement without notice by vote of the City Council if the City Council determines that it is in the public interest to do so. Any breach of this Agreement shall be considered a default. The indemnification provisions shall survive termination. 25. Except for those responsibilities expressly reserved to the City Council, all rights and duties of the City may be exercised by the City Manager or designee. ORGANIZER SPONSOR [Name] City of Tigard [Signature] [Signature] [Date] [Date] I:WDM-xCATHN\EVENTSXSP0NSOR\00 BALLOON FEST -SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT 11-01.DOC SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Balloon Festival Page 10 SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT This Sponsorship Agreement ("Agreement") is between the City of Tigard, an Oregon municipal corporation ("City") and the Broadway Rose Theater ("Organizer"). RECITALS a. Organizer is the organizer of the Broadway Rose Theater season (the "Event and has asked the City to be a sponsor of the Event. Although open to the public, the Event put on by Organizer is a private event and not an official City event. b. City has passed a resolution which provides procedures and policies for City sponsorship of events. C. City has passed a resolution which authorized City sponsorship of the Event, subject to execution of this Sponsorship Agreement. d. City and Organizer have agreed to the scope of the City sponsorship and the relationship between the City and Organizer as set forth below. AGREEMENT 1. This Agreement shall be effective when Organizer provides certificates of insurance as required by Section 11 below. 2. This Agreement shall remain in effect until terminated as provided in Section _ below. 3. City shall reimburse (pay) Organizer up to for fiscal year , for costs incurred to put on the Event. Payment shall be made only after Organizer provides proof that the costs have been incurred and paid by the Organizer and were costs of the Event. (Payment shall be made no more than 60 days prior to the Event to pay costs of the Event.) The amount of fiords, if any, that the City will provide for future fiscal years shall be determined by the Tigard City Council in its sole discretion. 4. If the Event does not take place because of weather or other reason outside the control of the Organizer, Organizer shall repay the City the amount paid pursuant to Section 2, provided however, that Organizer shall not be required to refund any amount actually expended for the Event before cancellation. In determining whether proceeds from the City have been expended, Organizer shall balance expenditures for the Event against revenue related to the Event, and all excess income up to the amount stated in Section 2 shall be used to repay the City. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 1 If the Event is canceled for any reason, the City shall not provide any in-kind services after the date of cancellation. If the Event is canceled for any reason, the City's facilities shall be available to the Organizer on the same basis that they are available to any other person or entity. If the main location of the Event moves outside the City limits of the City of Tigard for a given year, the City may terminate or reduce payments and/or the provision of services as it determines appropriate. The termination or reduction shall be decided by the City Council in its sole discretion. 4. Organizer shall identify City as a sponsor of the Event and Organizer shall provide the following rights to City: A. The right to be a part of the corporate sponsorship display in the lobby where the theater is located. Such display ornaments to be provided by the Organizer and to be of a size and design mutually agreed upon by the City and the Organizer. B. The right to have additional signs at locations specified by the City. C. The right to signage on all courtesy vehicles, if any, used by Organizer in connection with the Event. D. The right to credit in placed by Organizer in connection with the Event. E. The right to be named in all press releases issued by Organizer. F. The right to be listed in any list of sponsors or to be included in any acknowledgment of sponsors. G. The right to purchase advertising in the official program produced by Organizer. H. The right to have the city logo displayed on an equal basis with other sponsors. I. The right to use photographs of this Event generated by the City, its employees, agents or volunteers. Nothing in the identification of the City as a sponsor shall state or imply that the 1 Organizer is an agent of the City or that the City is responsible in any way for the Event. 6. Organizer shall provide sufficient means by which the public may obtain information about the Event, including but not limited to adequate phone lines to handle inquiries about the Event. The information phone lines shall be answered by a person or by a message that includes Event location, schedule and pricing information. Organizer shall provide City a written public information and communication plan at least 90 days before SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 2 the Event. The City may require revisions to the plan. If Organizer fails to provide a plan or to comply with the plan, the City may terminate this Agreement, suspend or reduce payments, or deny Orga-dzer the use of City facilities or services. City's only obligation to provide information about the Event shall be to provide the Event's information telephone number and/or web site address. 7. Food and Beverage Service. A. Organizer represents and warrants that it will cause all food and beverage vendors to represent and warrant, as a condition of their participation in the Event, that they will comply with all food service, sanitation and other regulations applicable to their services at the Event. B. No alcohol is served at the Event. C. Organizer represents and warrants that all music played at the Event, whether live, recorded or publicly broadcast, will be duly licensed for public performance by ASCAP, BMI, SESAC or such other performing rights societies or copyright owners as may be required by law, or else in the public domain. Organizer will indemnify and hold City harmless from and against any liability arising out of the performance of music at the Event. 8. The City and Organizer enter into this Agreement at arms-length and their only relationship is contractual. Neither party is an employee, agent, partner, or co-venturer in relationship to the other. Organizer is and remains an independent entity and has no authority whatsoever to act for the City. Organizer is not an officer, employee or agent of City as those terms are used in ORS 30.265. Organizer's officers, employees and agents are not the officers, employees, or agents of City those terms are used in ORS 30.265. Organizer, its employees and officers shall not hold themselves out either explicitly or implicitly as officers, employees or agents of City for any purpose whatsoever, nor are they authorized to do so. Organizer shall include a provision that it is not an agent of the City in all contracts it enters into with third parties. 9. Organizer is solely responsible for the organization of the Event and accepts responsibility and liability for all personal injury, property damage, and other damages arising from or related to the Event. The City has no responsibility for the organization or operation of the Event. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Organizer agrees to fiilly indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City, its elected and appointed officials, employees and volunteers from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses incidental to the investigation and defense thereof, based upon or arising out of or incidental to damages or injuries to persons or property, in any way related to the Event, or any activity associated with the Event, except for claims, damages, losses and expenses that are solely attributable to the actions of the City. Organizer's Agreement to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City extends to all claims damages, losses and SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 3 01 expenses caused by or alleged to be caused by the fault or negligence in whole or in part of Organizer's agents, contractors, sub-contractors, employees or any third-parties that are in any way related to the Event. This provision is essential to the City's Agreement to sponsor the Event and may not be severed from this Agreement. 10. Organizer shall include in all Event-related contracts with third parties a provision requiring the third party to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the City as to any claim arising from the actions or negligence of the third party and shall include in those contracts a provision requiring the third parties to maintain adequate liability insurance naming the City as an additional insured. Organizer shall require contracts of all third parties that provide food or beverage service, rides or other entertainment at the site and shall require that the insurance covers the type of service or goods provided. Organizer shall provide City with the name, address and phone number of all third parties with which it contracts, a general description of the work the contractor will perform and a copy of each contract. Organizer shall also provide City with the name, address and phone number of all other sponsors of the Event. 11. During the term of this Sponsorship Agreement, Organizer shall purchase and maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts specified in this section. Organizer shall furnish acceptable certificates of insurance to City at least 60 days before commencement of the Event, or within ten (10) days after execution of this Agreement if this Agreement is executed less than 70 days before the Event. Organizer shall indemnify City for any liability or damages that City may incur due to Organizer's failure to purchase or maintain any required insurance. Organizer shall indemnify City for any liability or damages that City may incur due to Organizer's failure to purchase or maintain any required insurance. Organizer shall be responsible for the payment of all premiums and deductibles. Organizer shall maintain insurance of the types and in the amounts described below. A. General Liability Insurance Organizer shall obtain, at Organizer's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this Agreement, Comprehensive General Liability Insurance covering Bodily Injury and Property Damage on an "occurrence" form (1996 ISO or equivalent). This coverage shall include Contractual Liability insurance for the indemnity provided under this Agreement. The following limits of insurance will be carried: Coverage Limit General Aggregate $1,000,000 Products - Completed Operations Aggregate 2,000,000 SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 4 Personal and Advertising Injury 1,000,000 Each Occurrence 1,000,000 Fire Damage (Any one Fire) 50,000 Medical Expense (Any one Person) 5,000 Employers Liability 500,000 B. Commercial Automobile Insurance Organizer shall also obtain, at Organizer's expense, and keep in effect during the term of this Agreement, "Symbol 1" Commercial Automobile Liability coverage including coverage for all owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The Combined Single Limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. This requirement applies if the Organizer provides transportation to or from the Event for participants. C. Workers Compensation Insurance Organizer shall provide coverage for all employees coming under the scope of State Workers Compensation laws. This shall include Employers Liability Insurance with coverage of not less than $500,000 per accident. D. Additional Insured Requirement The City of Tigard, its officers, directors, employees, and volunteers shall be added as additional insured with respect to the Event. All Commercial General Liability insurance policies will be endorsed to show this additional coverage. E. Insurance Carrier Acceptability An insurance company acceptable to the City of Tigard must underwrite coverages provided by the Organizer. F. Evidence of Insurance As evidence of the insurance coverage required by this Agreement, the Organizer shall provide a certificate of insurance to the City. No use of City facilities, SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 5 payment or other benefit will be provided by the City to the Organizer until the required certificates have been received and approved by the City. The certificate will specify and document all provisions required by this Agreement. A renewal certificate will be sent to the City 10 days prior to coverage expiration. H. Cancellation Provisions Coverage may not be canceled or materially changed without 30 days written notice to the City. The notice of cancellation provision shall be physically endorsed on the Commercial General Liability policy. Failure of City to demand such certificate or other evidence of full compliance with these insurance requirements or failure of City to identify a deficiency from evidence that is provided shall not be construed as a waiver of Organizer's obligation to maintain such insurance. The insurance required under this paragraph shall require the insurer to give City not less than thirty (30) days' notice prior to termination or cancellation of coverage. Organizer shall require all entities it contracts with to provide service at the Event to provide insurance with the same limits required of Organizer. 12. Organizer shall adhere to all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances and obtain all required permits. Required permits may include but are not limited to: Food Handler Permits Fees for permits for the Event may be waived. 13. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be made under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered or sent by prepaid certified or registered mail or fax: If to Organizer, to: (Address) (Fax) i ' If to City, to: (Address) (Fax) or such other address as either party may designate in writing to the other party for this purpose. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 6 I It 14. Other Warranties. Organizer represents and warrants that: A. Organizer has the full right and legal authority to enter into and fully perform this Agreement in accordance with its terms without violating the rights of any other person; B. Organizer's trademarks do not infringe the trademarks or trade names or other rights of any other person; C. Organizer has all government licenses, permits or other authorizations necessary to conduct the Event as contemplated under this Agreement; and D. Organizer will comply with all applicable laws, regulations and ordinances pertaining to the promotion and conduct of the Event. E. Organizer will ensure that all persons and entities it contracts with to provide services or goods at the Event shall have the knowledge, experience and capacity to provide the goods and services. 15. Records and Reporting A. Organizer shall maintain a complete set of records relating to the Event, in accordance with generally accepted accounting procedures. The records must be maintained for at least three years from the date they are generated. Organizer shall permit the authorized representatives of the City to inspect and audit all work, materials, payrolls, books, accounts, and other data and records of Organizer relating to the Event while this Agreement is in effect and for three years after termination of this Agreement. The obligations imposed by this section shall survive termination of this Agreement. B. Organizer shall request funding on an annual basis for future years within the City's established budget cycle. The request for funding shall include: i. Financial statements from the previous year's Event. 1 ii. The budget for the Event to the year for which funding is requested. iii. An Event schedule. i iv. A list of events associated with the Event. + v. The amount of funds requested and the purpose for which the funds will be used. vi. A list of all other services, facilities, or other benefits, that Organizer is f requesting from City. a C. Failure to comply with subsections A or B of this section shall constitute cause for termination of this Agreement by the City. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 7 IIIIIIKIINJ~10~ IffiIII1% III III 16. Governing Law and Consent to Jurisdiction. This Agreement is subject to and shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon, except for choice of law provisions. City and Organizer both consent to jurisdiction in the state and federal courts located in Oregon. Organizer shall comply with the clauses required in every public contract entered into in the State of Oregon as set forth in ORS 279.312, 279.314, 279.316 and 279.320, which are hereby incorporated by reference. 17. Non-Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement without the prior written approval of the other party, except that City may assign this Agreement to any successor entity. 18. Complete Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between the parties and supersedes all other agreements, if any, express or implied, whether written or oral. Organizer has made and makes no representations of any kind except those specifically set forth herein. 19. Binding Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their successors and assigns. 20. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties. Either party may terminate this Agreement for no reason by providing notice of termination one year prior to termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement for default by providing 30 days' notice. If the other party may cure the default and does so within 30 days, the Agreement shall not terminate. City may terminate this Agreement without notice by vote of the City Council if the City Council determines that it is in the public interest to do so. Any breach of this Agreement shall be considered a default. The indemnification provisions shall survive termination. 21. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, either party may, within 30 days of the court decision, request that the parties meet to negotiate an amendment to compensate for the loss of the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable. If the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable is one that this Agreement provides is not severable, the parties shall meet as soon as possible to attempt to renegotiate this Agreement. If after good faith efforts to renegotiate the Agreement the parties cannot agree on an amendment, either party may declare the Agreement terminated. In that event, all obligations intended to survive termination, including indemnification obligations and records inspection requirements, shall remain effective but the Agreement shall be otherwise be terminated. In the event of termination under this provision, any payments made by the City to Organizer shall be refunded, except that Organizer shall not be required to refund any amount actually expended for the Event. In the event that neither party requests renegotiation within 30 days and the provision declared void, invalid or unenforceable is not one that the Agreement provides is non-severable, the Agreement shall remain in effect except for the provision declared invalid, void or unenforceable. SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 8 22. Except for those responsibilities expressly reserved to the City Council, all rights and duties of the City may be exercised by the City Manager or designee. ORGANIZER SPONSOR [Name] City of Tigard [Signature] [Signature] [Date] [Date] I:\ADM\CATHY\EVENTSI.SPONSORWO - BROADWAY ROSE - SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT -11-01.DOC SPONSORSHIP AGREEMENT - Broadway Rose Theater Page 9