Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Packet - 05/21/2013
I N • City of Tigard TIGARD Tigard Workshop Meeting — Agenda 0 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: May 21, 2013 - 6:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: Times noted are estimated. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with unpaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503 - 639 -4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503- 684 -2772 (IL)D - 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 by calling: 503 - 639 -4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503 - 684 -2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http: / /live.tgard- or.gov Workshop meetings are cablecast on Tualatin Valley Community TV as follows: Replay Schedule for Tigard City Council Workshop Meetings - Channel 28 • Every Sunday at 7 a.m. • Every Monday at 1 p.m. • Every Wednesday at 2 p.m. • Every Thursday at 12 p.m. • Every Friday at 3 p.m. — _ -- -- SEE ATTACHED AGENDA :IN e • City of Tigard Tigard Workshop Meeting — Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE AND TIME: May 21, 2013 - 6:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM • 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 identifying the applicable statute. 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(4), 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. 1. WORKSHOP MEETING A. Call to Order- City Council B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Council Communications & Liaison Reports E. Call to Council and Staff for Non - Agenda Items 2. JOINT MEETING WITH THE LIBRARY BOARD 3. STRATEGIC PLAN DISCUSSION 4. RECEIVE UPDATE ON SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR PLAN 5. RECEIVE UPDATE ON RIVER TERRACE COMMUNITY PLAN 6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 7. NON AGENDA ITEMS 8. 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 identifying the applicable statute. 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(4), 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. 9. ADJOURNMENT AIS -1158 2 Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 05/21/2013 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Joint Meeting with the Library Board Prepared For: Margaret Barnes Submitted By: Alison Grimes, Library Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE This is the regularly scheduled, annual joint meeting between City Council and the Library Board STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST None requested. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Annual meeting of the Library Board with the City Council to inform the Council of overall library operations. Including. - Highlighting the positive impacts the Library has on the community. - Reviewing key statistics of operation - Sharing various public comments from patrons regarding their experiences at the library. OTHER ALTERNATIVES COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The Library Board last met with City Council for their annual joint meeting Tuesday, April 17, 2012. FOR ma y 7i Letterman's Top 10 of Library Services (DATE OF MEETING) -f n det Her, 10. The library had 589 volunteers who worked a total of 25,902 hours, the equivalent of 12.46 FTE. 146 teens participated in the Summer Teen Volunteer Program, serving 3,665 hours. 9. The library provided 250 hours of service to 22 homebound patrons with the Friendly Visitor program. 8. The Friends of Tigard Public Library sponsored 25 programs attended by 3,317 people, featuring literature, music, dance and other cultural arts, as well as 30 book club sessions for children and teens with 900 attendees. 7. The library helped patrons discover ereaders and ebooks through 316 interactions at the Reference Desk and six classes attended by a total of 108 people. 6. The library partnered with AARP to provide free tax help to 498 people. 5. The library conducted 51 outreach visits to schools, reaching 4,682 students, teachers, parents and caregivers. 4. The library provided 375 Story Times, sharing books, songs, rhymes and early literacy tips with 11,735 children, parents and caregivers. Overall, the library presented a total of 906 programs for 26,621 people, including cultural events, story times, computer classes, teen programs and more. 3. The library communicates directly each month to 26,715 patrons through their eNewsletter, Books & Bits, 605 patrons via Facebook and 213 patrons on Twitter. 2. The library provided over 70,000 hours of internet access via public computers and 20,000 hours of WiFi access for patrons, including job searchers, students and small business owners. 1. The library circulated 1,482,027 items, of which 799,046 (53.9 %) were adult materials, 93,717 (6.3 %) were young adult materials, and 589,264 (39.8 %) were children's materials. AIS -1275 3. Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 05/21/2013 Length (in minutes): 20 Minutes Agenda Title: Strategic Planning for Tigard Prepared For: Marty Wine, City Manager Submitted By: Cathy Wheatley, Administrative Services Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Council is requested to consider its involvement in the development of a citywide strategic plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Receive a briefing about strategic planning and look forward to contributing to strategic plan development. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY A strategic plan represents an organization's proposed direction of change. The Mayor's Blue Ribbon Task Force recommended that "The city needs a strategic plan that clearly articulates the city's vision for what it hopes to accomplish and that supports a stronger identity and brand. This effort is crucial to implementing the task force recommendations in the areas of economic development, partnerships and marketing, education and communication." In addition, the City needs to articulate a clear vision, goals and objectives linked to our workplans which show the steps to achieve them. A strategic plan helps an organization make choices among the many things it can do in the future, and a strategic plan also helps to build organizational alignment and focus, providing a common direction for the community, elected officials, and the city workforce. The first step in strategic planning for Tigard is building the leadership foundation. This step entails affirming and setting a vision and mission and goals together with the Council and the city staff. This step creates a connection between City Council as the governing board, and the Executive Staff and Tigard employees as implementers. The leadership foundation allows the whole organization to align around common goals for a longer time horizon than a single year. A strategic plan also relies on the innovation of city employees and the commitment and reflection of community desires. After creating the leadership foundation (the first step), the City will move forward with these later steps. The City Manager will provide a briefing about plan development work to date and introduce the consulting firm, Campbell Delong Resources Inc. (CDRI) who will assist the city with the leadership foundation. CDRI will give an overview of the organization of the plan and discuss the process going forward. Timeline and Process: - December 2012 to present: Executive Staff have begun work to identify strategic goals and outcomes, presented to the Council at its January workshop. - May 21: introduction for Council of framework and process - After May 21: Follow up with individual meetings of Council and CDRI (John Campbell) - June: Bring Council and Strategic Plan staff team together for leadership foundation development. Confirm and agree on strategic goals and outcomes - August: Council consideration of goals and outcomes - After Council adoption: develop community, management and staff approaches for public and staff input to developing the strategic plan OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Council could choose several ways to be involved in strategic planning, besides working jointly with Executive Staff to create the leadership foundation. One is to direct staff to develop the strategic plan and then consider it. Another approach is to lead with a community involvement and visioning process such as was conducted in the 1990's (Tigard Beyond Tomorrow). A third approach is to not go forward with development of a strategic plan and proceed with annual goal- setting as has been done previously. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Strategic planning has the potential to affect almost all of the plans for major issues that Council as identified as priority for 2013: - Economic Development - Water Partnership - Southwest Corridor - River Terrace 2012 goals: Financial Sustainability. Develop a long -term financial strategy by mid -2012. Five year Council goals: - Identify funding and implement plan for city facility needs. Long term Council goals - Continue to pursue opportunities to reduce traffic congestion. - Continue implementing the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION The City Council last discussed this issue at its January, 2013 workshop and considered a first draft of a strategic plan developed by Executive Staff. Attachments Strategic Plan Draft Excerpt from January 10, 2013 Goal Setting Meeting Minutes Excerpt from January 10, 2013 Goal Setting Meeting Minutes Goal Setting and Strategic Planning Consultant Hertzberg referred to the work of the Blue Ribbon Task Force and its recommendation that the city should adopt a Strategic Plan, beginning with an aspirational vision. The Task Force recommended building public awareness about where Tigard is today and a plan for how it wants to move forward. A strategic plan is to begin with visioning what the absolute ideal would be. The next step is to identify the priorities to keep in focus over the next six months and for identified time increments thereafter. The City Council and staff were asked to write down on note cards three topics capturing what each believes to be the strengths of Tigard today. The next exercise was for the City Council and staff to write three topics envisioning what would make Tigard an exceptional place to live in 25 years. A summary list was created on flip chart pages; the transcription of the summary is attached (Attachment 1). Transcriptions of the topics written on notecards by staff, the mayor and council are filed in the record copy of the meeting packet. Steps to be taken to achieve the 25 -year vision were explored. City Manager Wine distributed to the City Council a list of the executive staff's vision of how the City of Tigard would function in 25 years. This list is on file with the record copy of the meeting packet. Council reviewed the list and discussed. City Manager Wine explained that the executive staff went through the exercise of creating a table of contents for what a strategic plan looks like based upon the report from the Blue Ribbon Task Force. The first page contains a list of the actions that have been taken in the past. The purpose of the list before the Council is to generate thoughts about elements of a strategic plan. The second two pages in the executive staffs list contain strategic priorities, similar to the exercise the Council just went through to envision Tigard in 25 years. Discussion followed comparing the Council's list to the list prepared by the executive staff: • Advancement on goals will depend on finding additional funding. Consideration of a local option levy will not be possible until there is an understanding /education effort to the citizenry. It was suggested that revenue be attached to services for a better understanding of the connection by taxpayers regarding the cost of the services. The Council will have a major role in this education process by being proactive in its communication with the community. • Basic services are listed in the executive staff list that Council members noted were assumed to continue. • Compete for resources in the region — pursue, leverage and position. Be proactive. • Geographic location — working with neighboring communities /cities to benefit one another. Geographically Tigard is in the center of the region; i.e. transportation hub. South county needs to do better job of working together on common issues. Plan joint meetings to hold these discussions — Sherwood, Tualatin, Lake Oswego, Beaverton and Tigard. Explore the concept of first tier development as defined and developed by the National League of Cities. • Reference was made to the City of Hillsboro and its history of following through on a strategic plan. Implementation of the plan was made possible by remaining focused, setting priorities and having a clear plan and implementation strategy. The Hillsboro community shared the vision of its leaders. The City of Hillsboro also has a tax rate of about $1.50 more than Tigard. Tigard has transportation advantages and Hillsboro has land advantages. • Now that the Comprehensive Plan is in place, it is a good time to move forward — the Plan is our vision. Councilor Snider asked if the executive staff's list and the Council's list are to be refined and combined? City Manager Wine said she would like to come back to the Council and discuss the next steps for setting the outline of the strategic plan. Consultant Hertzberg suggested that the next discussion also include establishing what the community element to the plan would be. Consultant Hertzberg noted that it will take a while before a strategic plan is in place — estimated to take about six months. For the next six months, what are the priorities that should be kept in focus? City Manager Wine distributed a list she compiled after visiting with individual Council members. This list also was developed with reference to the comments made during the recent city manager's performance evaluation. On one side of the page distributed was a list of items for focus over the next six months and on the other side of the page was a list of the city manager's goals for next year. City Manager Wine noted that the lists are more task and project oriented, but could be viewed as steps to be taken within the strategic plan. When comparing the lists, it appears that these steps are complementary with the policy focus identified by the City Council. A copy of the list distributed by City Manager Wine is on file with the record copy of the meeting packet. Six -month priorities were reviewed: • Downtown property purchases — staff has been talking to property owners. Decisions are needed with regard to how vigorously to pursue identified properties. Selection of a Plaza site should be finalized by the City Council. • Concern noted about the idea of a clock tower. This has been under discussion since 1985 and has not gone anywhere. There is also reference to the Rotary Club's offer to pay for exercise equipment that did not get acted upon. There was a lack of understanding about how projects got prioritized and how they could fall off the list and be left behind uncompleted. There was an expression of frustration about the length of time it takes to accomplish tasks or projects, which was challenged to be unnecessary if the right talent and focus was to take place. • Consultant Hertzberg asked the Council to look at the list prepared by City Manager Wine and whether this was the appropriate focus for the next six months. It was brought up that these items on the list have been recurring items for quite a long time. Councilor Buehner suggested an outline of tasks be created to show what would be done towards furthering the items on the list. Councilor Woodard summarized that strategic elements could be designated as the clock tower, the downtown Plaza, taking the recreation inventory to the next step, which are all steps that would catalyze /activate economic development. Councilor Buehner said she would like to see a specific list of tasks that would be completed in the next six months for River Terrace. Councilor Woodard commented that Councilor Buehner's concerns are similar to those that he has with regard to the capital improvement project list. Councilor Buehner noted that there used to be public hearings before the planning commission on the capital improvement projects. Councilor Buehner clarified that she would like to see a detailed action plan with a clear timeline so Council members can help keep pushing to move large projects forward more quickly. During the meeting, the council members discussed a call for a point of order about the tone of the discussion relating to frustration with activity levels on specific goals. Thoughts were expressed about how to be direct in communicating and the possibility of being perceived as being disrespectful, attacking or blaming in tone thereby causing the recipient of such feedback to become defensive. Council members discussed how to maintain open communication. City Manager Wine referred to Councilor Snider's comment at the beginning of this meeting about bringing solution- oriented approaches to the work. She noted that as she works with individual Councilors she screens the dialogue with what are the best and appropriate places for Council to make decisions, what is the Council's role or should the Council be given more information for a better understanding of what staff is doing. When a Council member expresses a concern, she will ask questions to determine what is behind the concern and then address or resolve the concern. City Manager Wine noted some key activities scheduled for the Council in the near future with regard to the River Terrace Community Plan. One activity has to do with the annexation of two areas. The other activity is the convening of the key stakeholder working group for which Councilor Woodard volunteered to be the Council representative. Ms. Wine said at the staff level, the tasks relating to updating the Master Plan and securing the consultant for a transportation plan update are underway. She said if more reporting is needed on these types of activities, staff can give more updates. In response to a comment from Councilor Buehner, City Manager Wine requested that when people inquire about the status of the River Terrace Community Plan project, they be referred to the project manager, Darren Wyss or to herself. She advised of the communication plan for people interested in this project, which includes sending out letters and maintaining a listserv. She spoke to the importance of maintaining a coordinated communication effort. Councilor Snider said he heard that Councilor Buehner would like to see more detail on a six -month activities plan for the River Terrace Community Plan. Council meeting recessed for a few minutes. Gathering Community Input Consultant Hertzberg opened the discussion on gathering community input. Councilor Woodard noted the Council hears from many of the same people much of the time and council is only hearing from a fraction of the community. He participated in the National Night Out event and said he found this to be an opportunity to talk to a different crowd of people. He said that when he talks to people in the community, he often finds there is a basic lack of understanding on community issues and noted the need for building awareness. Councilor Buehner noted her past success of walking the neighborhoods and spending time talking to residents about issues. Councilor Woodard offered that perhaps the Neighborhood Networks could offer a local government seminar. Councilor Snider served on Financing Strategies Task Force where the notion of the community list of wants have a price tag and there is a need to find out how much people are willing to pay for their requests for services. One idea suggested was to place a cafeteria plan on the ballot or a town hall where you allow "one- resident, one - vote" and whoever comes to vote will get to participate in selecting the top funding priorities for the city (over and above basic services). Councilor Buehner talked about a statistically valid survey conducted and noted the outcome on recreation issues. Councilor Woodard again referred to the Neighborhood Networks and how we could use this structure more effectively. Councilor Snider referred to the City of Newport Oregon's practice of dividing the community up into districts and holding meetings within these areas to find out the priorities of the people who live and work in each of the areas. Discussion on community engagement was held. An outline of the high points of the discussion is attached (Attachment 2). Meeting adjourned at 4:46 p.m. Discussion on community engagement was held. An outline of the high points of the discussion is attached (Attachment 2). Meeting adjourned at 4:46 p.m. /s /Catherine Wheatley Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Attest: /s /John L. Cook Mayor, City of Tigard Date: February 5. 2013 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES — JANUARY 10, 2013 City of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 972231503-639-41711 www.tigard - or.gov 1 Page 14 of 14 Attachment 1— January 10, 2013 Council Meeting Minutes Today's Strengths • Geographic location /easy access. • Committed staff and City Council: best for the city. • Parks and natural resources. • Fiscally responsible. • Education. • Volunteer involvement. • Strong feeling of community. • Stable population /workforce skilled. • Transportation network. Future Wishes — 25 years • Connection (between areas of Tigard) • Two hearts. • Between Triangle and Downtown. • Light rail /bus service. • Ten minute maximum travel /2 -3 modes. • Washington County with equal treatment for bus /light rail service — trolley /local bus services. • Parks and Recreation. • District. • Schools serve as centers. • Stadium (multi- sport) — amateur complex, arena. • Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District model. • Recreation center (YMCA). • Zip lining as destination. • Neighborhoods: • Sustainable • Live, work, play within twenty minutes walking distance. • Universal design (built for any age). • Vibrant communities. • Downtown (Examples: Redding, Ashland). • Urban, walkable, live, work, shop, play there. • Gathering place /common area. • Vibrant, evocative /want to go back there. • Convention center and amphitheater. • Revamped property tax system. • Stable, secure funding. • Own Zip Code. • Long -term water supply. • Willamette. (Tigard has water rights on the Willamette) • Owner. • Reuse (purple pipe). (Use for irrigation and to migrate into Fanno Creek) • Annexation. • All area with in Urban Planning Area. • Which directions to grow (new areas beyond). • Economy- robust! • More employment land. • Strong employment. • All who live here can work here. • Retail and high tech /complementary. �una� ivieeting Minutes Council Thoughts on Community Engagement What are our purposes in engaging the community? • The city needs public input to make good decisions • We want to widen the circle of involvement beyond those people we hear from regularly • It is important to build awareness of city issues and options for the future What tools and methodologies should we consider? • Town Halls + Citywide + Neighborhoods + Elders • Use existing community networks whenever possible • Reach out to people where they are: school open houses, football and soccer games, farmers markets, bingo, homeowner associations, Library, etc. • Engage people in one -on -one conversations; recruit active citizens to engage with others • Use a variety of tools to gauge public opinion + People- meters at meetings + Statistically -valid surveys + Advisory votes, perhaps offering cafeteria options + New England town meetings • Neighborhood Network • Neighborhood blogs • Use strategic planning process as an opportunity CITY OF TIGARD STRATEGIC PLAN DRAFT 2014 -2019 • Where is the City going— what are our priorities and focus? • What are the key questions facingTigard for the next 5-10 years? What will we do to maximize strengths and overcome obstacles? VISION (draft - 2009) A place to call home in a safe, healthy environment with exceptional service that allows residents and business to fulfill their aspirations. ,�- . ,MKz MISSION (draft 200.9 $ 4 To create an exceptional community with a sense of ce and identity and the highest level of livability: • A sustainable environment • An effective transportation system x r � `` '' J ost • A robust infrastructure that contributes to a healt y e conomy • Informed residents with diverse and leisure auttytties in safe and vital neighborhoods R VALUE adop 2006) -,6,,;":k.-7 ..; �� .., • Respect and Car . ti �,, � - ,� 0 T ; . z . 4 j r 4. Y ' ,,, e YJ We will treat peopl w e e ll; welco a suggestio d diverse points of view; greet each other and the customers with a sm1e:and.. ._nendly tone;b collaborative and cooperative relationships with otl1� tr ap em with e ect, an say y ou. • Do 'die Th 446%, . fi g ` We will focus on soluti5iisnot exxuses; if we see a problem we will own it until we take care of it or until we can find the l .74 t person �tohandle it; find opportunities to say "yes" versus "no "; � i s be proactive, than watt for something to become problem; and look for options and alternative ways�to,solve probs. • Get it Done ` .14t:,. „Axz We will go the extra more., tt0 icceed expectations; meet or beat deadlines; establish clear expectations and timelinso that there are no misunderstandings; offer to help when we see the need; and keep people informed of progress and steps to completion. 1 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES What is the bold promise of Tigard? What can it be? A strategic plan is not only words that could apply to any great city. It is about how Tigard will meet its unique opportunities and challenges based on its location and assets. If we could do one thing in the next 5 -10 years to really make a difference here, what would it be? The next generation will say Tigard was "the City that..." (Got Results) • Met drinking water needs by securing a safe and affoida water supply • Built a healthy local and regional economy by inviting andccping businesses and jobs here • Fixed its downtown to be a viable, walkable ; destination center' connected to the Triangle and Pacific Highway rr • Knew how it would grow, and managedgrowth of a diverse c &unity • Planned well to provide exceptional services,to a safe, growing City • Kept our neighborhoods livable and connected ;;= • Rebuilt and re -sited aging public facilities -44.s; (Here's how they got results) a` • Leveraged and sought adequate financial resour to be a financially viable city and meet demand for city services • Repositioned Tiga> d around°transportafioP access and infrastructure to take advantage of location �r 4 ; ,K , • Represented itself effectively. by building stromg partnerships in the region and state We're.I ere, We're Tigard (Strategic Prioritiiil): Mobile and Connected • The centez of the reg • A networ`: Hof safe, well - retained streets, parks, trails : ,,;?x• sue: • Walkable netliMprhoods7ceihnected to other transportation networks • I can work and 'p% fear `where I live • I can get anywhere from here The City is Positioned to Grow and Revitalize • People come by choice and stay by choice • We plan responsibly to serve residents — growth happened, and it was a good thing. We know how we will fund and provide services. • We consider what's in our current, and what could be our future boundaries • We serve our future community (aging population, increasing race, ethnic and language diversity, disparities of wealth) • We've secured a long -term, safe, affordable water supply A Community of Unique Neighborhoods • Continue to build and maintain a connected parks, green spaces, trail system • We are diverse neighborhoods, inclusive and accessible for all residents and levels of need (children, disabled, seniors, working poor, affordable housing) • We support diverse local choices for recreation, education, cultural activities that match with residents. desires • The City has effective communication strategies for residents to connect and communicate. These celebrate success, educate about how services are,povxded, addresses future funding challenges, say what we do, what we can do, give clarity about the city's mission and purpose • A community with a sense of identity • Retain the unique character of existing neighborhoods and develop unique new ones • Neighborhood schools also serve as community centers • Community building activities /events • Opportunities to age in place Prepared, Responsive and Safe • We protect people and property • Residents feel secure and free from'crlime and fear of crime • Safe routes to and environments in schools • Ready to face emergencies and disasters • We have infrastructure that works: water, sewer, sidewalks, streets, storm drainage • We maintain what we have: technology, faeties • Enforce building and safe housing codes • Nuisance, abatement !. y Contributing to a fie Regional Econom • Attracting outside investment-' • Enhance family /livin'g wage jobs in the City • Good and services available locally (the retail and office hub of the region ?) • Attract aril retain cluster businesses identified in EOA • Renewed focus ;on community aesthetics and beautification • Market the ci ty sF ',unr e (location, access, transportation) , ufeatures � • Enhance transportation network /options for freight, customers and employees A Responsible Government • Revenue - positive tax base to provide excellent city services at or above industry standards • Public employer of choice, engaged, responsive, competent workforce • Financially stable, credible steward of public funds • Transparent decisionmaking • Low level of bureaucracy, nimble to change with community needs • Forward thinking, willing to invest in the future 3 ►JurrL.EdViL1r 1 t1L r/Ht..l 1 FOR .7)2a i (DATE OF MEETING) .4,2-en, //em 3 City of Tigard Strategic Planning Orientation 8& Discussion May 2013 T1GARD Campbell DeLong Resources, Inc. Key Points ■ Definition of successful strategic plan ■ Definition of "Leadership Foundation" ■ A request for your help. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Definition of success (& failure) ■ Success path: ✓Translate vision into action ✓Specify direction of change & definition for arrival ✓Cause a change in focus, emphasis, or action ■ Failure path: ✓Translate vision into ...more vision ✓Make a list of stuff we were going to do anyway ✓Increase quantity of meetings & paperwork instead of quality of change. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CORI Strategic Planning for Alignment 1 Mission & Values I 1 Mis Your Purpose> + II// I Leadership Vision I 1 Vision 1 Outcomes What you measure 1 = <20 Outcomes (Goals & Objectives) 0 1 How ou get there stra Any Number y 9 Created & Implemented by AN of Strategies Success measures are clear; strategies can be modified at will; no categorization issues; mission drives the plan. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Two Elements of the Plan Leadership Foundation (Where we are going): ■ Mission, vision, values collectively are guiding principles and not usually directly measurable ■ Goals describe a desired direction of change ■ Outcomes or Objectives describe how we know when we arrive. Measures results, not effort Management Strategies (How we get there): ■ Change Strategies describe what we will do differently; "owned" by individuals. Describe specific tasks /planned effort. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Leadership Foundation: Our direction Mission, Vision, Values Goals Outcome Measures Mission (2009 draft): To create an exceptional community with a sense of place and identity and the highest level of livability, including: a sustainable environment, an effective transportation system, a robust infrastructure that contributes to a healthy economy, and informed residents with diverse cultural and leisure activities in safe and vital neighborhoods. Vision (2009 draft): A place to call home in a safe, healthy environment with exceptional service that allows residents and businesses to fulfill their aspirations. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Sample Strategic Goals & Outcomes 2013 CDRI Sample Goal: A greater sense of place, of a positive, distinct identity Measurable Outcomes: ■ Visual before & after change on 99W ■ More independent community events ■ Additional public spaces, increase their use. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Goal: A sustainable balance between service needs & available resources Measurable Outcomes: ■ Documented stop- & start -doing efficiency steps ■ Delivery of prioritized reinvestment plan ■ Alignment of service cost increases to CPI ■ Improved revenue source stability. City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Invitation to a conversation... ■ Discuss your questions, concerns, or suggestions ■ Find out your answers to two questions: VWhat is the most important direction of change you want to see in Tigard? ✓If the change occurred, what specific, measurable indicators would tells us it had happened? City of Tigard Strategic Planning 2013 CDRI Discussion AIS -1137 4 Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 05/21/2013 Length (in minutes): 45 Minutes Agenda Title: Southwest Corridor Plan Update Submitted By: Judith Gray, Community Development Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Council will hear an update on the SW Corridor Plan, including recent and upcoming decisions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST N,1 KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Phase 1 of the Southwest Corridor Plan is reaching a major milestone. In July 2013 the Steering Committee will be asked to decide on several major elements of the Southwest Corridor Plan, including which transit mode(s) and alignments should be studied further. Staff will present an update to Council regarding: • The most recent available information from the technical evaluation of alternatives; • The anticipated timeline for the decision process, including the scheduled Steering Committee recommendations; • A summary of public engagement, including upcoming activities. Staff seeks to learn from Council about any primary concerns and priorities; and what information is most important to help Council participate most effectively. OTHER ALTERNATIVES NA COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS Council has made participation in the Southwest Corridor Plan a priority goal. In 2012, Council's acceptance of the High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan was a significant step toward this goal. In addition, traffic congestion in the corridor has long been a priority for council. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION SW Corridor Plan November 15, 2011 November 20, 2012 February 19, 2013 Agenda items associated with High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan January 18, 2011 April 26, 2011 July 19, 2011 November 18, 2011 May 15, 2012 August 14, 2012 °�. ' i1 "tl Its rat �}� d i r -, - $6 1 r i m � a 1 Southwe Corr Plan Phase 1 Update Ma � ■� 110ARD City of Tigard a Phase 1 Decision Refinement Phase 2 • July 2013 • Fall 2013 • 2014 -2016 HCT Options for Clarify Options DEIS Further Study NTAL SUPPLEME PACKET FOR . ) �/ °� 4/3 (DATE OF M TING) >4genevAv Hei't iV `� City- of Tigard Phase 1 Decision Refinement Phase 2 • July 2013 • Fall 2013 • 2014 -2016 1 HCT Options for Clarify Options DEIS Further Study Local transit Additional regional coordination Transit: Southwest Service Enhancement Land use vision Highway 99W performance measures Roadway Ped /Bike Local actions Parks & Natural Tigard Triangle Refinement Plan Areas Amendments to TSP and other policies City of Tigard July decision: What HCT options need more study? • What HCT modes need further study? r o LRT? BRT? Both? • What is the extent of HCT service? o Tigard? Tualatin? Sherwood? • What kinds of lane treatment options should considered for BRT? W 11 r� 7 fl, \1 Il i . r ,';'.''', - 4 5 10 f y „` Scope refinement & DEIS (through 2016) (• Alignment options • Connection to PCC \ • SW Hall or 72nd Avenue • Naito or Barbur • Station locations • Right of way options • Transit system connections City of Tigard - a - i How we got here I ': _ T .:. _ ... _ I 7 , ••• j• Ar 4 Za •« o_ City of Tigard Regional High Capacity Transit System Plan (2010) Going Places ; Adopted July 9, 2009 Near -Term Priorities i . • Southwest n Corridor -- ___ ;-.. � . • Beaverton - Wilsonville i . • Powell- Division _ L E G E +w u City" of Tigard Regional Transportation Plan (2010) Mobility Corridor Refinement -- ---- -- c • �` i • is Priority corridors ..._ IN _.� 0 1 • Southwest • Corridor • East Metro • Connections City of Tigard Southwest Corridor Plan Framework Integrated Land Use & Multimodal Portland Transportation Plan earbur ,k Concept Plan Transit Tigard Alternatives HCT Land Analysis Use Plan Integrated Investment Strategy Transportation Linking Plan Tualatin Sherwood ' Land Use and Town Center Plan City of Tigard Tigard HCT Land Use Plan Concepts for Potential Station Communities • What areas are best suited for growth? cITY oTIGARD ■NCEPTS FOR POTENTIAL • What types of neighborhoods I ATION COMMUNITIES are the right fit for Tigard? FINAL REPORT v.:..... i • What changes are needed? JIMENI, Cit of Tigard Downtown Tigard I ( People said . , ,, Create destinations and identity," �, :� . ` support existing businesses, improve #- connections , Al a I ` 4 VibiRit Concept highlights " • 4 _ 0 4 Consistent with Downtown Plan r a d Focuses on connections, emphasizes 1 ; Mi/ existing assets ; •I i 1 Lfi i, "' �4 # 1 City of Tigard Tigard ghlights - Ili in People said Increase intensity, create destinations and 1 housing, work on Pac Hwy, I don't compete with downtown , , i Concept highlights . , • ► .. Shift to mixed use east of 72 "d Additional policy & planning work needed r 1 .�__ �sr Cit1' of Tigard PLACE TYPES O Essential Land Use Visions & vno`n 4 Neighborhood Transit Connections •., -, • Pr' • r • ' 0 r Refined development types: • Commercial, Mixed use, err— Employment, and Residential• -' areas ' E - Local connection priorities ' I , ! , ell • Essential, Priority, Opportunity, Neighborhood Southwest Corridor • Conumnal • MiaW U>♦ � Dw d. n r Fmpioynem enMnait FY �.r � i.JPa'�.+ Cite of Tigard - — — °Corridor Southwest Corridor Transportation Project Map Book , Project Bundles Ir E Roadway projects �Y\ • 46 projects f _ `v Transit • 5 HCT alternatives f ° _fr -r { • Local service enhancement 2 Active transportation y • 84 projects Parks & natural resources • Related to above projects Cite of Tigard High Capacity Transit (HCT) Alternatives One Light Rail Transit (LRT) option With possible extension to Tualatin Four Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) To Tigard - To Tualatin To Sherwood , x e , ri Fill','-`:,.., i _ - "Hub & Spoke" alternative Cite of Tigard e_ , — r:; f . - a LRT alignment & 4. 1 im design options �'� ` ' g p � : ire .,,_-:,.../..._._ k 5 if FJ ! p, ✓ , mo d ,` M.- dI — i r.__, ` e i I i 7 1 City of Tigard e ''--,1-`-,;. ' Southwest Corridor BAIT No Option. ' s� ` BRT to Tigard 4,„. ; . 1 1 1 , . r, ' ■ r ;, , g t t: ' 4 -- - ,mss '' C1L� Of Tlg " afd Southwest Corridor �..rorwr BRT to Tualatin _____,---- - ..---' - - 1 • ,„ ' , ...4.sd. -- Fa (11 ,. 1) *. ...... ., ! , „.....›- ,y f r } yi °� I � i� City of Tigard r ; t Southwest Corridor �eTrrn.weny..r4ue., BRT to Sherwood 1 . u 1 a, rat' F r i _...,',.. ti+ L ` 1t 4 r___..."___,47t4_ �!� _ ( ) 1\ r ---r Southwest r.OR1dor eaf/Yow4ar.lyr�r4w.r City of Tigard - 1 1 j '' ; BRT Hub & Spoke � .r '. ` .,--. re-.04"-----q- E. ; f ; ,.. ' r Citc of Tigard t.:._,. -. Key elements for Tigard o , J - P a L` • * TC � . • / Potential HCT Stations -----) ; ... ' t i ` tom, " • 4) -,I ^r Two Tigard priorities ford 1 �' economic development • Downtown SW u. r • Tigard Triangle (1 or 2) ` €' ■ '& ' • Hall Blvd /Durham Rd 1./.*' il 1 City of Tigard Key elements for Tigard = z i € - -.0 Y, A6 -. \ I 1 (Alignment Options 1 'v , E - ' '' ■ \ 4 ; d J � All alignments leave 99W before "IMF L is , reaching Tigard - .or ,1,.,; tor tA, l f a . ' P Jr1. , ( IL n j \ _ _ ,� S Bfl + 4. lags Ca) of Tigard 1 v . : Key elements for Tigard ‘x, F- t t : (I) ..- 'la Do 111141 T r Tigard Transportation System C Polk t Plan projects ; • Hwy 217 overcrossing at � , Hunziker hi a • Hunziker- Scoffins Realignment 0 _ i s , - ` ' • Upper Boones at Durham /72nd • Hall Blvd or 72nd Avenue \ 1 5 widening . . , ( ,, Bridg*por ` lags u City of Tigard Key elements for Tigard IP /a / L - Dow d TC r ( HCT /Transit Access ' P .1 -f 4 , ,,,, • Downtown Portland • PCC Sylvania; OHSU 1 `',We Kruse • Bridgeport Village I • W _ _- • Sherwood 4,. I Kruse ay - � • King City t. --: ; - u Brill a - lege d : Southwest Service Enhancement Plan 4 ,0 Q o m Key elements for Tigard � � 0 Local Service Enhancements � o Any HCT option will require local connections we Southwest Service Enhancement J c�` a Plan to proceed this fall ate, oo ( Support access to high capacity transit and connect communities in the corridor. Cite of Tigard Phase 1 Decision • July 2013 / HCT Options for Further Study • What HCT modes need further study? o LRT? BRT? Both? • What is the extent of HCT service? o Tigard? Tualatin? Sherwood? • What kinds of lane treatment options should considered for BRT? o How much is in dedicated lane? Where should lanes be used for business access or mixed traffic? City o/ Choices /Trade -offs Preliminary Results Bus Rapid Transit Considerations Light Rail (Gold standard) Daily Ridership (Demand) 22,500 20,100 Demand /Capacity (Peak) 1,300 / 2,100 = 62% 1,100 / 700 = Over Capacity Annual Operating Cost $4.9 M $6.3 M Capital Cost Highest 55 % -85% of LRT Economic Development Highest Less certain; Local influences Cite of Tigard r ga i - t 16al u ,ry Workshop Meeting - Update June 10 Steering Committee Phase 1 decision timeline Guidance on preferred strategy June 25 Tigard City Council Local Input Business Meeting Time Reserved • Commissions & Advisory Committees July 8 Steering Committee • Town Hall Guidance on preferred strategy • City web site questions July 16 Tigard City Council • Corridor Plan events Work Session Time Reserved This Thursday • / July 22 Steering Committee Adopt preferred strategy AIS -1257 5 Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 05/21/2013 Length (in minutes): 30 Minutes Agenda Title: River Terrace Community Plan Update Submitted By: Darren Wyss, Community Development Council Workshop Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Mtg. Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required ?: No Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Staff will update the Council on work program status and feedback from public meetings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST Council is requested to receive briefing from staff, ask questions and provide input as desired. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The River Terrace Community Plan effort recently completed a round of committee and public meetings to receive feedback on tasks related to natural resources and land use /zoning. The project's technical advisory committee (TAC) and council- appointed stakeholder working group (SWG) met on March 20/21 and the community meeting was held on April 11. The focus of all three meetings was to present the three natural resource maps that are regulated by the Tigard Community Development Code and to also get feedback on different zoning options that are intended to implement the recommended land use vision from the West Bull Mt. Concept Plan (WBMCP). The three natural resource maps (Significant Habitat Map, Significant Tree Grove Map, Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map) show the inventoried resources in the River Terrace Community Plan area. The discussion at the meetings focused on the varying types of regulation for each map and the city's intent to update the existing maps by adopting the River Terrace resources into the respective maps. The Significant Habitat and Significant Tree Grove maps have voluntary, flexible regulations and incentives for preserving resources. The Wetlands and Stream Corridors map identifies the general area of a resource that would need to be delineated and protected through the development process. The discussion was limited regarding these maps and focused on clarifying the intent of the maps by adding language or removing unnecessary information from the maps. The land use /zoning component of the meetings focused on gathering feedback on the translation of the recommended land uses from the WBMCP into city zoning. In December 2012, the Tigard City Council adopted the WBMCP recommended land uses into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. This action signified the transition to the community planning phase, as well as the intent to honor the investment and involvement that occurred during the WBMCP process to agree upon a vision for the area. The project team presented the explanation of how the zoning options were created, then small groups were formed to review the zoning options, give feedback, and make a recommendation on the preferred option. For the TAC and SWG meetings, two different zoning options were presented. There was unanimous consensus that the option that included a greater diversity of zoning districts was the better choice. There were also a number of suggestions for improvement. For the community meeting, the option chosen by the TAC and SWG was presented, as well as two additional options that incorporated feedback from the TAC and SWG meetings. A survey form was also available at the community meeting to capture comments and was made available for two weeks following the meeting to gather additional feedback for those who could not attend. A summary of all the meetings and the online survey are found as attachments. There was a total of 118 people that attended meetings or took the online survey. There was not a definitive consensus on which zoning option was preferred, but the general location of the concept plan's land uses seemed to be supported. The biggest difference between community responses was the location where the person lives and perceived traffic impacts from the adjacent zoning. Responses from the neighborhoods surrounding the southeast part of the plan area (Area 63) preferred zoning options that placed more R -4.5 zoning in that area, while responses from the neighborhoods adjacent to the northeast part of the plan area (Area 64) preferred zoning options that kept the higher density areas R -25 and distributed more R -7 in the southeast area. Finding an acceptable balance will be important. There were also some comments regarding the location of the commercial area and the community parks. The commercial area was placed in its location based on the county's limited arterial access regulations, a commercial land use analysis and the community's desire for a neighborhood focused center that is not auto - oriented. There was no consensus on needing to re- evaluate the location, but comments from the meeting questioned the viability of the commercial area if it doesn't have visibility along Roy Rogers Road. Staff is looking for direction from council on whether another analysis of the commercial location is preferred and the acceptable impact on the tinning of the rest of the project tasks. Many assumptions would need to be refined, particularly the traffic impacts of changing the recommended square footage of commercial space and moving it into a more auto - oriented location. The location of the community parks also received some attention at the meetings. The locations will get evaluated once again during the Parks Master Plan Update task, but moving the location would impact zoning and infrastructure planning. As with the commercial area, refining the concept plan as necessary is part of the community planning process, but the impacts of wholesale change of the concept plan on the timing of completing the community plan needs to be understood. The WBMCP had the support of its TAC and SWG and was adopted by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. Significant time and resources were spent to analyze the land uses and gain support for the trade -offs that occurred during the process. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL OR CCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Complete River Terrace Community Plan DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Council Workshop - April 23, 2013 Council Study Session - May 14, 2013 Fiscal Impact Cost: $134,100 Budgeted (yes or no): Yes Where Budgeted (department /program): CD Additional Fiscal Notes: Washington County transferred CET funds to the city for completing the community plan. The city has applied for additional CET funds for specific infrastructure master planning and financing strategy tasks. Attachments 3/19/2013 RTCP TAC Summary 3/20/2013 RTCP SWG Summary 4/11/2013 RTCP Community Meeting Sumrnary RTCP Online Survey Summary AgendaQuick©2005 - 2013 Destiny Software Inc., All Rights Reserved II 7 = City of Tigard TIGARD River Terrace TAC Summary MEETING DETAILS: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 9:00- 11:OOam, Tigard Town Hall Committee Members in Attendance Brian Rager, City of Tigard Anne Debbaut, DLCD Steve Martin, City of Tigard Ray Valone, Metro Dave Wells, King City Kelly Hossaini, TTSD Allen Kennedy, TVF &R Dick Winn, IWB Paul Whitney, Tualatin Riverkeepers Andy Braun, CWS Paul Shaefer, Washington County Jabra Khasho, City of Beaverton Dave Winship, City of Beaverton Judith Gray, City of Tigard Valerie Sutton, City of Beaverton Staff Present Consultant StaffPresent Darren Wyss, City of Tigard John Spencer, Spencer Consultants Marissa Daniels, City of Tigard Cheryl Caines, City of Tigard Tasks from this meeting: • Contact Metro staff regarding Title 13 updates and applicability to River Terrace • Create a crosswalk diagram for city and county zoning • Send link to the group for the new urban forestry code • Send link to the group for the River Terrace Tree Grove Inventory Report • Send stakeholder working group and community meeting schedules to the group • Send new urban forestry code information to property owners • Contact CWS staff regarding code updates for trails in vegetated corridors Introductions Darren thanked everyone for coming and reviewed the meeting goals and agenda, then led the group through a round of introductions. Roles and Responsibilities Darren reiterated the role of the TAC is to provide feedback and advice to staff during the planning process. The TAC will try to build consensus on recommendations, but if this is not possible then the group will vote on a recommendation. Darren said there will also be a Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) involved in the RTCP planning process. The SWG will also provide feedback and advice to the project team. Minutes of SWG meetings will be shared with the TAC and minutes of TAC meetings be shared with the SWG. TAC meetings will be scheduled in advance of SWG meetings so the SWG will be able to use information from the TAC during decision making. Darren said the TAC is going to provide assistance in translating the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan (WBMCP) into the RTCP. The TAC will hold three more meetings as a group, while subcommittees will be formed for each specific infrastructure task. Darren will request subcommittee volunteers through email and phone correspondence. Staff role will be to facilitate meetings and get materials to the group a week in advance. Staff will also be responsible for providing updates on the project scope between meetings. Darren said that the project team will be very clear about the questions that need to be answered for each meeting. Questions will be outlined in the meeting packets. Information will be presented on each work task and input will be collected from the TAC. At the next meeting, staff will present revisions /refinements based on SWG and TAC feedback. At that time, TAC members will be asked for a consensus recommendation. TAC members will see everything at least twice before having to make a decision. Project Information Darren reiterated that the RTCP process will use the vision that was outlined in the WBMCP and refine it as necessary to meet state, city, and regional requirements. Since the WBMCP, all of the area known as River Terrace has been annexed to the City of Tigard. There are 11 primary work tasks associated with this project. The Public Involvement task, Natural Resources task, and Zoning /Land Use task will be led by the City. The PI task will be guided by the Committee for Citizen Involvement's adopted Public Involvement Plan. The City will engage a consultant to help with the infrastructure tasks (including Water, Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater, Transportation, Parks; Infrastructure Financing and Public Facility Plan). The Request for Proposal (RFP) for this work was being published the day after the meeting; the consultant will be engaged in May and will attend future TAC meetings to provide information to the group. The sanitary sewer and water studies will include the urban reserve areas to ensure proper pipe sizing during development. Darren said the public involvement program for this planning process will occur over the next 10 months. The SWG and TAC will each meet five times. In addition, the project will have four community meetings. Darren noted the most important task in the list is the infrastructure financing. It is vitally important to have necessary funding mechanisms in place to supply the needed infrastructure for development of the area. This task will stretch the length of the RTCP planning process. Darren said the outcome of the RTCP planning process will be having city zoning and land use regulations in place and a financing strategy that allows the River Terrace area to be developed into a complete community. The schedule has been accelerated to try to meet a timeframe of completion by March 2014, including the legislative process. Darren reviewed the TAC meeting topics: • Meeting 1— Group initiation; introduce Zoning and Natural Resources • Meeting 2 — Introduce Parks and Water; revisit Zoning and Natural Resources • Meeting 3 — Introduce Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water, Transportation; revisit Parks and Water • Meeting 4 — Introduce Financing; revisit Sanitary/Sewer, Storm Water, Transportation — o Darren noted that although Financing will be discussed with each infrastructure task, meeting 4 will provide an opportunity to make specific recommendations on Financing • Meeting 5 — Final review and recommendations Darren reiterated we are moving forward from the vision of the WBMCP. The project team's expectation is that the TAC members are familiar with the content of the WBMCP and a detailed review is not necessary. If a committee member needs additional information, the team is happy to provide information or meet with group members to get them up to speed if needed. Darren concluded by saying he hopes the TAC can come to a consensus on an RTCP that implements the vision of the WBMCP and move the community plan into the legislative adoption process. Group Discussion Several TAC members asked to be sent the SWG and Community Meeting schedules. Natural Resources Work Task Review Darren said that the City's natural resource program is based on the sensitive lands chapter in the Community Development Code (CDC) which provides guidance for incentives, flexibility, and protections and three separate maps: Significant Habitat, Significant Tree Groves, and Wetlands and Stream Corridors. The process for developing these maps followed local and regional guidelines and meet state or regional requirements. The intention is to update these maps with the resources in the RTCP and then adopt the maps. Significant Habitat Map The Significant Habitat Map was originally part of the Tualatin Basin Partnership (Title 13). The City adopted the map in 2006 with associated development code amendments. When adoption took place, Measure 37 was in play, so the Partnership made a decision to apply voluntary, low- impact development guidelines. This approach was accepted by Metro. Significant Tree Groves Map Darren said that the Significant Tree Grove Preservation Program is a new program that was done as part of the City's Urban Forestry Code Revision project. Mature native tree groves of two acres and larger were inventoried as part of this process; the inventory in River Terrace was completed in Fall 2012 and followed state Goal 5 guidelines. During the development process, these voluntary and flexible development standards can be used to provide incentives to property owners /developers in saving some or all of an inventoried tree grove. The incentives include transfer of density to non -tree grove portion of property, reduction in minimum density requirements or increased height and reduced setbacks in commercial /industrial zones. Using the flexible standards and incentives can be a benefit in meeting the newly adopted city canopy requirements. The new tree code rewards developers for having trees on their property. It's important to be aware that the tree code has changed. The City has brochures covering the elements of the tree code; there were no copies at this meeting but Darren will email these out prior to the next meeting and copies will be brought to the next meeting. Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map Darren said that the Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map complies with the Goal 5 Local Wetland Inventory as well as Metro's Title 3 program (which is implemented through the Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards). Information on the map is approximate boundaries and detailed delineations are performed during the development process. Wetland inventory conducted during WBMCP process and the State Division of Lands has approved this inventory in Fall 2012; the City plans to adopt this map into the local inventory. The same contractor is completing the ESEE analysis for the wetlands and the tree groves. Summary Darren said that the intent today is to make sure the group understands the purpose of the three maps, how they were inventoried and what regulations apply to them. The City's intent is to update the maps with inventories from River Terrace and adopt the maps as part of the city's natural resource program. Group Discussion • Metro is updating Title 13 inventory. City should coordinate with Metro. • The TAC asked whether the Roshak Pond will be drained, as it was a popular topic of discussion during the WBMCP process. The pond could be increasing downstream water temperatures and the condition of the earthen dam is not known. Darren stated it will be evaluated during the stormwater task. • The group asked to be sent a link to the new tree code regulations and the tree grove inventory report. • The group recommended sending new tree code information to property owners. • The group asked about reduction of density incentives for tree groves and whether Metro has concerns. Darren stated the impacts will be outlined in the ESEE analysis. • The group recommended following up with CWS about code updates focused on trails in the vegetated corridor and wetlands. The Metro green trail guidelines recommend avoiding these natural features. City needs to consider how to remedy the two in the process. • Questions about the location and timing of pump stations were asked. Will it be located in a wetland? Is it possible to site it outside of the UGB to avoid wetlands? Andy Braun (CWS) responded that a pump station siting study is scheduled for July and both inside/ outside the UGB will be analyzed CWS prefers to site only once and this pump station will also serve South Cooper Mt. Darren stated these questions will get further attention during the sanitary sewer task. • The group asked about FEMA changes for development in the floodplain. Anne Debbaut (DLCD) responded she can keep the group informed and have a representative talk to the jurisdictions if needed Zoning Work Task Review Darren explained that the River Terrace zoning must meet two separate Title 11 requirements — Areas 63 and 64 must meet 2002 requirements (10 units per net developable acre); Roy Rogers West (RRW) must meet 2011 requirements (contain 479 housing units). However, some of the 479 units can be placed in Areas 63 and 64 as long as the City shows they have met both requirements overall. The Tigard City Council adopted the recommended land uses in the WBMCP in December 2012. These are shown as colored areas on the map. The project team has created two scenarios shown in two separate maps — Analysis 1 and Analysis 2. Both of these meet Title 11 requirements, though the second is better aligned with the WBMCP vision. Darren said the color schemes used in these maps are from the WBMCP. The WBMCP assumed a density of 11.5 -12 units per acre including the Rural Element. Without the Rural Element, for just Areas 63 and 64, it was 10.5 unit /acre. It also assumed that low density = 7, medium density = 14, and high density = 30. Analysts ) Darren referred the memo in the meeting packet. The County and City zoning designations are different, but he was able to match up minimum lot sizes. Analysis 1 has been based strictly on the recommended land use in WBMCP and what the City's code allows. This offered very limited choices to meet the requirements. This option ended up with little mix, no R -7, and required an R -40 zone to meet density requirements. The project team believes that Analysis 1 does not meet the "spirit" of the WBMCP and isn't realistic. It ended up with very little mix of housing types and price ranges, and they are not sure if the R40 zone is realistic. Analysis 2 Darren said that Analysis 2 applied the City's R -7 zone to low density areas, which results in a better mix of zoning overall. The highest density area is R -25. The project team would like feedback whether this is more feasible than the R -40 in Analysis 1. Staff felt analysis 2 is more aligned with the intentions of the WBMCP and provides more flexibility in accommodating the units for RRW. It considers existing neighborhoods and keeps larger lots adjacent to existing neighborhoods with larger lots. The TAC was split into four groups for an exercise in evaluating how the zoning meets the intent of the concept plan and which of the two analysis is preferred. Small Group Reports Table 1 • R -25 more appropriate than R -40 • Beef Bend & 150 increase from R -7 to R -12 • West edge of 64 change R -4.5 to at least R -7 • Change R -7 along Roy Rogers Rd to R -12 • Zoning Analysis 2 is better option Table 2 • Provide a crosswalk between city and county zoning • Safety issues on 150 if higher densities placed there • Cautious of R -12 in SE 63 • Anticipate low vs. medium density issues • Was transit considered? • More dense around Scholls Ferry — R -12 to R -25 & R -7 above park to R -12 • R -4.5 all along edge of existing neighborhoods? • Zoning Analysis 2 is better option Table 3 • Possible commercial zoning for property at SW corner of Roy Rogers & Scholls Ferry Rd.? • Draining pond will add buildable acres • R -40 near commercial center • R -25 below commercial center • Illogical boundary between low & medium density in West 63 & RRW — analyze • Fire protection needs — sprinkle higher density housing • Zoning Analysis 2 is better option Table 4 • Make zoning logical (e.g. follow contour lines) and flexible (e.g. not always squared off) • May need density (R -40) for commercial to pencil out • Neighborhood Commercial should serve local needs • More density around park in RRW (R -7 to R -12) • Parks are only 2/3 of city standards • Might need to zone everything higher • Blends nicely with existing neighborhoods • Financing may dictate zoning needs — does this deserve a second look? • Match with what uses may be on west side of Roy Rogers Rd (may require 15 units /acre) • How far is the city willing to take changes? This is a clean approach and things have changed. • What will be marketable? • More density to support commercial area (R -25 south of CN) • Parks and high density proximity • Analyze illogical boundary mentioned by Table 2 & 3 • Is there enough room between steep slopes and stream corridor for development on Area 63 property? • Zoning Analysis 2 is better option Meeting Wrap - Up and Next Steps Darren asked whether the same meeting day /time works for upcoming meetings. The time generally works for the group. The city will distribute a meeting invite for the next meeting. The SWG meeting is scheduled for the Wednesday evening and the next community meeting scheduled for April 11, 2013. Both are being held in the cafeteria of Deer Creek Elementary. Information is available online. Information for upcoming meetings will be available online and in project e- mails. TAC members will be added to the list serve. Members of the public should sign up for the list serve. Darren thanked everyone for coming and adjourned the meeting. TIGARD River Terrace Stakeholder Working Group MEETING DETAILS: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 6:30- 9:OOpm, Deer Creek Elementary Cafeteria Committee Members in Attendance Jim Beardsley, property owner — Area 64 Steve Jacobson, property owner — Area 63 Ernie Brown, Tigard Tualatin School District Marsha Lancaster, property owner — Urban Reserve Joanne Criscione, property owner — Area 64 Yolanda McVicker, CPO 4B, Bull Mountain Michael Freudenthal, neighborhood representative Kathy Stallkamp, CPO 4K Fred Gast, developer Richard Shavey, Tigard Planning Commission Dan Grimberg, developer and property owner — Area 64 John Weathers, neighborhood representative Lisa Hamilton, CPO 4B and Friends of Bull Mountain Matt Wellner, developer and property owner — Area 63 Jerry Hanford, property owner and neighborhood Dick Winn, Friends of Tualatin River Wildlife Refuge representative Marc Woodard, Tigard City Council Committee Members Absent Nora Curtis, Clean Water Services StaffPresent Consultant StaffPresent Darren Wyss, City of Tigard Adrienne DeDona, JLA Public Involvement Marissa Daniels, City of Tigard Jamie Harvie, JLA Public Involvement Christine Wiley XX, City of Tigard John Spencer, Spencer Consultants Members of the Public Present Paul Schaefer, Washington County Crystal Roshak, John L. Scott Don Roshak Jerry Roshak Steve & Linda Price Craig Schuck, Riverside Homes Ned Braw Elizabeth Burnell Kimmy Asher Kevin Dressel J. Roberts, Crandall Group Niki Munison, Riverside Homes Elise Shearer Ed Dantholemy Vima Pistilla Dana Rasmesse Tony Lozzi Don O'Neil, MLG Tom Brian Information requests from this meeting: • Group members would like information and updates from the South Cooper Mountain process. o The project team will provide this. Also, Matt Weliner serves on South Cooper Mountain CAC. • Group members would like to be aware of planning efforts for all other relevant areas, including unincorporated areas, Metro's Westside Trail and other efforts. • Group members would like summarized information regarding the updated tree code and would like this shared with area residents. o Brochures will be brought to the next meeting and Darren will email this information to the group members prior to the next meeting. The City's website also provides information about the new program. • Group members would like to be aware of Beaverton's zoning maps for the north side off Scholl's Ferry Road to make sure development is compatible. • Revisit upland area preservation requirements for this area (Natural Resources) Parking lot items and items for further discussion: • Revisit the issues surrounding Roshak's Pond during the storm water process. • Revisit park issues, including parks standards used for zoning analyses and locations. Overview Summary The following is an overview of the main comments made by members for the two tasks discussed at the March 20, 2013 SWG meeting. Overview of Project Information • Preserve WBMCP vision through implementation and development • Need for flexibility in implementation • Infrastructure financing task is critical • How will unincorporated area be addressed? • How will the Rural Area be addressed? • Consider parallel planning efforts, e.g. South Cooper Mountain, and share this information with the group Overview of Natural Resources Work Task • Revisit upland areas on the three natural resource maps, including reference to work that Washington County has done. • Remove the Significant Habitat layer from the Significant Tree Groves Map. • Indude note with Wetlands Map that detailed delineations would be done during the development process. • Explain why the Wetland Map extends outside of the River Terrace area in some places but stops at the border in others, particularly the eastern border. • Include a matrix of the three maps and city codes associated with them in order to clearly explain what the maps do and do not do • Would like to review maps incorporating feedback before recommending inclusion • City needs to have outreach to property owners regarding updated tree code Overview of Zoning Work Task • Zoning should follow property lines • Need for flexibility in implementation • Implementation of R -7 zoning (Analysis 2) is good Introductions Adrienne DeDona thanked everyone for coming and introduced herself as the facilitator of the group. She reviewed the meeting goals and agenda, then led the group through a round of introductions. Roles and Responsibilities SWG members Darren provided background information on the process that brought the Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) together. The 18 member group has been appointed by Tigard City Council to provide on -going advice and feedback to staff regarding preparation of the River Terrace Community Plan (RTCP). Darren thanked the SWG members for volunteering time to provide feedback and advice on the project. The mission of the group, as outlined by Council Resolution, is to: 1. Create an environment conducive to multiple and diverse opinions and ideas; 2. Review and comment on draft materials prepared by staff and consultants; 3. Ensure the community plan is consistent with and supportive of the applicable goals, policies, and actions measures in the Comprehensive Plan and the recommendations in the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan; and 4. Promote public understanding of the River Terrace Community Plan. Darren said there will also be a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) involved in the RTCP planning process. The TAC will provide feedback and advice to the project team. Minutes of SWG meetings will be shared with the TAC and minutes of TAC meetings be shared with the SWG. TAC meetings will be scheduled in advance of SWG meetings so the SWG will be able to use information from the TAC during decision making. Darren said the SWG is going to provide assistance in translating the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan ( WBMCP) into the RTCP. The City of Tigard has made a commitment to move the concept plan recommendations forward and not start the process over again. There have been three years of prior investment and public involvement and the City wants to honor that work. Darren said that the project team will be very clear about the questions that need to be answered for each meeting. Questions will be outlined in the meeting packets. Information will be presented on each work task and input will be collected from the SWG. At the next meeting, staff will present revisions /refinements based on SWG and TAC feedback. At that time, SWG members will be asked for a consensus recommendation. SWG members will see everything at least twice before having to make a decision. Facilitator Adrienne explained her role as the facilitator. She will make sure each meeting follows the agenda, that everyone has the opportunity to voice their opinions and /or ask questions, and enforce the protocols. She handed out draft protocols for review. These are similar to the protocols used for the WBMCP planning process. The protocols were not reviewed at the meeting; members will review them outside of the meeting and they will be further discussed and adopted at the following meeting. City staff Adrienne said that project staff, including Darren, Marissa and John, are here in a support role. Group members should come to them with any feedback /issues. Darren is project lead. After adopting the protocols, the project team will identify one point of contact. In the meantime, group members can come to Darren, Adrienne or Marissa with questions or comments. Adrienne said that she will be conducting stakeholder interviews with each group member in the time before the next meeting, so members should expect to hear from her. If a group member was involved in the WBMCP planning process, she would like to hear feedback on that process and whether any suggestions would be applicable to the RTCP process. Project Information Scope and Timelines Darren reiterated that the RTCP process will use the vision that was outlined in the WBMCP and refine it as necessary to meet state, city, and regional requirements. Since the WBMCP, all of the area known as River Terrace has been annexed to the City of Tigard. Task and Meeting Schedule A task and meeting schedule was provided. There are 11 primary work tasks associated with this project. One of these tasks, Land Use, has been completed already as part of the City Council's adoption of the WBMCP adopted land uses in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan in December. The Public Involvement task, Natural Resources task, and Zoning /Land Use task will be led by the City. The PI task will be guided by the Committee for Citizen Involvement's adopted Public Involvement Plan. The City will engage a consultant to help with the infrastructure tasks (including Water, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water, Transportation, Parks; Infrastructure Financing and Public Facility Plan). The Request for Proposal (RFP) for this work was sent out the day of the meeting; the consultant will be engaged by early May and will attend future SWG meetings to provide information to the group. Darren said the public involvement program for this planning process will occur over the next 10 months. The SWG and TAC will each meet five times. In addition, the project will have four community meetings. Darren noted the most important task in the list is the infrastructure financing. It is vitally important to have necessary funding mechanisms in place to supply the needed infrastructure for development of the area. This task will stretch the length of the RTCP planning process, and will be a standing agenda item for the SWG. Darren said the outcome of the RTCP planning process will be having city zoning and land use regulations in place and a financing strategy that allows the River Terrace area to be developed into a complete community. The SWG will endorse this plan and the River Terrace area will be ready for development in Spring of 2014. The schedule has been accelerated to try to meet a timeframe of completion by March 2014. SWIG Meeting Topics Darren reviewed the SWG meeting topics: • Meeting 1— Group initiation; introduce Zoning and Natural Resources • Meeting 2 — Introduce Parks and Water; revisit Zoning and Natural Resources • Meeting 3 — Introduce Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water, Transportation; revisit Parks and Water • Meeting 4 — Introduce Financing; revisit Sanitary /Sewer, Storm Water, Transportation — o Darren noted that although Financing will be discussed with each infrastructure task, meeting 4 will provide an opportunity to make specific recommendations on Financing • Meeting 5 — Final review and recommendations West Bull Mountain Concept Plan Darren said that the project team's expectation is that the SWG members are familiar with the content of the WBMCP. The project team will not review the WBMCP content in detail or revisit the previous process, but are happy to provide information or meet with group members to get them up to speed if needed. Final Outcomes Darren conduded by saying he hopes the SWG and TAC can come to a consensus on an RTCP that implements the vision of the WBMCP, which will result the Tigard City Council implementing what the groups have recommended. Adrienne reinforced that any changes to the WBMCP vision would require going back to Council. Group discussion • Dan Grimberg said he participated in the WBMCP. His concern is that, when development is done in segments, specific implementation requirements often clash with the overall plan. Because of this, the Financing Plan is a very important foundation for the overall planning process. Dan is involved in the planning process in North Bethany and hopes the RTCP will be more flexible than that. There must be some trust in developers and flexibility in zoning /land use to allow them to meet market demands. o Darren agreed that the financial element is very important and will thus be addressed throughout the project. There will also be technical experts on board to provide information to the group. o Dick Winn recognized Dan's concerns are related to implementation, but the SWG's mandate is related to planning. It is the City of Tigard's responsibility to deal with implementation. • Michael Freudenthal pointed out the unincorporated area in between River Terrace and the main part of the City of Tigard. He is concerned that this area will be affected by the planning process but has been under - considered. At some point in the process, he would like to discuss how that unincorporated area is factored into the planning process. • Joanne Criscione said that she had worked on the master planning for the rural area on corner of Beef Bend Road and Roy Rogers Road (called the "rural element "). How will the current planning process affect what they have already done? o Darren replied that this work will be a vital consideration of the infrastructure planning, so that planning for the two areas is complementary, but since it was not brought into Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), the City's planning process cannot apply regulations and zoning to that area. That master planning does not affect the density requirements for the RCTP. • Dan asked whether there will be shared information between the RTCP and South Cooper Mountain planning processes? o Darren replied that the Tigard and Beaverton city councils have had a joint meeting about that issue. Each council passed a resolution for staff on the two planning processes to coordinate and share information. The RTCP TAC will include a City of Beaverton staff member and the South Cooper Mountain TAC will have a City of Tigard staff member. • Dan said that he would like SWG meetings to include information at this meeting from the South Cooper Mountain process. o Darren said that this would be possible. o Matt Wellner said that he serves on South Cooper Mountain CAC and could be a resource for information. • Lisa Hamilton said it is important for the RTCP planning process not to function in a vacuum. The process needs to consider unincorporated areas, South Cooper Mountain, Metro's Westside Trail and other efforts. The SWG members need to be aware of the bigger picture and want information. o Darren replied that the project team is working with Metro on how to connect to the Westside trail. Natural Resources Work Task Review Darren said that the City's natural resource program is based on the sensitive lands chapter in the Community Development Code (CDC) which provides guidance for incentives, flexibility, and protections and is shown in three separate maps: Significant Habitat, Tree Groves, and Wetlands and Stream Corridors. The process for developing these maps followed local and regional guidelines and meet state or regional requirements. The intention is to include these maps in the RTCP so it's important that the SWG understand them and accept them. Significant Habitat Map Darren said that the Significant Habitat Map was originally part of the Tualatin Basin Partnership (Title 13). The City adopted the guidelines included in the Significant Habitat map in 2006. When adoption took place, Measure 37 passed so the City made these voluntary, low- impact development guidelines. Group discussion • Matt Wellner requested that the significant habitat upland areas be revisited since these guidelines were adopted before these areas were annexed into the city and therefore may not be applicable. His concern is that at some point in the future the significant habitat areas could no longer be voluntary. • Dan Grimberg said that the highlighted significant habitat areas should be identified as "areas of concern that require further study;" since delineation will be required at the time of development. The North Bethany planning process notes this in their plan. He is concerned about how this will be interpreted. • John Weathers said that the maps need to be based on actual site visits, not just on aerial images. • Lisa Hamilton asked whether regulations apply to the dark green significant habitat areas. o Darren replied that the Significant Habitat Map only has voluntary guidelines associated with it. Significant Tree Groves Map Darren said that the Significant Tree Grove Preservation Program is a new program that was done as part of the City's Urban Forestry Code Revision project. Mature native tree groves of two acres and larger were inventoried as part of this process; the inventory in River Terrace was completed in Fall 2012. Voluntary development guidelines are associated with this map in which saving portions of tree groves provides incentives to property owners /developers. The previous City tree code was very punitive. The new tree code rewards developers for having trees on their property. It's important to be aware that the tree code has changed. The City has brochures covering the elements of the tree code; there were no copies at this meeting but Darren will email these out prior to the next meeting and copies will be brought to the next meeting. Group discussion • Lisa Hamilton said that she is concerned that property owners may not be aware of changes to tree code and may cut their trees down in anticipation of development. o Marissa Daniels replied that the same issue was discussed at the TAC meeting last night. The project team hopes that the SWG and TAC groups can spread the news to property owners. The City will send a mailing to residents regarding this. In the meantime, the City's website also provides information about the new program. • Fred Gast said he is concerned that the Significant Tree Grove Map includes an overlay of the Significant Habitat, however the two do not necessarily correlate. If a person looks at the Significant Tree Grove Map without understanding the Significant Habitat Map, they could easily get confused or misinterpret. o Darren said that this layer can be removed from the Tree Grove map. • Dan Grimberg asked how current is the Tree Grove Map? o Darren replied the inventory had been done by a consultant in November 2012. Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map Darren said that the Wetlands and Stream Corridors Map complies with the Goal 5 Local Wetland Inventory as well as Metro's Title 3 program (which is implemented through the Clean Water Services Design and Construction Standards). The map shows approximate boundaries of wetlands. Detailed delineations of wetlands would be done during the development process. The State Division of Lands has approved this inventory; the City plans to adopt this map into the local inventory. The same contractor is completing the ESEE analysis for the wetlands and the tree groves. Group discussion • Dan Grimberg requested that a note be added to the Wetlands Map that it is a high -level generalization and detailed delineations will be required during the development process o Darren replied that this could be done. This is also defined in the City's code. • John Weathers asked why the Wetland Map extends outside of the River Terrace area in some places but stops at the border in others, particularly the eastern border where he knows there is significant wetland habitat? o Darren said he would follow -up with Washington County about this. • Lisa Hamilton said that there has been a lot of discussion about the Roshak's Pond; what is the final decision on whether it will stay intact during development? o Darren said that this is a critical issue and it will be addressed during the storm water planning task. The same question came up at the TAC meeting. • Dan said that it is a manmade pond put there for irrigation. He feels uncomfortable that the Roshaks are not able to speak to this issue. o Adrienne said that they can speak to this during the public comment period. • Jim Beardsley said that these ponds have done significant damage to some properties. He has discussed this with the County and Clean Water Services. o Darren said that this issue will be discussed during the storm water planning task and Clean Water Services will be involved. Summary Darren said that the intent today is to make sure the group understands the purpose of the maps; they are natural resource inventories that dictate various development guidelines. The City's intent is to include these existing guidelines in the RTCP. Adrienne reiterated that the maps are not a key deliberation piece and are planned to be brought into the plan as -is. This is the time to ask any questions to be sure everyone understands the maps before moving forward. Group discussion • Steve Jacobson asked whether the changes discussed today will be included in the maps before they are included in the RTCP? o Darren said the project team will discuss the comments and incorporate them prior to the next meeting. At the next meeting, they will look for a consensus that the maps are fine to include in the RTCP. o Adrienne said it would be possible to include a communication piece in the RTCP that conveys the intent of the maps, and this will take care of many of the comments. o Steve said these maps are very important because they affect people's livelihoods. o Dan Grimberg said that any mistakes made in these maps can be carried forward into future decisions. o Darren said that prior to next meeting, he can create a matrix of the three maps and city codes associated with them in order to explain what the maps do and do not do. • A member of the public added that the ultimate decision on Roshak's Pond is a big issue. o Adrienne said this will be a parking lot issue until the third meeting regarding storm water. Zoning Work Task Review Density Assumptions and Requirements Darren explained that the River Terrace zoning must meet two separate Title 11 requirements — Areas 63 and 64 must meet 2002 requirements (10 units per net developable acre); Roy Rogers West (RRW) must meet 2011 requirements (contain 479 housing units). However, some of the 479 units can be placed in Areas 63 and 64 as long as the City shows they have met both requirements overall. The Tigard City Council adopted the recommended land uses in the WBMCP in December 2012. These are shown as colored areas on the map. The project team has created two scenarios shown in two separate maps — Analysis 1 and Analysis 2. Both of these meet Title 11 requirements, though the second is better aligned with the WBMCP vision. Darren said the color schemes used in these maps are from the WBMCP. The WBMCP assumed a density of 11.5 -12 units per acre including the Rural Element. Without the Rural Element, for just Areas 63 and 64, it was 10.5 unit /acre. It also assumed that low density = 7, medium density = 14, and high density = 30. Recommended Zoning Analysis 1 Darren referred to a handout of Washington County's land use zoning code and the memo on Tigard's zoning districts (in the meeting packet). He said the County and City zoning designations are different, but he was able to match up minimum lot sizes. Analysis 1 has been based strictly on the recommended land use in WBMCP and what the City's code allows. This offered very limited choices to meet the requirements. This option ended up with little mix, no R -7, and required an R -40 zone to meet density requirements. The project team believes that Analysis 1 does not meet the "spirit" of the WBMCP and isn't realistic. It ended up with very little mix of housing types and price ranges, and they are not sure if the R40 zone is realistic. Analysis 2 Darren said that Analysis 2 applied the City's R -7 zone to low density areas, which results in a better mix of zoning overall. The highest density area is R -25. The project team would like feedback whether this is more feasible than the R -40 in Analysis 1. Staff felt analysis 2 is more aligned with the intentions of the WBMCP and provides more flexibility in accommodating the units for RRW. It considers existing neighborhoods and keeps larger lots adjacent to existing neighborhoods with larger lots. The TAC felt that Analysis 2 was a better representation of the WBMCP vision. They also discussed including additional R -25 south of the commercial area to meet the RRW requirements. They also felt that keeping R -7 as the most dense zoning in south -east of Area 63 was appropriate due to topography and drainage areas. Darren noted an error in the meeting packet, which states that switching an additional 12 acres R -7 to R -12 would meet unit requirements. This is incorrect. Group discussion • Jerry Hanford asked for the comparison of the Rural Element in Analysis 1 and 2 o Darren replied that the Rural Element in WBMCP is mostly medium density (R -7 to R -12), but this will depend on when it is brought into UBG what Metro determines the density should be. The City hopes that they would align with what is in the WBMCP. • Jerry asked what the Rural Element's density is for Washington County? o Paul Schaefer replied that the Rural Element on its own is higher than the area overall; it's medium density —13 unit /acre. This is higher than Areas 63 and 64. This correlates with the County's R- 15/R-9. • Matt Weliner asked whether the community parks included in the analysis match what was adopted by Washington County? o Darren replied that it matches the plans. Parks will also be addressed in an upcoming meeting. • Lisa Hamilton asked which parks standards are being used for these analysis (is it a hybrid)? o Darren said it is a hybrid and this will be addressed in the next meeting. • Dan Grimberg said that many of these zone lines do not follow property lines. How firm are these lines? Can they be flexible? Some of these areas do not make sense in regards to development. o Adrienne said this can be discussed further in the small group discussion. Small Group Exercise Adrienne asked everyone to break into small groups to further discuss these issues. She asked the groups to think about whether the proposed zoning seemed like a logical implementation of the concept plan? What works? What doesn't work? Where are opportunities for improvement? The SWG members separated into three groups. Members of the public formed a fourth group. Small Group Reports Group 1 • Zoning restrictions and how the zoning flowed from unincorporated area to Areas 63 and 64, and how zoning matched up at the edges of the map — concerned that some areas do not flow well — should be made more consistent • Is it more feasible to have the neighborhood commercial area on the border rather than in the middle • Is it more feasible to include the R -40 • Zoning should follow property lines • What zoning could be considered for the area slated for the school if the district decides not to build a school Group 2 • Analysis 2 made a lot more sense • There is a need for flexibility in zoning (fuzzy lines instead of hard, fixed lines) • The RTCP process should be aware of what Beaverton is doing on the other side of Scholl's Ferry Road; these two areas need to be compatible; Beaverton should also be aware of the River Terrace plans Group 3 • Move commercial area towards Roy Rogers Road • Does is work to split the R -25 area by Roy Rogers? Might be better to split the high density and commercial area instead • R7 zoning implementation is good. Match it up with the other side • Where should additional density be located if it is required? • Reiterated the need for flexibility and following property lines Group 4 — The Public • Address man -made ponds • Revisit and further discuss the park designation and location (near the school) • The need for zoning flexibility in tree groves — R -12 is perhaps too high density for an area with a lot of trees • Designate higher density along Roy Rogers road and lower density as you move away from arterials • Concerns about traffic coming in through a residential area to get to the commercial area • Explore higher density areas adjacent to the commercial area (south side) to make the higher densities more concentrated • Connections between parks and open space are very good. Adrienne said that the project team will take all this information and work with the contractor (once they are engaged) to revise the zoning analysis options. The team will bring updated maps to the next meeting for discussion and a consensus recommendation. Public Comment • Kevin Dressel asked if there will be flexibility in the natural resource maps in the future? • Darren replied that the Wetland and Stream Corridor Map is the only regulatory map with boundaries approximate and delineation would be required during development. The Tree Grove map only has voluntary guidelines associated with it as does the Significant Habitat Map Meeting Wrap -Up and Next Steps SWIG Meeting Time and Location Adrienne asked whether the same meeting time works for upcoming meetings (third Wednesday of the month). Dick Winn and Kathy Stallkamp have conflicts. Matt Wellner asked to avoid conflict with South Cooper Mountain meetings. This time generally works for the rest of the group. The group agreed that the school is a good location, but the library would be better room. The city will distribute a meeting invite for the next meeting. The next community meeting scheduled for April 11, 2013. Information is available online. Information for upcoming meetings will be available online and in project e- mails. SWG members will be added to the list serve. Members of the public should sign up for the list serve. Adrienne will be doing individual interviews with each SWG member prior to the next meeting. Adrienne thanked everyone for coming and adjourned the meeting. River Terrace Community Plan Community Meeting #2 Report 4/11/2013 Executive Summary Overview On April 11, 2013 the Tigard Community Development Department convened Community Meeting #2 for the River Terrace Community Plan. Topics covered at the meeting included Natural Resources and Land Use, and 31 community members in attendance provided feedback to city staff. Feedback was gathered three ways — comments during the open house portion of the meeting, group discussions about land use alternatives, and an individual survey form evaluating the land use alternatives. The main portion of the evening was focused on discussing potential zoning in the River Terrace area. This discussion centered on three questions: • How closely each map represents your understanding of the Community Plan land use vision? • Which map do you prefer? Why? • What could be improved? Results Participants showed a clear preference for refinement of concept plan land uses as opposed to straight transfer of the concept plan to Tigard zoning. Participants also showed a preference for the analysis which incorporated Technical Advisory Committee and Stakeholder Working Group comments (Analysis 2 and 3). In the group exercise, participants preferred some combination including Analysis 2 and 3 equally. However, in the individual survey, participants preferred Analysis 3 two to one. Looking deeper into the results it is clear that for participants increased neighborhood traffic and impacts on adjacent neighborhoods are two important factors when determining zoning for River Terrace. Analysis 2 places slightly more density in the southern portion of the planning area as opposed to Analysis 3, while Analysis 3 places increased density (R -40 instead of R -25 for a portion of the area) in the northern portion of the planning area. For this reason, the same comments were used to describe participant's preference for Analysis 2 or Analysis 3 depending on which portion of the area they live adjacent to. Additionally, providing support for the proposed commercial area and natural resources came up as important considerations. While there were proponents of both analyses who felt their chosen analysis provided the right amount of support for the commercial area in the individual survey, there was only one group out of five during the group discussions who felt that R -40 was needed to support the commercial area. One additional group expressed a preference for R -40, because lower density in the southern portion of the area was preferred. This lower density is what allowed more consideration for the tree groves and topography in the southern portion of the plan area. Feedback on the two analyses is summarized below. Analysis 2 Analysis 3 • Maintains similar zoning with existing • Lowers the density on 150th Ave neighborhoods • Expands R -12 density near the school • Less traffic impact to existing neighborhood • Less dense on sloping ground • Supports the commercial center • Protects tree groves better than others • Provides additional support to commercial center Overview Part L• Open House Community members were greeted by city staff. Two separate sets of maps were available on display — natural resource maps (Significant Tree Groves, Significant Habitat Areas, and Wetlands and Stream Corridors) and Land Use (Analysis 1, Analysis 2, and Analysis 3). Attendees had an opportunity to direct specific questions to staff about each map. Part 2: Project Manager Presentation Tigard Project Manager Darren Wyss spoke to the two topics of discussion: Natural Resources and Land Use. Natural Resources The City of Tigard is responsible for implementing its natural resources program in the River Terrace Area. The city's natural resources program consists of its sensitive lands chapter in the Community Development Code and three maps that provide guidance for some incentives, flexibility, and protections from the code. Darren explained that the city's intent is to update all three maps to reflect inventoried resources in the River Terrace Community Plan area. Inventories followed established guidelines and meet state or regional requirements. Darren shared a handout (Attachment 1) which explained the regulations, requirements and incentives for each map. Land Use In December 2012, the Tigard City Council adopted the recommended land uses from the West Bull Mt. Concept Plan into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. The next step is to apply Tigard zoning to the area. Because the concept plan land use framework was based on Washington County zoning, which differs from Tigard zoning, additional analysis and community input is needed to finalize zoning for River Terrace. Three options were presented for review. Analysis 1 Analysis 2 Analysis 3 • Initial City of Tigard Staff • Concept Plan refinement • Further refinement Recommendation incorporates TAC and SWG incorporates TAC and SWG • Key features of this map comments comments includes: • Key features of this map • Key features of this refinement — Zoning has been mirrored to includes: include: complement existing housing — More R -25 along Scholls — R -40 zoning in the high — The areas envisioned as low Ferry Rd. density residential area density residential have been — More of area 63 in the adjacent to the commercial zoned R -7 in addition to R- southeast comer of the map area to further support 4.5 has been zoned R -4.5 around commercial development. — The area adjacent to the existing homes and natural — More of Area 63 is zoned R- commercial area is zoned R- features 4.5 to keep lower densities 25 instead of R -40. — One property lowered to R -7 around existing homes and in consideration of a resources (slopes and creeks). significant tree grove. Part 3: Group Activity Meeting participants were divided into small groups to discuss the three zoning maps. City staff facilitated the discussions and were available to answer questions. Groups were asked to answer the following questions and report back to the large group. • How well does each map represent the vision of the concept plan • Which do you recommend? Why? • What works or doesn't work? Results Group Activity Group 1 (Darren) Preference — Combination of Analysis 2 and 3 Wanted to accommodate lower densities in Area 63 without burdening the existing neighborhood adjacent to Area 64 with traffic impacts from too much high density. Concern for safety issues on SW 150th Ave. so preferred lower densities of Analysis 3 in the area Felt it was important to support neighborhood commercial area with higher densities, but preferred R -25 to limit cut - through traffic impacts to existing neighborhoods Felt the high density was located appropriately to take advantage of parks in the area Discussed how tree removal decisions (both mapped groves and smaller stands) would get made during the development process Discussed an existing cell phone tower on property adjacent to Scholls Ferry Rd. (east of Roy Rogers Rd.) and possibility of extending R -25 on all of the property. Agreed with the R -25 surrounding PGE substation and should add the property just to the east into the R -25. However, there was concern over the traffic impacts in the existing neighborhood with the addition of more density. Group 2 (Gary) Preference — Analysis 2 R -40 in Analysis 3 may have adverse transportation impacts to Roshak Rd., including safety concerns, congestion, and spill-over from Scholls Ferry and Roy Rogers Rds. Neighborhood commercial area may benefit from greater exposure to Roy Rogers Rd, but keep the R -25 zoning just on west side of Roy Rogers Rd and don't slide any to east of commercial area Good distribution of R -7 and R-4.5 — sensitive to existing development Group3(Marissal Preference — Analysis 3 Likes the consideration of topography and natural resources in Area 63 Would like to see a plan for transit service to the area Safety concerns at major intersections Agrees with the location of the R -40 zoning Would like to see more density along Scholls Ferry if transit service is anticipated Group 4 (Cheryl). Preference — Analysis 2 Preferred R -25 over R -40 adjacent to neighborhood commercial area Felt extending the R -25 on west side of Roy Rogers Rd up to Scholls Ferry Rd would help support the commercial development — would also allow additional R -4.5 in Area 63 (similar to Analysis 3) Group 5 (Agnes) Preference — Combination of Analysis 1 and 3 Higher density (R -25) along Scholls Ferry Rd only with good access Need R-40 to support the neighborhood commercial area Zoning is consistent with terrain — lower densities on steeper slopes, higher densities in flatter areas Higher density on property north of school property — R -12 in Analysis 1 Neighborhood commercial should have a unique design /distinct feeling Survey Form Responses Please rate how closely each map represents your understanding of the Community Plan land use vision. Analysis 1 Analysis 2 Analysis 3 Average Score: Average Score: Average Score: 2.84/5 3.29/5 3.68/5 Which map do you prefer? 11 5 2 Analysis 1 Analysis 2 Analysis 3 Analysis 1 Please share any additional Why do you prefer this map? How could this concept be improved? comments or suggestions Move high density near school Keep high density R -25 wrapping around Swap comm /gen CG area out R -12 towards Scholls Ferry to main road further away from existing neighborhoods and buffer it with R25 The spread of the density More R -7 in area 63 - less preferred. Less traffic impact R4.5; No R -40 in both areas 63 and 64! Analysis 2 Please share any additional Why do you prefer this map? How could this concept be improved? comments or suggestions Maintains similar zoning with Move "CG" commercial areas nearer Roy Avoid R -40 existing neighborhoods, avoids Rogers traffic issues Less traffic impact to existing Have R -25 on both sides of Roy Rogers neighborhood off Roshak - R- 25 vs. R -40 - in area 64 It would help the commercial Keep R -25 on both sides of Roy Rogers The linear parkway on roads center with customers. should be reduced to 20 feet Bring high density along RR See map - Cheryl's group I like the general concept Rd as noted on map - Cheryl's plan. Look forward to more group detail as time allows. Least of all the evils Analysis 3 Please share any additional Why do you prefer this map? How could this concept be improved? comments or suggestions The concentration of density if Provide better exposure for commercial to Having one property half in done right helps keep an Roy Rogers Rd. and half out of the R -25 is overall open community. inconvenient. Lower density on 150th Ave, Make all land on south east side of Scholls Nice Job! higher density closer to Scholls Ferry R -25 or R -40 Ferry Distribution of zoning Access to Scholls @ R -25, light @ Bull Mtn, R -12 above school R3 with expansion to R12 by Traffic light on Scholls Ferry Rd school, less density by RSH by 150th Expands R -12 density near the Increase density north next to CG by school Expanding R -7 area next to R -25 Has a good zoning flow better Additional adjustments to zoning as noted than existing and new on map - Cheryl's group development Less density on sloping ground Perhaps higher density focusing on Scholls with more density along Roy Ferry, but traffic safety concerns may not Rogers allow. Protects tree groves better than Bus service on Roy Rogers and Scholls High density along Scholls others Ferry. Traffic lights on Roy Rogers & Beef Ferry with bus service Bend and Roy Rogers & Bull Mtn. Open House Comments and Responses What is the potential for property just north of Beef Bend Rd to be included? When? Annexation? This area is not within the Metro urban growth boundary and cannot be developed to urban level uses at this time. The area is designated as urban reserve and was concept planned as part of the county's West Bull Mt. Concept Plan process. This makes it eligible as an urban growth boundary expansion area if the next Metro • Urban Growth Report analysis finds the need for more land to accommodate projected population and employment. These decisions will be made in 2015/2016. What are the bents of existing trees on property? The city recently adopted new urban forestry code regulations that require a percentage of canopy coverage (at maturity) during the development process. Existing trees are a benefit to properties as they will get counted as double credit if preserved on the site. If the trees are part of an inventoried significant tree grove, the city has adopted flexible development standards to provide additional options during the development process. The city's website has detailed information on the new urban forestry program (www.tigard- or.gov /trees). What is open space designation on the zoning maps? The open space designation identifies land that will be protected by the Clean Water Services Design and Construction Manual. The Manual outlines the required vegetated corridor buffer for streams and wetlands. The open space designation is an approximation and on -site delineations will be completed during the development process. The neighborhood park (southernmost park west of Roy Rogers Rd.) doesn't mrre pond with existing tree grove. The West Bull Mt. Concept Plan identified recommended park locations to serve all neighborhoods in the planning area. There will be some flexibility when the neighborhood parks are designed as part of a development proposal, including the ability to shift orientation or incorporate existing natural resources. In this case, analyzing the preferred park amenities and the impacts of locating them in a tree grove would be a logical exercise. Move the commercial area to main road and the R-25 towards the pond. The location of the neighborhood commercial area was agreed upon during the West Bull Mt. Concept Planning process. This agreement resulted from a commercial services assessment, transportation assessment and community involvement. A re- evaluation of the location would need to go through a similar process to assess the impacts. Agree with placing R -25 zoning near Scholls Ferry Rd Zoning Analysis 2 and 3 both extend R -25 zoning up to and along Scholls Ferry Rd. Higher density housing along Scholls Fery Rd. because of PGE substation and two cell phone towers, including one in middle of property bordering Scholl). Fery Rd Extending the R -25 zoning in Analysis 2 and 3 increased the density slightly from the concept plan. Additional increases in density or extending it farther to the east will begin a major departure from the intention of the concept plan recommended land uses. Encroachment into the transition zone from the existing neighborhood and associated traffic impacts would need to be evaluated. Attachment 1: RIVER TERRACE COMMUNITY MEETING — April 11, 2013 Natural Resource Map Regulations & Incentives Map Regulations Requirements /Incentives Significant Tree Groves Voluntary 1. Reduced minimum density- 18.790.050D(1) 2. Residential density transfer- 18.790.050D(2) 3. Adjustments to commercial & industrial development standards - 18.790.050D(3) Significant Habitat Area Voluntary 1. Up to 50% adjustment to dimensional standards- 18.775.100A 2. Reduced minimum density-18.775.100C 3. Low Impact Development (LID) options- various sections Wetlands & Stream Corridor Mandatory 1. Comply with CWS "Design & Construction Standards "- 18.775.050A 2. Wetland delineation may be required-18.775.050B 3. Comply with Statewide Planning Goal 5 Natural Resources and Comprehensive Plan process- 18.775.090A & 18.775.130 Potential Zoning - Analysis 1 N.' April 2013 - River Terrace Community Meeting TIGARD ��,' aria .....0 far ®. .., ,: ; \z, a , ^ti�1 sehF errY ����� ���A �� ._ �4 _..1111�l:C e, r • 4 ,4 1 a aim Iuiapu111111 le'. : : i au 2 , Eon :::jp /1111111 mO 1 Tigard Comp Plan Designation - NE L— 1i �: 1111111111 11111M moo N. D � � Ij iuii 111 Low Density Residential 1 .90111 R -12 hp 1mi1111111 "11111 IIIIluu1 - • 4• �� Sia � 1 40p= j ��1111 Lam Medium Density Residential , Oi t. I - 01 111111111 t• eta— 11 11 . High Density Residential R -7 R -25 1/1 ►� ► = .1 ►ice : 111 1 11 9 Y . �rir e ra• �� .� m ��l1�u R I -12 ► ��� / /11 \�� ��r" Neighborhood Commercial \ IA r III r�lllll l►���,.. il i g �: ■ M mem 11∎0 i ti11 1 1 1 1 � *o 1111111 Open Space 0. III ` ;::•rnor,,e� p 1 0 1111111 eau umffi4 /1111 :% /1111111 Public Institution p El= )•111110111 11111111111 /1 .7 R-4.5 10u NI u 11 arum 1 /mu E J Tigard City Boundary -ors _. R -25 ant ! := = nm1 p n C 'm— illt ,� p C I Potential Zoning Boundary R -7 .- ■V r• al 1111 Slopes 25% II! r II r II I■■■■.1/-I, 4 — Existing Structure > $300k r ; :1 �:, = '••` Neighborhood Park l R�•5 .• 00 0 IMMII • ., - Community Park ` R -12 1 ` Taxlot Boundary N 1 �.� - `B . - , � IiLII 0 0.1 0.2 0. - _ II . 101 ■1■1/1101 �� 1 1 i 1 I 1 1 1 I C J i -v 111111111111 E � , : ]f.' mil I. ce - in 1 1111111111111 cu 11111 mown ;iv � ' _ - :II: C,`��� cc g11ff m■ �■Emu glaritil � , III � � anC � : ��II >, R -7 ' 1 I h 1 i i 11f, 1 :- �■■G►�i o � 0 R-4.5 1 . . 4 1 Illirr 7 1 i l l ifrri h — 1 01 * r 4 4 . 1. 4 ■ I ns 1 � '/� , � >is•1l ._ ��11I IUIfr�/ c_ i irei �R -7 i a Io / \ UflhI ■ mo :r1 ski 711111 k ■ - No ,li �_ 1 1111M : ii ■ ■ Analysis 1 is based on unit per acre assumptions and housing stock diversity 11 VMS 40 guidelines in the concept plan. The flexibility to zone low density areas with �11111 i 1■gl ' 111111: Tigard R -7 district aligns with the concept plan. This also allows the high density 1 areas to be zoned R -25 instead of R -40, while meeting the requirement - -- Beef Bend Rd II for the opportunity of 10 dwelling units /net developable acre. Potential Zoning - Analysis 2 ' TIGARO April 2013 -River Terrace Community Meeting ,,j imp- llgll� lean 11111111` ®.,., , \ �." ,,,,, � �,: . r ry R — il� • 11111 �' � �,��� �►� � ��I oils F_e UB ■ no �'• _ .isso .m e : [4;1; 111 IIVF 111 m j ' Tigard Comp Plan Designation �� r C 11111111 111 1111 ■ �� �■ ° � I or r / Oi nn11 Ili Low Density Residential - 11 r 1 \• . /�IIIIIIIg11 ��111111 �Illlluur �, R -25 T / 1 j�p �I � I I1 %1~II'IIi Med ium Density Residential �� ( pni 4 +III 11 111111111 l�J / ►Nig= I11 1 p 11 1111111 Hi h Densit Residenti Q Q R-4.5 1i� ►�q � Wean - 1, ■ g y L R -12 �� /n ■�� .v ; � • r ' ► 14/11W.* - I ron Neighborhood Commercial . �\ \ ��_. 11 /1111111►� In g \ N. �� 1 � 1111111 Open Space `: R -7 II wan 11! 11■r�I1D 1 1111 I/IOII - -- 11 ■/ �1�r� %IIIII %111111 Public Institution _ I 1 11 1111111111111 ill C 1 = GE p 11111111 111111 pi11 1 - 11111111 111111 ra m� 10 Tigard City Boundary • 1111 ' .. Itllt/l • -- �` R - - .1111 M - 1 ... r 1r... Still: ■ Potential Zoning Boundary i ti g .111111r t • . �' r� 11�11111n1 t - �, � rill- Slopes > 25% 4,.. II m 11yUr - = a; S�� nib _ Existing Structure > $300k �,;. ;1 � : :' -'� ''•� • i Neighborhood Park , ;� `* R-4.5 . . oli ,. � _Community Park , _ ,`,; R -12 ■ 4�rw■ ■■r �i Taxlot Boundary = ` ` l N I. _ �� /um Bull Mt Rd l ��ll61 0 0.1 0.2 0.. ` . mf =I= y1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 1 r 11 -o 1111x1 1111 BM , m� Miles v i fa re ■ 111111111111 ■ IN a,- � 1r ■ � • Ns r . ��a �� rl 7 — "// a o, •1111 ununnnl f � � // 11 :11: I � YIP/ a ■ / turn un imrs 11 �i1a /�■■■■■■ ■ = 76 >, I n t ! . „„ ii • /1 1 i I 1 liken �' : 0 . !! � � � 1 111111 ►I�� • I/ a n ■ e: : : ' ::: ►�i�1�is ■r.■' .::■■■■■■ ►� ��� 0 ■ .11 NI I 1 \ re 0 ■■ or, uu1�� pa' ■ , 1 11■ / R1_- rI !'•.I R7 l 1 � — - . ��� , p< 110■1111111111•A Alil u ' / ■ ►�,A10 I d 7 l_ IN I AA ■■M 10 -Mello � � Ni- h1111111\�m�' I I . . . �■ 1= 1/111= a ' 'Awl e / rte .�1 Analysis 2 is based on feedback received from the project TAC and SWG. , z • Extending the R -25 zoning up to Scholls Ferry Rd allowed more of Area 63 : hu i :hum ug11 1 to be R -4.5 around existing homes and a property with a significant r /110111/ ;iI 1 11 tree grove to be lowered to R -7. This option also meets the requirement == Beef Bend Rd r _____ for the opportunity of 10 dwelling units /net developable acre. Potential Zoning - Analysis 3 ' T ,, ;A , ; ,, April 2013 - River Terrace Community Meeting .I r um �.nm swan ®. ", r vg,-- ^till. s Feral Rd --- - I�1't� IIIf,� n 7 /:, � �� or Sch oll 11 UT, ■�� r — • ._.q� _l 2 t\• �1■111111 : : � � m■ ■■ ■ ■r►�p � � Tigard Comp Plan Designation - 2 In MI - 1 ■■ ■ — 11111 11 un 1111 9 P g Cii ao■ /1 . ■1 . p 111111 um ° Ir 04..01111111111 10111111 Low Density Residential ���'I R -25 ' J i ■ �■ ■n 111 1I mom Densit Residential L %mom 1,4 - _ j: �� 111' 111 i ii 11 11 Density Nil l m�nl I R-4.5 j ��jj u ►j. .1111111 High Density Residential t 12 415 ■�� �� spun /II 11,07,6, I ■ ■i -- um Neighborhood Commercial MN ■ ■►► ii1111111► �� oid- ' ' • Hi ■i ■�om1111 --- 'woo WWI Open Space � p ■■■ ■■r•��� __ 11m11 R - ? , 1 / ■■ ■ ■ ■ \�0/1111 �����1111 Public Inst � � �, �. '� nmo ,1111111111111 1111111111111 Public n O ue i:Z11111111 HOU °N/, In ■ . ■C 1111111 111 1111 C ��'r Tigard City Boun dary R-4O m . .1 III�I = m I -,.1... r�t'� ` = C _ Potential Zoning Boundary pal i■ •�' ms, A� c 11111111111111 ai m.' = Slopes > 25% 11:1 1 I i : = 1 -: k : Existing Structure > $300k w, ". Al , — Neighborhood Park III MU i � • / 111111 1. / �� � Community Park R-4.5 ∎l — �,� a■ AN . Taxlot Bounda 11. N IN - =— - -.. �_ ` Bull Mt Rd .1111.1.11 0 0.1 0.2 0. • Will/ ` J l 1111 .�. [TTTfTTTTTTl �� l i i I i i l r J ■ -a 11..11111111 ! 1 jI Miles V; II il IN 0 V2 1 T 1 nl amnion :� • �� t� / ��� a - -.. o° 41 11 iuiuininl m O. .p 2 Ma rsl rIi .,; ' nun misusing ■ /����mum = ml- = vim y—. :u. X11■ ■■■■sr � � �/ ..• man : ��II re r, e c !�: 1g, [! U Iii � �� t �� � � I I I I 11 1111111_ ► / p/ 04 ■ Ml , • 10°4' I M I PM MIMI � R -12 ��� R -7 �' R-4.5 I • • 4 , , o< tf \\iI11■■ //I •-• ger NE ..,., . ._ ca • Irv NI' 141 I Tr, ' Irm, _ ._ IN taffrailli �i �. III . 1� ii ■ IMmarliM 11111` ` MIL h mg Analysis 3 is based on feedback received from the project TAC and SWG. ,11;1 j Providing R -40 zoning in proximity to the commercial area will help in its alums j1s■111 success. This allows for more of Area 63 to be R -4.5 and keep lower ■1111111111111/411111111111111:11111111: 1 11�■�� ;1s 1 1 densities around additional existing homes . This option also meets the Beef Bend Rd� requirement for the opportunity of 10 dwelling units /net developable acre. li • City of Ti ard g ' River Terrace Online Survey Results T ICi. I) The survey form that was available for the April 11, 2013 community meeting was also posted online. The survey was open for two weeks following the meeting. The results are found on the following pages. I Q1 Please rate how closely each map represents your understanding of the Community Plan land use vision. Answered: 27 Skipped: 0 Analysis 1 Analysis 2 Analysis 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 Disappointing (no label) (no label) (no label) Exceptional Total Average Rating Analysis 1 34.62% 11.54% 19.23% 15.38% 19.23% 9 3 5 4 5 26 2.73 Analysis 2 44.44% 11.11% 7.41% 29.63% 7.41% 12 3 2 8 2 27 2.44 Analysis 3 59.26% 11.11% 11.11% 3.70% 14.81% 16 3 3 1 4 27 2.04 Q2 Which map do you prefer? Answered: 20 Skipped: 7 Analysis 1 Analysis 2 Analysis 3 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Answer Choices Responses Analysis 1 50% 10 Analysis 2 25% 5 Analysis 3 25% 5 Total Respondents: 20 Other (please specify) ( 5 ) # Other (please specify) Date 1 None 4/16/2013 4:59 PM 2 none are all that appealing to be honest, WA county never listened to what we thought the first time 4/16/2013 2:04 PM so it should come as no surprise that we still don't like the density and the lack of thought on the increased impact on traffic especially in area 63 where the new school site is. 3 lower density in area 63 4/16/2013 1:50 PM 4 Trully none. We do not like the density of our neighborhood as is and believe that all of area 63 should 4/16/2013 1:48 PM be no more than R4.5, otherwise the helathybalance and quality of the neighborhood is irreperably compromised (no real yards or private space, as a lack of building size restrictions and small lots decrease the quality of our neighborhoods) making a more reasoanble /private lot a thing only wealthier folks can afford. 5 All are unacceptable. 4/16/2013 12:22 PM Q3 Why do you prefer this map? Answered: 25 Skipped: 2 Responses Date 1 As a resident next to area 64, I have concems that the bulk of density is in 64. I have concems over 4/27/2013 4:39 PM increased traffic in my existing neighborhood, children safety and well - it's just not fair - look at the map - all the congestion will be in area 64. 2 avoids higher density. spreads our density more evenly between north and south 4/27/2013 11:11 AM 3 The houses in Scholl's Country Estates fit better with low density houses...not town homes or 4/26/2013 5:31 PM apartments. 4 It is lower density and compliments the community and home owners that will be impacted by this 4/26/2013 3:38 PM development and the wetlands that will also feel the adjustments. 5 Concemed about traffic, children safety and overall faimess 4/26/2013 1:56 PM 6 We live in Scholls Country Estates off of Roshak, adjacent to Area 64. We strongly believe that Tigard 4/26/2013 1:41 PM should zone the apartments planned in Area 64 R -25. R -40, up to 4 story apartments, simply stated would be an eye sore and would create a major traffic concem for our neighborhood. Area 63 literally has half of the density as Area 64 - this is because our neighborhood and all areas adjacent to Area 64 was unrepresented in the Washington County process. There is no reason why some of the density cannot be spread to Area 63 by increasing a small portion of their zoning from R -4 to R -7. The new development in Area 63 has less of an incentive to traverse through existing neighborhoods to access major arterials - they simply would go to Beef Bend Road and then to Roy Rogers or the 99. Conversely, the development in Area 64 has a greater incentive and quite frankly would be encouraged to traverse through existing neighborhoods (our neighborhood) to access Barrows and Scholls Ferry Road. Our neighborhood cannot support this traffic and it would be dangerous for families living along Roshak and on the streets intended as "cut throughs." In short - spread the density and zone the apartments in Area 64 R -25 and do not make it any larger than Analysis 1. 7 We live in Scholls Country Estates off of Roshak, adjacent to Area 64. We have been made aware that 4/25/2013 1:16 PM there are 2 possible analyses being considered with 2 zoning options for the Apartments in Area 64 - either R -25 or R -40. We strongly believe that Tigard should zone the apartments R -25. R -40, up to 4 story apartments, simply stated would be an eye sore and would create a major traffic concem for our neighborhood. Area 63 literally has half of the density as Area 64 - this is because our neighborhood was not properly represented in the first go around. There is no reason why some of the density cannot be spread to Area 63 by increasing a small portion of their zoning from R -4 to R -7. The development in Area 63 has less of an incentive to traverse through existing neighborhoods to access major arterials - they simply would go to Beef Bend Road and then to Roy Rogers or the 99. Conversely, the development in Area 64 has a greater incentive and quite frankly would be encouraged to traverse through existing neighborhoods (our neighborhood) to access Barrows and Scholls Ferry Road. In short - spread the density and zone the apartments in Area 64 R -25. 8 put population around the commercial property so it is convenient for them to walk to. 4/24/2013 9:58 PM 9 For commercial center to prosper, increase density is good. Progress Ridge has many condo all 4/24/2013 9:41 PM around the lake and it is packed with customers 10 Analysis 1 is closest to the Concept plan in terms of density. Even Analysis 1 has 2x the density in Area 4/24/2013 2:40 PM 64 than in Area 63. The infrastructure planned will not support the density which is even worse in Analysis 2 and 3 and it does not align with the goal of integration with existing neighborhoods stated in the plan. 11 Better concentration in /around commercial areas and decreased density along SW 150th. 4/24/2013 9:07 AM 12 There would be more high density along Roy Rogers, a main arterial which is already in place, versus 4/24/2013 8:51 AM adding traffic through our neighborhood and adding the eye sore of tall apt. complexes. 13 It seems most consistent with the existing development in the area 4/22/2013 9:17 PM 14 Prefer R -12 to R -25 in Northern portion. 4/19/2013 9:56 AM 15 No R40 zoning and the Northwest corner is more consistent and less broken up with different 4/18/2013 9:53 AM densities (R4.5 eliminated and R7 used in the combined area). vacs 16 We live in Scholls Country Estates off of Roshak, adjacent to Area 64. We have been made aware that 4/17/2013 10:02 AM there are 2 possible analyses being considered with 2 zoning options for the Apartments in Area 64 - either R -25 or R -40. We strongly believe that Tigard should zone the apartments R -25. R -40, up to 4 story apartments, simply stated would be an eye sore and would create a major traffic concem for our neighborhood. Area 63 literally has half of the density as Area 64 - this is because our neighborhood was not properly represented in the first go around. There is no reason why some of the density cannot be spread to Area 63 by increasing a small portion of their zoning from R -4 to R -7. The development in Area 63 has less of an incentive to traverse through existing neighborhoods to access major arterials - they simply would go to Beef Bend Road and then to Roy Rogers or the 99. Conversely, the development in Area 64 has a greater incentive and quite frankly would be encouraged to traverse through existing neighborhoods (our neighborhood) to access Barrows and Scholls Ferry Road. In short - spread the density and zone the apartments in Area 64 R -25. 17 Concentrates highest density development near commerical & preserves lower density development 4/16/2013 8:08 PM in accor with natural areas & existing development. 18 None 4/16/2013 4:59 PM 19 Better balance - - - -no R -40 4/16/2013 4:55 PM 20 Don't prefer any of them 4/16/2013 2:04 PM 21 None 4/16/2013 1:50 PM 22 None of the maps really address the issue of density that is too high in area 63, especially when you 4/16/2013 1:48 PM consider the heavy burden placed on 161st ave. While roads take years to be developed, the school site and all the housing will put a tremendous pressure on those living in Meyers farm, decreasing quality of life, increasing traffic, risk to children who currently have no where else to play other than the street (since density was so high and builders are not forced to build smaller houses, and no green space was required) accidents and injuries to children and families will occur. 23 larger boundary of low density housing in r4 4/16/2013 1:02 PM 24 None of the maps are acceptable. 4/16/2013 12:22 PM 25 Outlet for the school distric traffic on the NE side of their plot means a more balanced flow of traffic. 4/16/2013 12:21 PM Q4 How could this concept be improved? Answered: 17 Skipped: 10 Responses Date 1 move commerciaVhigher density areas more south or on west side of Roy Rogers Road. 4/27/2013 11:11 AM 2 Please do not attempt to change Luke Lane from a cul -d -sac to a through street. It will significantly 4/26/2013 5:31 PM diminish livability on Luke Lane and other streets. 3 Still do not agree that Area 64 should be 2x the density of Area 63 ? ?? Seems incredibly unfair. 4/26/2013 3:38 PM 4 Same thing - spread some of the density to Area 63. It is unfair that Area 64 has been burdened with 2 4/26/2013 1:41 PM times the density as Area 63 just because we were unrepresented in the initial process. Area 63 can handle traffic just as easily as Area 64. 5 Do not zone for any apartments around Roshak Road. All apartment complexes should be zoned for 4/25/2013 1:16 PM the Roy Rogers area, as that would have far less impact on the community in terms of property values, quality of life, safety of children, and traffic. 6 Dog park is need 4/24/2013 9:58 PM 7 If you need more density to meet Metro requirements push it south or west -- across Roy Rogers or 4/24/2013 2:40 PM extended further towards Beef Bend. The is the more equitable approach for existing neighborhoods contiguous to Area 64 that are zoned R -4. 8 Expand R -7 and reduce /eliminate R -12 along Bull Mtn /Roy Rogers 4/24/2013 9:07 AM 9 By removing the comer of 4.5 density. 4/24/2013 8:51 AM 10 1) No 4 -story appartments - No R40 in Area 64 2) Spread some density from Area 64 to Area 63 for 4/18/2013 9:53 AM better balance. 11 Zoning Analysis is comprehensive & fair. 4/16/2013 8:08 PM 12 The neighborhood commerical area should be relocated to the West side of Roy Rogers. Replace the 4/16/2013 4:59 PM CG area on the East side with medium density housing. 13 best solution -- -move on! 4/16/2013 4:55 PM 14 Lower density 4/16/2013 1:50 PM 15 Make all R7 land in area 63 no more than R4.5. 4/16/2013 1:48 PM 16 It appears that whereever there are active farm /vineyard properties as well as estate property, you 4/16/2013 12:22 PM have dropped 'park" or "public institution" items. Hence what the developers can't buy, you will condemn through eminent domain. Right? 17 Less 4/16/2013 12:21 PM Q5 Please share any additional comments or suggestions. Answered: 11 Skipped: 16 Responses Date 1 Love the park and open space in area 64!!! Since the neighborhood next to area 64 was created 4/27/2013 4:39 PM without any park or anything (not counting the jungle gym on barrows), this is highly appreciated. 2 The Commerical area would be more successful if it had immediate road access and visibility. Not be 4/27/2013 11:11 AM tucked behind residential buildings. Adding more curves and dropping the speed limit on Roy Rogers needs to occur. 3 We are concemed and extremely worried about the additional traffic that will bring to our 4/26/2013 3:38 PM neighborhood. Our children safety is our number one concern. We are also concemed that 2 of the 3 choices seem abhorrently unthoughtful of the existing homeowners and looks only to development for financial reasons. (This is obvious in all plans regarding the density of area 64 versus area 63.) There could be an opportunity to add value to our homes but we can't find this in plan 2 or 3 for certain. Plan 1 is our best option. 4 Someone should look into inviting the YMCA to locate in the shopping center planned - that would be 4/26/2013 1:41 PM a perfect anchor and would fill a huge need we have for this area. !called them and they are looking to add a YMCA in Tigard - why not there? More shopping stores alone are going to have a hard time at succeeding - we have seen this with the shopping center at Barrows /Scholls Ferry Road. It has never been full and has had business after business fail. 5 Please, please do not put apartments in our peaceful neighborhood! We chose to purchase a house 4/25/2013 1:16 PM in Scholls Country Estates for the quality of life it offered to raise our family. 6 Exceptional planning work all around; however it ultimately tums out will be fine. 4/24/2013 9:07 AM 7 Placing all high density in 64 creates a traffic nightmare. With the addition of Churchill Forest, traffic will 4/19/2013 9:56 AM congest at Scholls and Barrows which already has difficulty asndling the flow. It will also incrfease traffic on Barrows which is not adequate today. 63 should have a greater proportion of high density. 8 Once Potential Zoning plan is finalized, add expected transportation grid concepts. 4/16/2013 8:08 PM 9 161st in area 63 is already a dangerous and people drive fast while kids play in the street. Adding a 4/16/2013 2:04 PM couple hundred homes, a school and athletic fields will have people driving up and down 161st at all hours, especially since no other roads will be built in the urban reserve area for many years. The burden of increased density will fall squarely on the poor folks who live in Meyers farm. Not equitable at all, while the folks in the pleasant view neighborhood , benefit from lower density next to them as well as no through streets. Meyers farm residents shouldn't have to be represented by an attorney, like three folks on finis lane are, in order to be heard. 10 Please, take an honest and closer look at the impact these zoning decisions will have on the existing 4/16/2013 1:48 PM residents in Meyers farm, especially along 161st. Without proper planning and forethought, you will end up decreasing the livability of this neighborhood. At a minimum, expand the R4.5 area and implement permanent and substantial traffic calming measures onr 161st, especially between Kessler and bull mountain (especially here because the topo that has as a result the increases the speed of traffic) 11 This was a bad idea 6 years ago. It is still a bad idea today. The area does NOT need more housing. 4/16/2013 12:22 PM especially high density housing where there will be NO transit.