02/06/2013 - Packet • Completeness
Review for Boards,
Commissions and
Committee Records
CITY OF TIGARD
TTAC—Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee
Name of Board, Commission or Committee
February G,2013
Date of Meeting
C.L.Wiley
Print Name
Signature
4/29/13
Date
e
' City of Tigard
Transportation Advisory Committee Agenda
MEETING DATE/TIME: February 6, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Library, 2nd Floor Conference Room
1) Call to order Steve 6:30
Roll Call Chris
Approval of January 9 Meeting Summary Steve
Visitor Comment Steve
2) TTAC officer elections Staff/All 6:50
Action Item: Elect 2013 TTAC officers
3) TTAC Bylaws Review and Update Steve 7:15
Action Item: Create subcommittee
14) SW Corridor Plan Update* Judith 7:30
5) Update on potential local transit improvements* Judith 8:00
Jobs Access and Reverse Commute QARC)
6) Other Updates* Mike/All 8:15
7) Adjourn Steve 8:30
Supporting materials/handouts
January 9 meeting summary
*Materials available at the meeting.
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA — February 6, 2013
City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of I
TTAC Tentative Future Agenda Items
JANUARY 2013 JULY 2013
**Joint meeting with Council
FEBRUARY 2013 AUGUST 2013
New TTAC officer elections
TTAC Bylaws Update—subcommittee
MARCH 2013 SEPTEMBER 2013
Joint meeting with Ped Bike Subcommittee **CIP Project ranking
APRIL 2013 OCTOBER 2013
**Input on Council Goals
MAY 2013 NOVEMBER 2013
**CIP Project ranking
JUNE 2013 DECEMBER 2013
**GIP Project ranking
** Recurring topic; tentative date
PARKING LOT—TTAC INTEREST AREAS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION
• Transit service improvements; coordinate w TriMet (expected 2013)
• Incremental project improvements / Funding strategies
V
Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee [TTAC] Summary
Wednesday, February 06, 2013, 6:30 PM— 8:30 PM
Tigard Library, 2nd floor conference room, 13500 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, Oregon
1) Call to order Chair Bass called the meeting to order at 6:39 p.m.
a. Roll Call —meeting secretary Chris Wiley recorded the roll.
Members Present (8): Steven Bass (Chair), Mark Bogert, Evelyn Murphy, Dennis
Mitchell,Jennifer Stanfield, Mike Stevenson, Don Schmidt, George Hetu.
Members Absent (1): Karen Hughart (Vice-Chair)
Guests Present (2): Marc Woodard, Council Liaison and Elise Shearer, City
'Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) Liaison.
Staff Present (3): Judith Gray, Senior Transportation Planner, Michael McCarthy,
Sr. Project Engineer; and Chris Wiley, St. Administrative Specialist.
b. Approval of January 9 Meeting Summary — unanimously approved by all TTAC
members present.
c. Visitor Comment- None
2) TTAC officer elections —Action Item: Elect 2013 TTAC officers
a. Mike McCarthy passed out ballots and asked the members to nominate members they
would like to see serve as Chair or Vice Chair. If members wanted to, they could
write in their own names to volunteer to serve in one of the positions. Judith Gray
noted that Karen Hughart, current Vice Chair, was unable to attend tonight but had
indicated that she is willing to serve another year as Vice Chair, but not as Chair.
b. Steve Bass was the only nominee for Chair and accepted the position for another year.
Evelyn Murphy and Karen Hughart were nominated as Vice Chair. Karen Hughart
was elected to serve as vice chair for another year.
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES—February 6,2013
City of Tigard 113125 SW1 Hall Blvd, Tigard OR 97223 503-6394171 1 www.4 and-orLov Page 1 of4
3) TTAC Bylaws Review and Update —Action Item: A subcommittee from TTAC needs to
assemble to work on the review and update. Steve Bass asked for volunteers to work with
him on the subcommittee. He said members could notify him by email if they are interested
in participating in the review. Steve said Karen Hughart has said she will assist with the
review. A lot of the work can be done by email. Evelyn Murphy also volunteered.
4) SW Corridor Plan Update —Judith Gray (Attachment 1)
a. Judith provided the packet materials to the TTAC members that will be presented to
the SW Corridor Plan Steering Committee members on Monday, February 11, 2013.
The Steering Committee will consider five alternative "project bundles" to move
ahead for further analysis. Later in the process Gune) they may decide to combine
elements of multiple project bundles together.
b. In response to concerns about specific individual roadway projects, Judith explained
that the Steering Committee adopted a charter accepting an obligation to work
together, but that there will still be a need for negotiation and compromise and mutual
support. This is the steering committee's opportunity to look at things
comprehensively and see how they support each other. If any TTAC members are
able to attend the meeting, it is scheduled to take place at the Beaverton Library.
Judith plans to give an update to the TTAC members each month as the committee
progresses. She asked the TTAC members to let her know if they have any comments
or concerns about information in the packet. Both Judith and Mike McCarthy
encouraged the TTAC members to provide input. Judith will update city council on
February 19, to go over the steering committee's process and to report on anything
that comes out of the Steering Committee meeting on the 11th.
5) Update on potential local transit improvements—jobs Access and Reverse Commute QARC)
a. TriMet administers a federal grant program called JARC. Tigard has been asked by
TriMet to put in an application requesting TriMet provide a connection from downtown
Tigard to the Triangle area at 72nd and Bonita and then on to Bridgeport and downtown
Tualatin. The funding is for one year. TriMet is providing the local match to the federal
funds.
b. TriMet believes the service could be successful and would seek to provide continuing
support. The grant begins July 1 and targeted service would begin sometime in the fall of
this year. There will be more community outreach to refine route, stops, service
schedules, etc. This would be incorporated into the Westside Service Enhancement work
that TriMet will be working on with Tigard later this year.
c. The committee's key concern was that the initial suggestion was to propose 8 hours of
weekday service to this area. There is concern about whether or not 8 hours of service
will be enough to make the plan successful. Employees in service sector jobs in the area
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES—February 6,2013
Cae of Tigard 13125 SWI Had!Blvd, Tigard OIC 97223 503-639-411 www.0 rd-gL oi 1Pqge2of4
leave for work early, can spent an hour or more in transit time, average nine hour shifts
and spend another hour or more in transit return time. Judith proposed an alternative
approach: initially ask for 12-14 hours;work with TriMet to determine the best availability
and use of JARC and possibly other resources. Judith will prepare a one-page report for
TriMet which is due to them by Monday, February 11. Then,Judith will seek to schedule
a special TTAC meeting with TriMet to discuss the proposal.
d. February 28th is the day the final application is due. Selection will be made in March
or April.
6) Other Updates
a. Judith and Carissa will not be able to attend the regularly scheduled March meeting.
The next regular TTAC meeting will take place on April 6.
b. Mike McCarthy updated the committee on street projects.
1. The State is doing a project to do sidewalk improvements and signal equipment
replacement at Pacific Highway 99W and Oregon Route 217.
2. There is another state project to add a southbound right-turn lane from Pacific
Highway 99W onto Beef Bend Road.
3. In the spring, the city will oversee crack sealing all through Tigard, about 20 miles
of streets.
4. Walmart is planning to get started on their street improvements for their project
fairly soon. They are presently in the process of getting the required permits.
Walmart hopes to open in the fall before the holiday shopping season begins. Their
project will add signals on Dartmouth St, a southbound lane on Pacific Highway 99W
and a northbound lane on SW 72nd Avenue through the Hwy 217 interchange. The
existing signal at 72nd Ave and Hampton Street will be removed. A signal will be
installed at the new Walmart location across the street from the WinCo entrance.
5. The city will be working on a capital project add sidewalks through the narrow
section of SW 72nd Avenue at the same time that Walmart is working to install a signal
at the SW 72ndAvenue and SW Dartmouth Street intersection.
6. The city will be adding a sidewalk next to Tigard High School on SW 92nd Avenue,
beginning at SW Waverly Drive down the hill to Cook Park. The project will start in
July after the Balloon Festival.
7. The city will do slurry sealing this summer on about 12 miles of streets this year and
pavement overlays on approximately another 3 miles of streets.
8. There is a state project coming up to make safety improvements at the intersection
of Pacific Hwy 99W with SW Fischer Road and the Royal Villas Manufactured Home
Park. As part of that, more people will have to be u-turning up at SW Durham Road
so part of the project will add streetlights at the Pacific Highway 99W and Durham
Road intersection.
9. Dennis Mitchell, who is an engineer for ODOT, provided an update on ODOT
plans for improvements to Oregon Route 217. ODOT will finish re-paving 217 and
adding some shoulders. The repaving is from Tualatin Valley Highway south. For
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES—February 6,2013
City of Tigard J 13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigav d OR 97223 503-6394171 1 wwvr�ard-or�kov I Page 3 of 4
inXnt response, there will be some narrow shoulders added. There will also be some
sigm cant technological pieces such as Variable Message Signage (VMS), an advisory
speed system, and arterial signs leading to the freeway systems_ It's a huge project.
The contractor wants to be finished with everything by August. Mike McCarthy told
the committee members 217 carries more traffic per through-lane than any other
highway in the state except for Interstate 5 through the Rose Quarter.
10. In 2014, construction will begin on the Highway 99W/Gaarde/McDonald
intersection project.
11. Construction on SW Walnut Street (Tiedeman to 116th) and at its intersection SW
135th Avenue is planned for 2015.
12. The Main Street project will start up this year as well_ Street improvements will
begin with utility work on the southwest portion of Main Street beginning at the
railroad crossing to the southwest intersection of Main with Highway 99W. This part
of the Main Street project will be completed in 2014.
7) The meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
Chris W' ey,TTAC tary
ATTEST: Steven Bass, Chair
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES—February 6,2013
Cezy of Tigard 113125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard OR 97223 503-6394171 1 Lumww.Aa rd-oraov Paoe 4 of 4
600 NE Grand Ave. www.oregonmetro.gov
Portland,OR 97232-2736
Metro I Agenda
Meeting: SW Corridor Plan Steering Committee
Date: February 11, 2013
Time: 9:30 to 11:30 a.m.
Place: Beaverton Library, Room A
Objective: Consider adopting five project bundles for evaluation and public discussion
as a major milestone towards selecting a preferred shared investment
strategy for the Southwest Corridor in June 2013.
9:30 a.m. Welcome and introductions Co-chairs Dirksen &Stacey
9:40 a.m. Project partner updates All
1-2 minute updates from project partners to share information related to the
Southwest Corridor Plan.
ACTION ITEM
9:50 a.m. Consideration of the Steering Committee meeting Co-chair Dirksen
summary from January 14, 2013 ACTION REQUESTED
INFORMATION./DISCUSSION ITEM
9:55 a.m. Decision review: February and June Co-chair Dirksen
Brief overview of the decision under consideration today and the shared
investment strategy decision in June. Highlight the sequence of milestone
decisions through June.
ACTION ITEM
10:05 a.m. Project bundles for evaluation Malu Wilkinson, Leila Aman, Metro
Overview of the following elements:
1. Processfor developing thefive project bundles(each bundle includes a
representative transit alignment and complementary roadway and active
transportation projects thatsupport the land use vision),
2. The evaluation approach, and
3. Next steps for moving towards a preferred strategy.
ACTION REQUESTED: Confirmation of the five project bundles for
evaluation and public review
3
SW CORRIDOR STEERING COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 11,2013 9:30 TO 11:30 A.M.
INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEM
11:05 a.m. Spring engagement overview Karen Withrow, Metro
Upcoming public engagement opportunities on the five project bundles and
selection of a preferred investment strategy to support the Southwest Corridor
land use vision.
11:20 a.m. Public Comment
11:30 a.m. Next meetings and adjourn Co-chair Dirksen
Next meetings:
April 8,2013, 9:30 to 11:30 am, Tualatin Police Department
• Review and discuss complementary policies and programs to support the corridor
land use vision, including:
o Green investments
o Economic development strategies
O Housing strategies
o Policy changes
May 13, 2013, 9.30 to 11:30 a.m., Metro Council Chambers
• Review and discuss evaluation results and provide guidance on determining a
preferred investment strategy
• Discuss implementation for preferred shared investment strategy
June 10,2013, 9:30 to 11:30 a.m., Tigard Library
• Consider adoption of a preferred shared investment strategy and implementation
plan for the Southwest Corridor
o Southwest Corridor Plan: includes implementing actions for land use,policy
changes, development incentives, parks and nature projects
O Southwest Transportation Plan: a set of prioritized projects that support the
land use vision for roadway and active transportation and a general direction
for transit
o Southwest Corridor Transit Alternatives Analysis: defines direction for an
investment in high capacity transit (one mode or two?,general alignment
location?,potential station locations?) including a description of next steps
and when to begin work
Materials for 2/11 meeting:
• Project bundle process memo
• Transit alternative maps
• Transportation map book
• Spring calendar
• 1/14 meeting summary
2
is� H V :-Ml�IO,90Y
I:
S— 1-a lil:
TW
klettt) I MeetingSutznnaiy
Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee
Monday,January 14, 2013
9:30 to 11:30 a.m.
Metro Council Chamber, 600 NE Grand Ave, Portland, OR 97232
Committee Members Present
Craig Dirksen, Co-chair Metro Council
Bob Stacey,Co-chair Metro Council
Bill Middleton City of Sherwood
Neil McFarlane Trimet
Loretta Smith Multnomah County
Lou Ogden City of Tualatin
Jason Tell Oregon Department of Transportation
Gery Schirado City of Durham
Roy Rogers Washington County
Denny Doyle City of Beaverton
Donna Jordan City of Lake Oswego
Committee Members Excused
Denny Doyle City of Beaverton
John Cook City of Tigard
Charlie Hales City of Portland
Suzan Turley City of King City
Alternate Members Present
Joseph Zehnder City of Portland
Marland Henderson City of Tigard
Metro Staff
Elissa Gertler, Malu Wilkinson, Catherine Ciarlo, Karen Withrow, Matt Bihn,Anthony Buczek,
Clifford Higgins, Robin McArthur, Leila Aman, Emma Fredieu,Tim Collins, Erin O'Reilly
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 1
1.0 Welcome and introductions
Co-chair Craig Dirksen,Metro Councilor,welcomed steering committee and audience
members,and asked the committee members to introduce themselves.After introductions,
Co-chair Dirksen expressed excitement for the next six months of the SW Corridor Plan and
looked forward to working together with the communities of the SW Corridor.He noted
that the steering committee would take action on five different shared investment strategy
alternatives on February llm,and that staff would work to review those alternatives with
the public.Co-chair Dirksen then asked for project updates from each jurisdiction.
Ms.Donna Jordan,City of Lake Oswego,informed the committee that the citizens of Lake
Oswego passed a$5 million bond measure for Boones Ferry Road improvements.
Mr.Joe Zehnder,City of Portland,explained that Portland's Barbur Boulevard concept plan
would be submitted the Planning and Sustainability Commission for review in February.
Mr.Neil McFarlane,TriMet,reported that TriMet,partnering with many of the SW Corridor
communities,submitted Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
applications to ODOT for improvements along Barbur Boulevard and 99W.He expressed his
enthusiasm for working together to implement practical improvements to the corridor.
Mr.Roy Rogers,Washington County,also reported on Washington County's participation in
the STIP applications,and explained that Washington County would be partnering with
King City to improve sidewalk connectivity.
Mayor Denny Doyle,City of Beaverton,informed the committee that he would be giving an
update on the SW Corridor Plan to the Beaverton City Council in February.
Ms.Julia Hajduk,City of Sherwood,described updates to the Sherwood town center plan,
She explained that planners had evaluated three alternatives and that there would be an
open house on January 17 to discuss the alternatives with the public.
Mayor Lou Ogden, City of Tualatin,reported on the agreement for an alignment for a
connection between 124th and Boones Ferry Road.He noted that the agreement was an
historic accomplishment between the jurisdictions involved.
Mr.Marland Henderson,City of Tigard,explained that plans for River Terrace were moving
forward and that the City of Tigard had applied for a grant to study the Tigard triangle.
Mr.Jason Tell,ODOT,explained that ODOT would narrow the STIP applications between
now and March,and would have a set of recommendations to the State of Oregon regarding
who to award STIP funds to by the end of the summer.Mr.Tell also discussed the value of
low cost investments in the corridor and encouraged the committee to look for
opportunities for implementable projects,such as bus shelter or sidewalk improvements.
He added that ODOT was looking for partners to work with to fund these low cost projects.
2.0 Consideration of the Steering Committee meeting summary from November
26,2012
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 2
Co-chair Dirksen asked the committee to consider the meeting summary from November
26,2012.Ms.Jordan motioned to approve the meeting summary.Mr. Rogers seconded Ms.
Jordan's motion.With no members opposed,the committee voted to approve the November
26, 2012 meeting summary.
3.0 Major milestones/next six months and beyond
Co-chair Dirksen highlighted the accomplishments of the committee thus far and the
decisions to be made moving forward.He noted the agreed upon plan charter and the
shared vision for the corridor the committee had established.Co-chair Dirksen praised the
strategy of assembling local plans together for an overall vision of the corridor,rather than
starting from scratch to generate a list of necessary projects.He argued that this strategy
allowed communities to feel ownership over the SW Corridor plan and explained that the
steering committee would use the shared vision to choose the shared investment strategies
in the near future.
Mr.Rogers wondered if the SW Corridor Plan would integrate other studies in Washington
County,such as a corridor study in Hillsboro,and if other considerations were necessary to
include before June 2013.He expressed concern over the choice between integrating plans
from throughout Washington County or continuing to use the current defined plan area.
Co-chair Dirksen agreed that the committee should be aware of the studies throughout
Washington County,and noted that the committee included community members from
throughout the county for that reason.He argued,however,that a plan area and focus is
necessary for the SW Corridor Plan to succeed,
Ms.Jordan questioned how corridor studies in the region would be prioritized for funding.
She wondered if plans would be funded one at a time, or if funding would be distributed.Mr.
Rogers agreed with Ms.Jordan but was unsure as to how plans would be prioritized.
Mayor Doyle advocated for continuing with the current plan area for the SW Corridor.
Mr.Tell believed that the limited capacity for funding in the region meant that the
committee should be aspirational about its plans but should also be careful to develop
projects that can be implemented.Co-chair Bob Stacey,Metro Councilor,agreed with Mr.
Tell and argued that the SW Corridor Plan should include small,medium,and aspirational-
sized projects.
4.0 Shape SW results
Ms. Karen Withrow,Metro,presented an overview of the Shape SW tool results
(presentation included in the meeting packet).She briefed the committee on the number of
participants of the online survey tool,and how the participants identified the key places in
the SW Corridor.She also outlined how participants ranked the importance of certain
factors in the survey(safety,quality of life,access,equity,etc.).
Mr.Rogers asked how the survey defined the relationship of the participants to the
corridor.Withrow responded that she could send out a more detailed breakdown of the
survey responses to answer his question.
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 3
Mr.Tell noted that two-thirds of the respondents lived in Portland.He wondered if their
responses were similar to the one-third of respondents who did not live in Portland.Ms.
Withrow responded that she would send out more detailed information regarding
responses by location.
5.0 Transit options
Mr.Alan Lehto,TriMet presented five high capacity transit(HCT)alignment alternatives
(included in the meeting packet) to the committee and emphasized that the alignments
should be considered early drafts and are not final.He added that the components of the
alignments could be mixed and matched and noted that the committee would not be locked
into any alignments or decisions on the alignments at this time.Mr.Lehto also explained
that TriMet would work to determine how the background transit network would relate to
the five HCT alternatives.He asked the committee for an assurance that SW Corridor staff
should continue to develop the alternatives.
Mr.Lehto introduced Mr.James McGrath,CH2MHill,who provided an overview of each of
the five alignment alternatives and opened up his presentation to questions from the
committee.
Referencing the Bus Rapid Transit(BRT)to Sherwood alignment,Ms.Jordan asked if staff
would be looking to developing a connection between Kruse Way and the BRT route.Mr.
Lehto responded that the hub-and-spoke model could provide for a connection or there
might he a local transit alternative to and from Lake Oswego.He noted that TriMet would
review the background transit network to identify needs such as a connection to Lake
Oswego.
Mayor Ogden wondered about the level of analysis staff used to develop the five alignments,
and how viable the alternatives would be for implementation.Mr.McGrath responded that
the next step in developing the alignments is to determine details such as available right-of-
way,grade,freight needs,etc.,that would influence implementation.Mr.Lehto clarified that
jurisdictional staff had worked through high-level considerations to determine the current
routes of the alignments.
Regarding the BRT to Tualatin alignment,Mayor Ogden asked why the route differed from
the BRT to Sherwood alignment.Mr.McGrath explained that staff wanted to illustrate as
many options as possible for the alignments,and that the routes could be mixed and
matched.
Referencing the BRT hub and spoke alignment,Co-chair Stacey requested more detail as to
how the system would operate.Mr.Lehto responded that each of the branches of the system
would share a certain number of the total buses running on the system per hour,based on
demand and ridership. He explained that each bus line would travel from down the main
spine of the system and out along one of the branches.Mr. Lehto also explained that the
branches could be local service bus lines connecting at the hub transit center in Tigard.He
added that a grid transit network is most efficient for cross-corridor travel.
Mayor Ogden asked if the hub and spoke system might include connections between
communities that are not attached to the hub.Mr.McGrath replied that the committee could
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting summary 4
mix and match the five alignment alternatives to form a hub and spoke system that includes
additional BRT or local connections.
Ms.Jordan commented that the hub and spoke alignment would allow residents of Portland
to travel to employment areas in the SW Corridor.
Regarding the light rail transit(LRT) to Tigard alignment, Mayor Ogden requested
clarification if the committee had preserved an LRT to Tualatin alignment for further study
when screening the potential transit projects.Ms.Wilkinson responded that the committee
had not eliminated LRT to Tualatin as a transit option in the corridor,and noted that orange
lines on the alignment maps included an LRT route to Tualatin.
Co-chair Stacey asked if staff would study ridership on the orange lines when analyzing the
alignment options further.Mr.Lehto explained that the red lines on the maps would go
through a full regional demand model for analysis,but the orange lines would be studied in
a more qualitative manner.Ms.Wilkinson added that staff will provide further analysis on
whichever option best reflects the shared vision of the corridor,as chosen by the steering
committee in June 2013.
Mr.Zehnder wondered if Mr.Lehto expected to see a difference in ridership between BRT
and LRT alignments.Mr. Lehto answered that staff had not completed that level of analysis
yet,but that nationally LRT systems have higher ridership rates than BRT systems.
Ms.Jordan noted that planning a transit connection to Portland Community College (PCC)is
challenging and wondered if PCC and the SW Corridor Plan could explore a shuttle service
option to the nearest possible connection.Mr.Lehto replied that TriMet will be studying the
background transit network in the corridor and considering shuttle options as analysis
continues.He added that there are no plans for specific station locations at this time.
Ms.Jordan commented that she was most interest in seeing a connection to Kruse Way in
Lake Oswego.Co-chair Dirksen reminded the committee that the presented alignment
options included the ability to mix and match between the alternatives,which might allow
for a connection to Kruse Way.
Co-chair Stacey asked Mr.Lehto for more information as to when TriMet would be studying
the background transit network in the corridor.Mr.Lehto explained that TriMet would
begin the SW service enhancement plan in early 2013 and would work with stakeholders,
local jurisdictions,and the public to establish the needs and vision for the local bus network.
He noted that the existing conditions analysis provided by the SW Corridor Plan would
assist with TriMet's work.
Co-chair Stacey wondered how the SW Corridor Plan would incorporate TriMet's planned
improvements into its work. Co-chair Dirksen explained that currently the SW Corridor
Plan was identifying the requirements needed to build a transit system that reflects the
shared vision of the corridor.He argued that the first step after identifying the needs would
be making improvements to the local bus service,which is where TriMet's service
enhancement could be incorporated into the SW Corridor Plan.Mr.McFarlane added that
the SW Corridor Plan and TriMet's service enhancement plan would inform each other
moving forward.
01/14/13 Southwest corridor Plan steering committee Meeting Summary 5
Mr.Rogers asked Mr.McFarlane if TriMet has determined a how potential alignment
alternatives balance ridership,cost,and number of connections at this time.Mr.McFarlane
replied that TriMet had set no expectations yet as to how ridership and connections
compare to level of investment in each alignment.
Ms.Jordan advocated for planning a connection between the Tigard triangle and
Washington Square.Co-chair Dirksen agreed and added that local connections between the
Tigard triangle and Washington Square,and Washington Square and the WES are important
to the region.He noted that the work done by the SW Corridor Plan could affect a north-
south corridor study.
Co-chair Dirksen asked if the committee agreed that the five transit alignments presented
by Mr.Lehto and Mr.McGrath reflect the vision of the corridor,and if staff should continue
to develop the alignments moving forward.No committee members objected.
6.0 Building shared investment strategies
Ms.Elissa Gertler,Metro,explained that,in February,the committee would take action on a
set of shared investment strategies currently being developed by SW Corridor staff.She
reminded the committee that the lists of projects should support the corridor vision,and
should be implemented in short,mid,and long-term phases.She argued that identifying
those projects that support the vision of the corridor will allow communities to develop
desired places,access to transit,and mobility across the corridor.She noted that the East
Metro Connections Plan(EMCP)was the first of this kind of corridor project.
Ms.Gertler continued to explain that building shared investment strategies will allow the
committee to find the right sequence of projects to achieve the corridor vision.She cited
TriMet's service enhancement plan as an example of proper sequencing to support the
vision.She informed the committee that they would make a final decision on the chosen
investments in June 2013,which would conclude Phase I of the SW Corridor Plan.After the
committee takes action on the shared investment strategies,it will begin to explore funding
options for the chosen projects.
Ms.Jordan wondered who would participate in the funding process.She asked if all would
share in funding each project,or if investment would be calculated based on who benefits or
is impacted the most.Co-chair Dirksen responded that sharing of investment would be
determined on a project-by-project basis. Ms.Gertler added that the chosen investment
package should support the corridor-wide vision, so all project partners should benefit in
some way from the projects chosen.She noted that the benefits to partners might be at
different levels,but all partners should agree that they want those projects to be built.
Co-chair Dirksen explained that if the committee agrees on the projects and the priority of
the projects,they will know how to use funding as it becomes available.
Mr.Tell argued that the committee could generate a list of all the desired improvements and
projects in the corridor,or the committee could think strategically about prioritizing
specific projects and supporting those projects when funding becomes available.He
advocated for developing a strategy where the political will of the SW Corridor Plan
partners can be used to pursue funding and build agreed upon projects.
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 6
Ms.Gertler agreed that a strategic approach will allow the corridor to implement projects in
a prioritized manner and allow for short term improvements as funding is available.
Mayor Ogden responded to Mr.Tell and argued that the SW Corridor Plan should work
toward an improved transit corridor and a large-scale improvement for the partners to
agree to.He believed that the SW Corridor Plan needed to be a regional priority supported
by the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT).Mayor Ogden concluded
that support for the SW Corridor Plan needed to come from regional authorities,and not
just local communities,for the plan to achieve its vision.
Mr.McFarlane replied that regional investment arrives when local jurisdictions advocate
for projects they believe are important.He believed the region has been successful at
finding funding for light rail and transit options because local jurisdictions support those
solutions.
Ms.Jordan noted that funding processes move slowly,so the committee will need to explore
now how to find investment for projects to implement in 2015.
Mr.Rogers explained that funding sources in Washington County were limited,and the
committee would need to decide on the priorities for the SW Corridor Plan to determine
how and when to pursue investment.
Ms.Gertler informed the committee that implementing a large project will require a large
effort.She argued that the effort would have the best chance when SW Corridor Plan
partners together strategically.
7.0 Public Comment
Co-chair Dirksen opened up the meeting to comments from members of the public.
Mr.Don McHarnesi,resident of Lake Oswego,commented that he would like to see Kruse
Way connected to Washington Square,and the Beaverton transit center.
Ms.Marianne Fitzgerald,SW Neighborhoods Inc.,was glad to see upcoming action by the
steering committee and encouraged the committee to involve the public before make any
major decisions.
Mr.Jeremy Grotbo asked the committee to consider the perceptions of younger residents
when developing the vision of the SW Corridor.
8.0 Next meetings and adjourn
Co-chair Dirksen thanked the committee and audience members for their participation and
reminded them that staff would be developing shared investment strategies for the
committee to consider in February.
Ms.Wilkinson clarified that staff would bring five strategies for the committee to consider,
and would ask the committee to chose one of the five strategies in June after additional
analysis.
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 7
Co-chair Dirksen adjourned the committee at 11:30 a.m.
Meeting summary respectfully submitted by:
<SIGN HERE FOR FINAL VERSION>
Emma Fredieu
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 8
Attachments to the Record:
1 A enda 114 13 Januarymeetingagenda 011413swc sc-01
2 Summar 11 26 12 11/26/12 meetingminutes 011413swc sc-02
3 Document 1 3 13 Engagement calendar 011413swc sc-03
4 Summar 12 12 12 12/12/12 workshopsumma 011413swc sc-04
5 Memo 1 7 13 Transit alternatives memo 011413swc sc-05
6 Mas 1/1 13 Transit alternatives maps 011413swc sc-06
7 Workflow 1/14Z13 SW Corridor workflow 011413sw sc-07
01/14/13 Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee Meeting Summary 9
SWCP Steering Committee Proposed Meeting Topics and Major Engagement Opportunities
Draft 2/512013
Month Groups and topics
January 1/14:Steering Committee meeting
2013 • Overview of Southwest Corridor Plan,where we are in process,what to expect
• Transit options based on 10/2012 SC recommendation DISCUSS
• Draft shared investment strategies and evaluation approach DISCUSS
February 2/11:Steering Committee meeting
2013 • Shared investment strategies for evaluation ADOPT
April 2013 4/8:Steering Committee meeting
• Economic development strategies DISCUSS
• Housing strategies DISCUSS
• Policy changes DISCUSS
• Green investments DISCUSS
April29?:Community Planning Forum: advice on refinement process;
implementation ideas
Late April/Early May:Economic Summit:which strategy(s) best support economic
development
Throughout April: Local advisory committee/community presentations:offer project
update presentations to Planning Commissions,Transportation or other local
advisory committees, neighborhood and business groups, etc.
May 2013 May 7?:Optln/online information:describe key tradeoffs between shared
investment strategies in terms of outcomes (based on evaluation) and ask for
preferences to help with refinement of preferred strategy
5/13:Steering Committee meeting (or workshop)
• Evaluation results DISCUSS
• Guidance on preferred strategy(s) RECOMMENDATION
Throughout May: Local jurisdiction and agency presentations: provide presentations
to city councils,county commissions and agencies to prepare them for future action
on the preferred shared investment strategy
June 2013 6/10:Steering Committee meeting
• Community input on refinement of shared investment strategies DISCUSS
• Preferred shared investment strategy(s)and implementation plan forthe
Southwest Corridor ADOPT
Local jurisdiction and agency action:final presentations to city councils,county
commissions and agencies to act on shared investment strategy(may involve public
testimony)
July— Community Planning Forum:celebrate accomplishments for corridor,discuss next
September steps to support implementation
2013
600 NE Grand Ave_ . ,www,oregonmetro,gav
Portland,OR 9 72 32-2 736
503-797-1700
503-797-1804 TDD
503.797.1797 fax
Metro I Memo
Date: February 5, 2013
To: Southwest Corridor Plan Steering Committee members
From: Malu Wilkinson,Southwest Corridor Plan Project Manager
RE: Project bundles
On February 11,the Southwest Corridor Steering Committee is scheduled to consider approving five
preliminary project"bundles"as the first step in creating a shared investment strategy to support
the Southwest Corridor land use vision. Each of the five bundles contains a representative transit
alignment and a set of roadway and active transportation projects to be modeled and further
evaluated by Southwest Corridor project partners and shared with the public for review and input.
The five bundles developed at this point in the Southwest Corridor process have narrowed around
$4 billion in projects to a much smaller set of potential investments,with the estimated roadway
and active transportation costs ranging from$220 to about$500 million depending on the bundle.
(The cost of all the projects to be evaluated is close to$800 million). Based on past funding allocated
to the corridor and current fiscal trends,the corridor could reasonably expect to see$45-60M in
regional and state transportation dollars invested over the next 15 years.The total cost of the
roadway and active transportation projects included for study in these bundles is still more than 13
times the projected funding.The cost estimates for the representative transit alignments will be
developed as part of the evaluation phase. On the revenue side,federal funds will likely cover no
more than half the cost of a high capacity transit project,with the remainder to be funded locally.
To narrow these five project sets to a single list that can realistically be implemented in the next 15
years,the Southwest Corridor project partners will need to focus on the highest priorities, identify
new funding sources, and make local funding commitments.This is the work we will undertake
together over the next five months.
Creating the five project bundles
To create the five draft roadway/active transportation project bundles, Metro staff worked with
project partners to develop and apply a set of criteria to narrow more than 500 projects to a set of
48 roadway projects and 84 active transportation projects.The criteria were designed to identify the
projects that best advance the agreed-upon goals of the Southwest Corridor Plan, support the Land
Use Vision for the corridor,and ensure the success of a possible future High Capacity Transit
investment. See the attached technical memo, "Creating the Five Project Bundles"for a detailed
description of the criteria and the process used to apply them.
Application of these criteria to the initial 500+ project list resulted in a much smaller list of projects,
which were prioritized to be consistent with the RTP Functional Plan,focusing first on operations,
management and multimodal access to transit before adding roadway capacity. Metro staff shared
this with local jurisdictional partners. The partners gave input and feedback on the initial list, and
the resulting additions (and in some cases deletions)are reflected in the five project bundles
described in the attached map book.
t gape
Next steps
When the Southwest Corridor Steering Committee considers the five project bundles on February
11,their decision to advance the five for further analysis will represent the first step in a process
designed to ensure our collective resources are targeted strategically to support the vision.Approval
of the five project bundles is not a decision to proceed on any one alignment or set of projects, but
will serve as a starting point for further refinement.
Evaluation and refinement of project bundles
Once the Southwest Corridor Steering Committee has confirmed the initial five project bundles,the
ensuing evaluation phase will provide information on project impacts to help further narrow and
refine the project lists. The evaluation criteria (see attached list)were developed over the past
several months and will use a variety of tools to assess how well the project bundles address the
vision,goals and objectives. It is important to note that each bundle includes a varying set of
roadway and active transportation projects designed to complement the transit alignment. Each
bundle represents a different level of investment, and evaluation results will provide more in-depth
information about the bundles.
The purpose of the evaluation and additional analysis is to better understand impacts on the
transportation network as well as each bundle's potential to advance the Land Use Vision shared by
SW Corridor partner jurisdictions.The evaluation will set the framework to develop a set of projects
based around high capacity transit that will be the foundation forthe Shared Investment Strategy.
During the evaluation phase we will also identify complementary parks and nature projects, policy
changes and programs that support development in the Southwest Corridor's key places.
The 15-year Shared Investment Strategy
The result of the evaluation and refinement will be a single Shared Investment Strategy upon which
all of the Southwest Corridor partners agree. The Strategy will be developed through a collaborative
process with ODOT,TriMet, and partner jurisdictions.
The Shared Investment Strategy will contain a prioritized list of agreed-on projects, including a
representative transit alignment. It will also identify a funding strategy to direct project
implementation.This funding strategy will be based on existing resources—but,to the extent that
the Shared Investment Strategy exceeds those resources, it will also include approaches for
additional funding resources. The expected outcome is a 15-year, implementation-focused Shared
Investment Strategy that includes projects that have been prioritized based on their potential to
support the Land Use Vision for the corridor and the selected high capacity transit line—and have
identified an existing or potential funding source.
i
21Page
Southwest Corridor Plan Key Measures
No Measure
1 Capital costs of all projects
2 Transit operating costs
3 Development potential
4 Distribution of jobs (by type
and location)
5 Distribution of housing (by
type and location)
6 Residential and business
displacements
7 Transportation and housing
costs by household
8 Increased tree canopy and
other desirable vegetation
9 Improvements in fish passage
and wildlife connectivity
10 1 Water quality
11 1 People (jobs and residents)
within''/: mile of a bikeway,
natural area, public park or
trail
12 People(jobs and residents)
within''/:mile of potential high
capacity transit stations
13 Traffic safety(reduction in
serious crashes)
14 1 Sidewalk connectivity on major
roads within%mile of
potential high capacity transit
stations and within X mile of
other transit routes
15 Motor vehicle mobility
16 Transit travel time between
specific locations (peak and
off-peak)
17 Projected transit ridership
18 Projected bike trips
19 Vehicle miles traveled
20 Mode share
31Page
600.NE Grand Ave, www.oregonmetro.gov
Portland,OR 97232-2736
503-797-1700
503-797-1804 TDD
503.797.1797 fax
Metro I Memo
Date: Wednesday,January 30, 2013
To: SW Corridor Plan, Project Team Leaders
From: Leila Aman, Metro
Re: Creating the 5 Project Bundles
The purpose of this memo is to outline the draft methodology for identifying and prioritizing projects for the 5
project bundles that will be recommended for adoption by the SWCP Steering Committee in February.The
methodology takes two step approach to project selection:
1. A transparent project selection using a GIS based method that identifies projects based on location and
then prioritization based on a classification system approach.
2. Collaborative refinement of projects with project partners to review and refine the project list to best fit
with community goals and plans that support a given HCT alternative.
This memo focuses primarily on the Roadway and Active Transportation projects.
Step 1—GIS Location Screen and Project Classification
In this step each project in the wide range was assigned a score based on a classification methodology to help
assess how each individual project best fit with the land use and transit options and to provide a framework to
prioritize the investments.Approaches for Roads, Natural Areas and Active Transportation were developed by
project leads.The classification allowed for evaluation of projects based on their merits to support the land use
vision and transit alternative.The following describes the approaches to classification by each project group. All
are guided by the SWCP vision,goals and objectives and the needs identified from the existing conditions. Local
partners were also asked to identify catalyst projects for both Roadway and Active Transportation.
Roadway Approach
Each roadway project was classified and scored based on the following:
1. Project supports safe access to HCT
2. Project strengthens connections to or between essential and priority places
3. Project catalyzes/supports land use goals inessential and priority places
4. Project addresses freight routes with reliability problems
Projects that met 3 or more of the 4 classifications or were identified by a local partner as a catalyst project
were selected out for further review. There were also a small number of projects that were considered that met
only 2 of the classifications but were considered critical for safe HCT access (i.e. Barbur pedestrian crossings)
Finally, staff approached the refinement by taking a "fiscally constrained"approach to develop a short list to
focus priorities with limited future revenues. Projects were then placed into one of the following three tiers:
• Tier 0(transit baseline): Projects that were determined to be necessary for the HCT alignment
• Tier 1:Projects that support the first priority of the Regional Transportation Plan Functional Plan (RTPFP)
by addressing Management/Operations or Multimodal access solutions
• Tier 2:Lower priority of RTPFP is focus on adding new roadway capacity
Active Transportation Approach
Active Transportation (AT) Projects were evaluated using a similar approach as the roadway projects. AT Projects
could achieve a total score of 10 and used the following classifications:
1. Project supports safe access to transit
2. Project strengthens connections to or between key places
3. Project catalyzes/supports land use goals in key places
4. Improves access within key places
5. Improves access along the HCT route
Forty(40)Active Transportation Projects were then placed into one of the following two tiers:
•
Tier 1—Projects that received 10 points from the technical analysis
• Tier 2—Projects that received 8 or 9 points from the technical analysis
In addition projects that received a technical score of 7 were also included for discussion with project partners.
Jurisdictional staff recommended adjustments based on local priorities and geographic equity. Local
jurisdictional staff identified forty-four(44) additional active transportation projects as catalyst projects before,
during and afterthe meetings held January 16—25,2013.
Natural Areas Approach
Natural Areas projects were also evaluated using the following classification approach:
1. Important for overall natural resource health
2. Can serve as a catalyst to future economic development
3. Enhances community livability
4. Project creates the interconnected network that supports mobility
The refinement and bundling of these projects will be discussed separately.
Step 2—Review and Refine
Metro staff met with local partners (by jurisdiction)to review and refine Roadway and Active Transportation
projects to align with local needs. Metro staff brought comprehensive lists of all projects and reviewed the
selected projects and catalyst project identified by project partners. Local partners reviewed these lists, and
were provided an opportunity to give feedback to Metro staff that included:
• Confirmation of projects identified through the technical analysis.This included removing projects or re
prioritizing based on local input.
• Discuss importance of catalyst projects that did not meet the technical classification but were
considered critical to local partners.
• Identify projects that should be tested in some of the model runs but not others.
• Refine project descriptions, cost estimates and other information.
Metro staff reviewed input from local partners and incorporated the information into a final draft list.This final
draft of the 5 project bundles is what is being recommended to move forward for the Steering Committee for
adoption in February.
Southwest e . e options to -qard Alignment
B � 1
17,
r
I
J �
` I V
Aw��Mnetbn L �..
en. '� •��� ®' 'f;a•� 1� ro.tdnaye vmtrcml e�
DownNwn a Tc
\reiar�Kr •weY ,"�`u' ��;
.. j 1�,._wV I
1 r Qt f
i e lagaoen vols_ 1 a 0�►p
��e.
T. lol
ios
Sha-.ed Tc
a
Downtown Sherwood
�MrT Pevon
A:LRT to TigeM Representative Alignment Options (
Baseline l
•
Alternative Alignment Prioritized Key Places �1
�•
Existing Transit '
I Other Key Places �s ,
Streets
Study Areas
SouthwestCorridor
Options
1: rs:'
m /
R 4 1
.cmcz: l
— )1
i
Jr-
TC� 7r V6iurn
_ _ Wy M1I 61 591i.• � _
r.
s Iagnlon w1.e
I-'
VAN
Tt r
a n{ow�rTa IeN lt r
IT3xrmwa
9M1erwneY'TC � ti
OownbWn SM1erveootl I p ^qr- -p
[B:BRi to Tigard Representative Alignment Options 'Nelio a=v oi
1
�Baseline ,
Prioritized Key Places
=—�- Alternative Alignments
Existing Transit Other Key Places os
Streets
®Study Area
SouthwestCorridor gnirnentOptions
_ F
ar l I
tr
ILI
Aft
NIMIu I �
O � e
W L`MIn9Ybn=5gLn• t ��
oYls 'i p --
u_ � ���,® "�\tlaj��•,��Rl11ei11gG GnitYG0119 y3�
r _ \Weyler K ee W+, 11
l /1
d-.
� � Br1a61POr OIaB
7 �
DOvyi latl � p
SM1amODtl'TD / � aF� '�FY •���
DOwnbwn snerwooa
4.
c:FIAT to Tualatin Representative Alignment Options
I
Baseline
-- Alternative Alignments Prioritized Key Places I
Existing Transit Other Key Places a as +
Idilev
Streets
�Study Area io N1,1
Southwest Corridor OptionserwoodAlignment
r �
rr
xc E -
'
-
/ -a 1) unitY Coll Be
L
Downey.f'.
TD
J'
h
s w.
LL
4 'I .�• .a�hT
i 4
r+ f
�er11
" .
�'rif r
i
7 � �
-
� r
� � s
Be BBT to shemoo0 Bepms"itaRw Alisnmsnf OpHona
L.
ti.
�Baseline �
® Prioritized Key Places
�-- Alternative Alignments
Existing Transit j Other Key Places
Streets
StudyArea
nil!„
Southwest Corridor
x:yyy '
1.1�
I
§ � 1
m � .
r � ,
`J,1
wu ¢i aibn Saoelo _
ptl GO nIty Goll
TC
\w.fiK,...wur
33
�'r . _
i
e tl§ a lalnueo � �•.
' D nlown4v�la1�
i - I
yt(rwaetl Tc i
c
i
GYw wY sao..,.00tl
(' C
i
E:oar Nub and Spabe RepresenteHveARgnmeM Optionsqw.ox.ao.
Baseline .<.--,
------ S okes Prioritized Key Places
q
Existing Transit Other Key Places o s
Streets
i
StudyArea
O4MEAi PIALfS
Corridor Southwest Corridor
Transportation Project Map Book j
-i
I 1
i
, gg
in
i
r
.,
L � �
ro
N nrsom j
c — 4
C/
i f
4yEJ i
r '
fG p9;W We
y`
U—NEWORMT- me
�1 II
WIN
I 5<
Map Book Sections MileSectionsQ Data Collection Area Urban Growth Boundary \ C .5 1 f
Metro
FI r.�,c�rr`zan �
CorridorTransportation Projects - Section 1
AIN
T aai�'fT
' 5 } .■4141 �F
x' � �' r :�iAfiyAP
�•..��� 1. , .1
r.r
♦ .� r 'y'rr14r -
fa .r• -
IF
f r
:'1 l
• I ��
Ta,
f.
• C x Commercial Essential ,•••. ��
Urban Growth Boundary
y O • 5'� l. p, O Employment r y Priority mor , Utz
D M N
a >, • a y Parks
,�; Mixed Use U .2 Opportunity i
.Q Auto/Freight m rJ
= Multimodal a HD Residential Neighborhood Data Collection Area `
Fes,..•rs mia —' j .
1Xsdl[tlan P.]e.ID P kdntl s11mM dCa Primary Matl —VaN BRTTIgeN BRTNalatln
BRTSnem;u Xob&Stake
P y tl'D6aN ODtlY lOF3 5 A MiN M y - s .�$3.OW -
J
Portlald,OWT Inaa 1.1h I aC alai of y $2200D Cn0 q o/Fre gM1[ N
Potlantl,OWi
--Mir
PCOP BaNurBNa CW IiN teralll5<sl Mol modal mprowmenR $b.B9aiW MuMMptlal
Portlantl 5013 Nano/3nu[n Punlana lmprovem n[s left turn po[ke6 wnn bl ke/pea ane remove
nnel,nm—d—d.11 539,69s,0T9 MuMmoaal %
ACVVe Transpvrttli PmjeM — - ---
lurlpdktlen pre/set lO Frtlmat d s P�=mary Mod Tlnyrd BRinp�d BRTTualalln g0.i5M1erweetl XUB&Stake
I
zWy 4RR4iSNCSBidBRlv86n°rceFeys $1sae0BQ+ vmesmnm. % x. % %
Pomana 2p:z vameear[<t veeennan sues= sss.000.mp Peaennan x
PYnrana —�� 9n1s Nano r<anvmntto,dngar vpnease. 91,3W.r101i -_ % x ' x
x %
Portlantl 2029 Ramp Crossinget kellY Pve[o Nano Parkway Notthbonntl S39GW(I peeeslrlaa % x
x x x x
P.11-d
P }nb9 Svwµ:tlpmn'ImpmwmtlnL ro.avaGpbs mn:n Abcv 5>V.ml x % x
x I
rtlantl 3028 INNiP HAMnipX/mmSW Terwil4gerBMtl IOSW Corben qvp Bikeusy 59,gp Md. X % % %
�I qI N
PornanC ai11 .3038 LwNE¢5W]se.(rom 5w 9uibYrbMee SW Pnnurh PJkeaik tl��T. x % P _ x
Ponuna iF 3093 TI.111G11GAn Blkeway
POnkntl �s 303a VpoFPB4RBVRIro-m 5W 4Pnel Nr.vlo SW Seeman ST b�4ewpY 51,21.DTT %—s'1
7�C P x x r
Porclane �I{ SOzl Xamelen simmNsomn Ponal Penes(nan/mq[lecvnnmloe v,00C,t4p Blk.Pw x
ponlann ? gp}r n.16>emfilw✓ale NlmP.Mvemenn $s;OIN,NO ery[(Paq % x x
14 %
Off dorTransportation Projects - Section 2
s�, r
15
43
N
-,ti z�
7026
� 50071 -•.�__�
- FYh'09.tF'a`P+RGAZa' e - „.• /7% y. .
"4}, .. is��___ / a-, •� '
'7k
f
_ » CommercialEssential ,-^.
Priority
Urban Growth Boundary 0.2, °,`
C : 3_= SGCfC C O1 ® EmP15007ent A Frio lily INNEINEENNER Parks D9i{es
Mixed Use M a Opportunity 1
Auto/Freight mV Data Collection Area i —
Multimodal O _. .: HDR€4Rle ntial Neighborhood N _ r
"YP *,
-lurlstllttlen PrekRIO PrejeR Tlxe Warr.i.d[col PrlmlryMade INf tl
gxtl RRT TIpN BRT Tualatin BRi SAewootl NuhS 9peke
portlana.alga W,OOpi 3033 p5.40lve TraflH Manage mini
$3W0.0.'V AuIU/Frtlgllt %
Pa Rlana,000i 1019 Barpur poaa Olet-[yprta-1l Namll[onjretlua noRM1boune la n ee lrom[Rmem two x
wmn mwwmotlalrmmwemeatal $2sa.ao0 Aetp/f.elgne _ % x %
Ponla ntl.0001 1028 Ba rb urRewiNgeFln[MeRlon Ped�0lke imptovemeny $z,W0.034 Mukimodal
Pnrtlantl,000t 9002Barbut 9Xa.5W O ni Tewllllgerl-MUlomotlallmp.ovements $6,59<.100 Multrmotlal
pa rtla na.0001 sW5 Bathes9Na SW ReRvllbger-CRy llmnsf'MukFmeasl lmprovem en[a $26,033r100 MURrmoaal x y %
Perckna.0001 m06 Ramo.pne Orel T-111...m Caprml Rs0,000 Mmmm.aal
Ppmana,OoOT saw Rateur slgnala laaa agrtalleM miersecwn:l $1,BO9,GR0 Munrmmal
% x
poRlantl $009 CapROlXxy lmpmvementslrep laretoatlwayantl atltl ntlewalk)
MM. Munlmoael
AWve,TronspeTt flon Pmjem — —
IUXWl2kn ProkR lb I.ojea Title Esn..d Cpal Pran.,.paetpTT tl
Portia na 2w2 1918 Aw S3'2nd Art:6xkveRPm�NcftyW$ming.Gattlervl-SW RaMpr[o islbn Rar orTa. RRT Tualatin qRT$Aetvmd MupS Spate
ferry Roetl S30].0.T PetleRnan N X % X %.
Pa rtlantl ZCM Z6[F pve,5W j5p nog Gara¢n-Tayla ti Eet ryl'pe tleRnan imp.ove menti $350,= Pedestrian
PaIIaM ZO2G Mu ono maA RNd.MaOn.141111)Pedes[wnrmp!m'lmenis $Aur.. peeesfan %
%
portlana 2030 Sp rinA Ga Wen,SW'a"..Fe.ry-MIA:Peaesnran l mpravements $a50,Po0 poronnnn %
x
Pnrtlantl 2W] sW 1RM1 M.petleRnan lmpmvemenk Gtbu.-Sprmg WWea Sa15,000 pedlytnan % X
pomand 20,z xulsaale'.aaeNlpn of RCvmgs on Barour 521G,GNO peaentMn z
portlana 2073 NIIIsCakaosNne!mpmV<menla'Ba2ur/I91M1 53.501Wp pehv<nan x
'..no 2071 Nlllstla le<rossinglmp.ovemen[y',Ba rb ur/Bercba $E W.WO Petleatrlan %
,.,[and 3012 CAPITOL XIµqO(rem SW Barbu.BMb3W Re2Fa BNa $1W,0.'V RICKk % x %
1e2lantl 3028 INN EP NAMILTON I.om SW iewll llq<r RlW to$W(o2ett qVe BIYeWey $4.fiW Blrycle %
portlpntl 3033 INNER LROv�hom TN 4PNUINwraO SW CapRe1 NII6Rtl bite heulwere 5131,OW Bp(p Y x %
PORla ntl 30M MIpO1E Rpg0Vq-bort sW z3rtl Ave b SW CapnelXwyOamUr Bvtl Bikeway $1.650,PYr Blq<le
Portland geeverton 3050 MULTNOMAN.IpmSW rikaon qdp$WTemlllyer qNd lak., Sn,W,M. Blgde % %
X N
PaRlana 3069 Spnng Ga Nen.sW(laylars ferry�Ca01<dlXwy:Rlkeway $a,165,OW Blrycle X
Pprtlantl 3 J3 TFRWILkWF0.GR P5.Bikeway $296.W0 RIMIe % %
% X X
Po2lanp 3096 VPPER RPp BUP-from SW Ca pnolHwy to$W SAetm an S(plkeway $1p". Bl'da % %
PCrtkna 3101 VfRMOM-CXESTN OF-rypmSW WpnplXwyRo$W TewrlM1ger ONtl RIke OOUlevartl $Z3g,OW BRy<k X %
PORlantl 6W3 MUkn omap watluR prrytle and petlesl nan ktllliles $],6fip,243 RIYe/p¢tl
Portlan4000T 6CCa NevA•uryvNdtrtt blry<ka na petlennae latlllnes $3.711.612 BltelPotl % y
Pnrtlantl.000i 6005 Vermon[waauR blrytle antl ,d..,.an h[IIl31es $5,I R3.IE< Blke/Petl _
PUrtlantl 6022 MpSC[mynp petl/RIYe lmy[ovament{ $$q'p,009 &Xe/Petl Y
Pnrtlantl 9N6 Fanno CteeY Grtenway�fletl EleRncl hall $]Z.653,Mp }mil
x
Portland 1. Trap on SWM Road to AM Elr.Ra[T.all j15W,W0 Trail Y
I-
�q int=..•
r_
j
fWT
n_
7
i
39
Commercial Essential -. ._ . ,-... �..�
y • -� a m Urban Growth Boundary o r"
qS _ �
y O • -:n. Q. `p Employment p, Priority. Mile' ..
G v Y
n • s: Auto/Freight i m Mixed Use G Opportunity Parks %!,,t
m V HD Residential Neighborhood Data Collection Area N'
=a Multimodal C - _
noeaw,y rrq.En
k°n[ala°° M1°hR�G rrokm IDl. Ef11m.Eee Con rtlmery M°ae urnpN .nrnpw eRtiutlatln MM.-Abd Hub.spke
n9?la�bm"v! 115fi Seh°Ik Furry Pd AT S Aq. Autof
P° q '
lunfdl.a°n rr°ka lU rmhn Tnk Es11mnM Cost rdmary M°Je kRTnpN egiilpra BXTTualatln ..Sh.--d Nub O Sr°ke
TI}ald,EeawRon fiW W.SM1bn,,-Su...ReyonM n.,HHgF j,217Vetltimpn/Blke[i+e�Cmssi� SS.]W.C.. 9lk.ry.a % % % % %
.:Corridor
s
Transportation Projects Section 4
y ll
nT F
$) 3 a
/
R
RW■(I p 3�� 5 59
50
'r
� • p �-0007
` • 4 O
• c N - Commercial Essential ,••-.
yh ,0 • �39:rc-�F.'-t3_I' • • ,•••, Urban Growth,Boundary �_.., i rnilr.
O • C O` - Employment >, Priority
.O. g • x" p d Mixed Use ! Opportunity Parks
d .4 Auto/Freight > rqp S -- 1 i CI I'.
m U HD Residential ll
C
D
Neighborhood Data Collection.Area 'y`'
�• Multimodal Q �- 4 —
aw,ms,mn 1 -
RwtlwaY Pro�eSe
/Ymmmo. vrojed to pre�ett The Efelmahtl Cast pemary Mede VRTgare BRiTpre ORT iva Utln BRigM1ervaM NYb&SpaFe
PONand,T:gam,ODOi Ml3 ~ rS rkMeinllic Mamagemen'. $3,WJ:0.b .rr10/4regnl R LQ I-
%
gate 3eaverton 1]36 Scbclb Ferty Ra&}M5 $1,109,OW arr10/ireiGb; X %
N % X
perliane.ppoT 5w5 PeRN BF/a,3W 1Per NJla•�-eNpmns MJM mMJIIm➢ewemaR(5 5Zi,633,1w
pOrtland.OpOr $00) Barbur Signalx lade $I.BCO,fXp Mulfimceal _
iyaW.BRreatoPr063i,Wa.plue;on % N
_ ?! _ WrIF mm�Jra Wrhenlryt f)Lwnc099W 33,59)y'pO MYTa - %
ANve TranzporomnvmJxe - -- ---------
Nrbdldlao Proka:D Pwptt Tltle fi[Imafetl Cmt PRmary MPle IgTTMtl IRTTped RRTTualaNn BRI$M1eF Nub&Sp ke
Portland 1u}] Pedtmur Mewrsneyr MnrktraT[cMvl Y.Y,e139S 2Mertrl'an }
%
ireare xxo >bB ema p.aeSrran meu SZ,wo.oW vetlesrran %
% % x dl
POrdantl&a+e Ron ',vN M. NOMpN. $W Okfo fla 5%i mBBR'BrSd BIFe'wn $SAY+SfO. R}[.4. n µ
��A %
Pnrtlana fiRxa iVl ry,SW�C p11Hwy <Iry IlBl yl.&Pa Inlmpmvemenl5 $0,109.WB BINe/Pea µ
TNird B!avedOn ypP] µyr,PyyOn$purrt5pglune;Cvnttr RrgliwiY]I]Pvaeatnwr(aRp Q4l VOfY M1k $9:ipg,fMq dlAlfPo{ Y H 73§rfl l
Corridor Transportation
99
5009 . •�:: ,�}tf__ . � . .
0
4
5007
O ` W
5059
+i..
k)-'t007 L _
sosr�
n'
a Commercial Essential ,•••. 0 0,25 n,
N m • _ a — Urban Growth Boundary
m o • tipk�' M Employment �, '�•" Priority
,: • a. G> y m Mixed Use W .2 Opportunity Parks
Auto/Freight a a = a' Cnr
d V HD Residential Neighborhood Data Collection Area N _
Multimodal C] - s.2013 — _
R dw yP $e
Iuriidlttinn Prole¢In Irefe¢Tltle Catlmaretl Cnn prlmaryMWe IPT Tgxtl Bpi T6aN BPT TualaMn BqT SFerwpod Muh HSpeHe
P el nd.TlgaN,OC OT 1013 5':MryI TUHCMtlupaminl $3 CW,W] Pulw'frtlgM % - nr r'
v plana,000T
3U33 3arburpnad 0¢[ Cap X Ilton(reduce nnrlFFountl la ed,l(om aM1 red,mtwa % % -� X
I'll 111W-motlaH mp ¢n sl $23n 000 Auto/iregF _ % % X
p rtIMeMOT 3031 $W PERNnd iS PM ISglf3prPy Tiallan lM6rt'Aa geh tWdesdOsi HeniluH SB
aM M.ff.rarrya ;39,9M.03p gvtol ie ent
Porth ntl.OWT $OOS Barbur Blvd,$W(i Illg r City lim
w" tlal lm prow eMs $Ea,033 1W Mulr mo dal
%'
P Nand,OWT SWk WrIrYr UIN OL Ta+w llA .1.Capes Y1 $p5n 1pp MUF11mA0Y� _�
rtlanQ OW}
SBY3 Barbur5 gn ale a tll f goal tl HIrseQlo n sl $3.80000 Mullimndal F
PonIa M,OGDi I., 3arpup/GPIIeIHgy/Xobor/hyyp iprry lnreltegmn Sa(ery lmomvem coli T1,atl3:GW MuPimotlal Ji �
po rtlanE S�9 C3PkW H'ryi lmprpvements lreplace ra dtlw nd add,ldewalkel $19,1W.WU M.ulb medal tom% H� ��
PorNantr 5057
SW-M xfw ofpe "useml $SWAIL'O Mngrmodal��= �� x�r % 1
"o rtlanQ OCOT 5059 SWPonla nd!CMssFca65MYIllmodailla1110p dwaV realign,cots antl t
motlllitabons ao 0arhur Blvd..GpdolH antl[Fe HS aourry povntl oo ram 1 ?n,W0,W0 MulYm otlal %
ANv TranSPOMlon Pmj$ - -
IurhdfNon paejAR 10 Prolecl Title Glmetvtl Cnsl PrlmaryMotle IVTIl ld onng d BT Tuelatln BPTS--I Mub Htpope
PONane ve,SW APnna GifEM.tiylali Fe Ryl'PM¢SIINnIIIIPvwemenb 15350.0'Yu Fed.SaXM X
Portlantl 2011 SW Tayloc perryroad to Barb ur pep;al bra nsn Cen ler SSn,Wp ftd-an X %
%
Portline �_MVberSf.SW IBarbYr-35M1.PMesinin lTpYJY4nenT5 $gylµC pegnrnvn X X -
Portlantl 2016 Xu bet SVeel Sdewalk ProlF 3]tM1 Pvp aim Pve/ISOmPa mO $3fA.IXX1 petleahlan
PO rHbnd � .aea nae R.- A X % X %
hM1[flm0/j( PI.hrtAP n5No01 S¢Su 1.Y ��y� % %
Portlantl 3033 In Portland Town Camae Ped es[nan lm provnmevs SSp IS,EW petlennan `fit rX�
?.Mg.d twee„an �'„h Ir is %
sA Barbue T< St5L.0IN % %
Portlantl rfi036 SyM11ISWMWeYs S1 CW,pq] BI101pd %
%
X %
Pdrpantl latA ywago, -
le6 Petleanun ilrlProcv.mdq S:SaOAbG Tkc'+ro 3
Po¢Hnd :6013 Barbur/PCC6lkaway Cpnnenlon 5>SO.OW PAe/Ped % % X
Portland. y5y ,n
�emenq l9seX tr eerbur $1 Ima. . IPte % e X
Portgnd 6034 T 00'Ferry,SW Wpuol H' I'll llm ltil'.Bigtle&Pldo,Wap lmprov..enry $a,209.000 Blke/Petl X
Oorridor Transportation Projects - Section 6
WN
AMP Z7
4 • f 1 Pr -:3 �
1 v P•:!f� yFc r
`t7f '"• t `�� Ute' r j!'
�¢°}•. ,k^ " « rpt ��� - � . / s *-.7 ' `u",
r..... _...... . ,.' •.. - . � +•r ala -
1 4wr. 1 � 11
for
rPIT
�y�• rj d' aF' .
r
NA J
Ile
`}. � � .. .tri. ..._ titii •!„d�
o
• 3 = Commercial Essential --.
e •6 • _= rte'�(��;:� d a+ r- , Urban Growth Boundary o 0.25 I
y 0 • -NiL y p Employment T d Priority tAJes I _
O R d " -Parks 1'r
O y, • R op y ,d, Mixed Use Y d ' Opportunity I '
G•J2 Auto/Freight ! m _, N�1 \j/-!t'q �:
V ND Residential Neighborhood Data Collection Area N J _
L
=� Multimodal O"__. - M13 i
lurhelglan P."'O hohRrnp Rtllllw.e Cwl FxmM'Mea. wr
ns.,a exrm.re cxrm.wn exrsn.m.e xun�sws.
i CorridorTransportation
b.. - \,�' • - _ �� �M .1113 �-
k . �►
v" t
ty o)L y M.
9018 �_ . I�Si
I 4
(D °
1 ll°
1 N .
c
:.
5039 � �Y
RMW
m IJ
d ! 3 d d - commercial Essential 1-^I
Urban Growth Boundary �^ i
m O • - - ,�i,. y O Employment �, ym Priority -�
CL � ! a y .O+ _ Mixed Use Y y Opportunity parks
J2 Auto/Freight y 15 F HD Residential - - Neighborhood Data Collection Area R1 ti(i{i 1
�o Multimodal 1] - g aaer,,.y s.zms V
xoar"Ay Projxl9
rVnrg.d... "da"'0 Preleat Title v�Atlmall Coal PRmary Mede IRTTlgartl gRTTRaN 80.1 Tualaxn AT SM1ewoaa NUE&Sake
P kdTB+d.OOpT 10Y3 54 ¢Ra(fla M>Ng(m¢] —' T" ]�
rtlare TIB.1d,T,all'o,
OD T T011 "Bet MO Oownaewn Ponlana lu3W 1!6tM1 $Bod. aid"111.01 1 % %
Trnrd LO» - ungrevceMlloadwsim6(HaWroatlway) £311NXA#Nr Aura/fre'.gp[ :g- K K x
iiRaM 1nJ8 gtlanla5treet ERension(new roatlweY) (3,BDOODD pato/heipM1l
�S N X % % X
T8 Rn8[onCo ]'r+3E .(j�Hel goVk WW nin6.Bp Pb 0¢.maA $3,9W Ip0' A of neifAa �®�% -�'^^�
Tlg tl W[e ngton Co 11W Hall/X k /S Hins int q Ilenment S5.00O 000 q to/Feign) N �a
y % % x
lg td amort tpa. -WSW
Hav 2])OW %'NVniA 'N pt Cbnpne[k+n 551A1xr. ulo/Frpl;gg r
��A{{
Bard -�Illlg�Oak LInCoulLoodS1 CII tlor5as[ (Connallmpnvements) 511"'T"ll A,.'./11,111d
Portland.ODW g,h—V99ag/l.SB anOudesdudN ritall i gS Wr000 Auto/Prat %
ream,oom uv lagbwar 9Bw/Bern Ar¢Imamemm�rmorwementa) 5],OOOObO Aumr Faegnr. x
x
n3am,door 1]x9 NNnwpv r9w axml¢maaTg.m¢m
ngard OOOT u19 xwy xnnna Ava lvnagmpovemma r<¢nauto¢a w/asses mr:) 5s36l..0oAAmobo//FFlelght -X-
Poaland,000i m {an'.18"e.SW(la"Al", 0t Llydg4Mulidollaurvrov l 524.213.1m Multimodal T %
'heard Bel Bern Avenue widen ro 3 lanes) Wreell. MUuoor'al
ilgard Waa un6[onf0 SDYI 121WAva Wl—,XUNukero-eurn>Ill)widen r030r5gnyl S1a,000Rw "doled A
1.1"Waenenglon Co SDIa ])nd dvenue Widening-99W[o Hunri4er 56,000.DpD M¢Ilimcdal _ % X %
TBaltl 0007 wdrnlndno Co SOB Na110pM Wla &NIpM1WaY 99WTofanm CRek BMW.W0 vilurrodal ,
Ill Ii ng[on 1,, 5036 Hall Boulevard Witl g. t0o'all Street to Fall'Creek nclud ngere[k bridge $11.e.. M Ilmodal X _
THaN,bn OBOT.WaapnM1{•.- ' x
C. oe�lr -1 ill[ouklA '_POkmn to 9qW 53,BdI WO MVI[mM;k � X `
Tg d W b"egton Co 5039 naW SVYH Wide g,99W!o hall Sir.udd Mull—dal X %
aXvdve TMnepot)atlo a Project
Isdletlen �pro]{f�eat�l0 Ptepitrede eadmared pd ryMpde MTTgard BRT T{ard 11M.1.gtln BaTelude ! NUEBSPoku
I TMMC^��^"�ypg5 MdAvenVG51OBvlu, $"Seguin W:.. ed rn x
Tg>rtl Edd al5lrcea$idewalM j]lO WD nd
d y X. % X
X
Tigard )¢41 Ha II BeVlwafd iNevNka 51,6W;OOC PedMlgn % ,� '�F X
regard 1038 Nunzder5treel Sltlewalka $$dD.WD Peedolden X x Fx % X
ligard zDE6 - IiBare Poen Cantsl]MawlownlPNeRrunimpmvemems 5e1ggO.WO vvludrYLIi� �-
Yigartl 3076 le8artl irani2 Cenr¢+99W sd¢wnlL lnflll $SOO,OOD PetleeMan x %
TceaN a0]r ._. �
'l� rCard+efnaet CenRrcewneempmuvvnmtY j)50,0]0 iMeieda "� % - X
TRard T. }igard Trane2[eater Pa+4gpetlepetleRrlan pa[h 5]ta),000 Peaeatn>n % X X X
'wed W79' •1�' Tyere lydnaar"ollpMas ingour`
rrllllf!' el ;3 �pydps[ile M�L %
ie8ara g. Tg"I'alel Ce¢Rraldewalkmllll j1N,000 Petlexoiao % % X
X X
nlgaxe ]P30 �"
- - Hag RIraIA—raoln]el - _ r-g mm�r-
Portland 3D55 Op99W aver l 5.peneslrlan and 1A el..mprovementr jG,S]9,313 &ryele N X X
TB+rd.14aNYln 3;V ]Xnd Aaenue duauaY 9l,M0,pG. MMI. ®�®!'"
ilgartl Take Oswego 3151 Bpn2a poatl BlkeWay $3M,P90 elq[le _ % X
PdNdntlTquN 3UA ~�— 9aeiAk Xlva 99Wye rands Moog
Tyard 3129 T18aMlnniet[enrer0iryele Xp! S13WD Blryele %- 'X N 1%r.
y
]akTi Oar) 800] I�(pnrta kd.CareNnOr to Panxy gdidewalAsana bra.ynn 5300 M0 �a
igare Be. Fanaeeltek Tra2-iD/Dlvede Pavedlrall $3TdrlOr10 Tall X' X'. % X: X
Uk<Oawego yV,a xeoY Wae Paln
_55.(rtYnPW irax
"'id Bed1 Teeard Srreet[ralltonneReon Dp0
Portland aJ55 Bha/ped Cgrmcewn Eerwxn Tigarai+xnyeand PC<-SyNanla SSW:PoD Tall ���®
Corridor Transportation Projects Section 8
'-_
tee '°Z� Vii•--.�r+'°�7L"" .;-..
0
- 4 .vim
N m "� d m ' Commercial Essential ����� urban Growth Boundary o i''�' °-S��
y C • ,uril p,.p Employmentp, � Priority N'1"
rL o 01 u q -Parks
P
40 Mixed use Y —y Opportunity
a. S Auto/Freights
Multimodal :I-
"' '3 HD Residential Neighborhood Data Collection Area y
FaMYflry 5,20)]
RPgd"P.Jens
IuflrdkNon v.gea to Prekztlrlhe FstlmMed Cort Prima Mode IXT
- N Tknd BRTTPrd BRTTuabhn kRT$Ferwapl Nubf gpoke
IagegWp{o SW3 � -„�
Lake Osw
reo Sxa Boones Ferry PnaU'gWlfyrE lmptovelneRs P wth Dike/pee6d M tla a SB,9T$4H _�
[o hmu Ways $33,OPo.CUn Muhlmodil
tive T2nsPesMtlpn Pmlech
_luifdlabn pro�eq In PreIeRTNe AtlmMed[ezt Pdm,Metle IPTTyntl Nff
T dd eUTm%Un bgTAh.r—d tlub.zAeke
tikediwegn -A pikclane --sm®
take Ozwego 6M3 BonRa Pd-Cam.anp MOanpgtlsNewalks antl Like lanes $3... pike/ped
--- x x x x
takeoawree ext " •-• -... - —..--__..--..__ -
[aTenM.ndM'd $3suaoC elk)eM --- --X71
takeosw¢go fi016 Bovnez Ferry Ad bde W.,co-1,Mble noMern city llmhz Sfi.o11,13P Blke/vetl
_ X x
lake05wePa 9P]! Rv't WeY Palh 5 Axx). Troll.
X x,
UA,ozwego gozs surfmTudnnoere,Tran ,Ih.Tonedln Trail ss,0.tl,aGp Troll _
x _ X
Dorridor
Transportation
IA
.i
...........
Cr
A 'W
y� n
J 39+
__ �l _ ••yy t • ,9 , / Ate.
S
• �s
• `5pY9;
• -i C
• m Commercial al 0.5 25.
6
w d _� y y •• U
�v"'�f3� •..; Urban Growth Boundary �
y O • - S p ® Employment T 0 Priority z�tt milt'
a • - "?3_}-313iQjp a Mixed Use X y Opportunity
iL_ Parks �-
Auto/Freight N V Data Collection Area '" ' \I
Multimodal
,"_,"�_ HD Residential Neighborhood— -_" _.—" -_ _
(Roadway Pmkds
LLL lxdltllen hokmG ProbR Tllla fellmmdCoal Prlmery MCtle 1R111Iprd eRT Tprd ORT Tua dtln RIT SM1ewood Rub L 1,k.
PoMi.id TpeN�Toa1&in.bM1vwNd: L%5 - -.
pWi RM'49W 19Mp�Mxntavm Pars antl to SW 5' � / � } X
Active TnspeRatlon PwJecb
lurlsdlRlon P.okRlo ProkR Thk E...dCas. Prlmery Mah LR N.M III R0.T Nelatln OA 9M1ewm! Rub ASryYe
%nA CJty 3W1 Aly Gty NWn fen<N PMeRMn-pro lrts $Lwl]0 P.e.n X X.
% X %
Tlgirtl 3%0 99W pedestnan lmpbremen is to serve%InA<Ry ynsh sto ps $9W.. Pedes4lan %
Po.<lantl liRatd 3]$8 PatlT It".1.O%le,bnes $SW.w ll, a .% X X
i.gard Tu alat.n 9p23 Nalrtln RWer PatM1way $B.bW.WO Trail
Tualdt.n 9059
99W➢m MI PaN 'j$W.IXW Tratl _
Tua laVn 9061 Westi.tle Tra.l _ X
$5.060.W0 Lra 11 % x
King Cny,WasM1.n¢an G' 9999 ULt Ove 3 nd fluter Rpad.udewalk.Ml ll a n6 dke lanes $$WPW O.ke X
X X % %
i CorridorTransportation Projects - Section 10
jo0
d- ' •,, i iif—'mac
U �
/
1 �
K Commercial Essential --,
N w Urban Growth Boundary
dO • --- M p Employment p, Priority _ _-
o • ft.uv , ° a Y = Parks
A y he Use dP
Opportunity
a Auto/Freight m V - Data Collection Area ,
Multimodal O -
HD Residential Neighborhood N / l,('h(( __ J
F
rtwdw,v ProieX+s
mnsal[Hnn vroptttp Pro)etl Tm< Fstlm.d.rd-I PnmaNMoaa MTnnre BoTn@ore ani
ivatagn BRTBherwooE Xub&Syke
ngara,Washington Cn 3038 NaA 00Y1wafd Wraemnq BOnrya Rnatl ro Curlram O,,QoI. uto/Frtly1,[
_ X X
Tlgartl,.a nnrlon Co. 1323 Uppef600nes."or]2na too, M1am Inters......lmpmvem<nts)reeonllgurt) $31.630,IA'p Auto/Frplght g
TuaWlm.WasFmgon Co: 1139 BounesFttry ROad(reeannuet/wutenwrn Martman.tO bam.M pes Ferry) $12'.3W,CW pate/im6Vrt --
_ _ x % X
Lake pswego SCU3 Carman nr Improvemenlx wA<n to3lanes w/bl4e dne5l $8,979,923 Wl.nn.dt
lake:Oswego SW9 -'ova V" mMha.Mhb6r/y.1.-Ara(rOBa
eOgaum ,,lybY) S32..." Mukvnotlal -
Tlprd,WasM1lwonCo. SOIr 22nd Ave Wleen.ng;Xum1k,,to OuR.am(wind¢.to 3 or S lanes) 53a,0... Mulomoaal _
nalatm swg X<rm.n(mummmal lmpmwm.no-,ia.n rorual,tm Ra) i2spo,0pp Mmum.a.l x - --
ivalalln.OpOT SWBA ISNortM1bountlLower Bovnes ierryeyli ramp)atltlalane $3500.. Auto/Freight X y
X N
Nala[.ry OCOT .0088 F45WIhbowq_AungaN lrq LC�¢rPwdes p¢rryuy rwnpblexeY&onn:Fnry x
nr.romy P.M. AUM/FMgFt _ % X
/.Nve Trens3y.ldttlon Ptblecls -
sulnolulon vre)M IO Pro)ere Tld. Fatlmned Coat PamaNMode Mll,artl BBTnpftl BRTTUalatln BInlhervepd Nub&Spke
I'M 1.6 22nd Mento 5emalks $gW..0 P<de#nan %
T.,IM 2057 Xall Ooulevara 5ldewalkx ".."'d Petlestrran %
TBarE 2f/Jp W- NaII BNtl PNesMpn lnhll $I.O.L\tl PMeytNn %
%
LakeOmgo 3W3 Ir.n Mounnan/Vpper OrNe bike lanes $5>.Wp,0.b Blgcle _
Tlgare.TI.Lonn 311] ]2ntl AVenue OlkepaY $2pgppO$ ggY,� % %. % N
take Oswego 6W2 Carman pr,sltlewal4y ani hoe lanes $]9p,pW^ Bike/ped _
purlvm . -f� Booties Ferry AnewalksX x X
5300. BhNPeO % X x X X
i.gartl,Tualatln 9023 Lara n g'er Pathway $8,60-,0. Trill
Lake Oswego 9035 11 WYXgOTUTTng MnneCS Fanno Creo4TnllInd Me ipnpu.n Tn.l $s,Wp,rp2 TTall _
Corridor Transportation
i n r
r
!
!
,a
�W
lip,rr
/ r
Not
_ y
!
1 :
��OLY�PLgG!
L
i
- Jrr� i
068 \
�O
1068 0
Q:1,06 s�
t r.
5020
Ai
r.
lamW"KK®1
• �i 3 c m commercial Essential T— —�
1 • �= i7T f?3"� m , , Urban Growth Boundary r
I
O- _ 7
y O • — - `p Employment Priority tJ�iles
W•i Parks
S • � � y d Mixed Use Y a p Opportunity
.O Auto/Freight a \I 1
a U HD Residential Neighborhood Data Collection Area ['
Multimodal 0 '
Rmi Projegt4
•ooked'. Pr°Ie[i M° Eeematetl[e¢t PamaryMotle deiT artl BRi ilxartl Oqr NahNn 11Sh—eed
Mu6&Spa k¢
ShelwoM iMi Herman gpkpNd 5. rlhulftl3 hn RT Jexelk¢aeE phe Wes 5819pW3 pveo(kerg{, �_ x X
M1ervooa 1g68
ro.,Cerner Yrg &I "'e"mPr° (powol°Wh sherwova� $t,tl 13,OrA Aum/PI 1,Y X
TWhW She -tl,O�i.Wshlrp(pn tt94 1Wt YhGrxood pvgayl Itri.Toton A,-vdderl,Fi ilaNn'x.A
qw P.A. X X X
5030 0¢g°"PIPe I°tersettron&SrreermlProvem ants $1.945 q'O Mulu m°tlal _
TLaYdNM1 Slretµrctl,WMhf gtalr Co 5W7 CrPM!Ptl.(VMen lo]yne•Wlllr"I"", AgNfm°h4�� i X
Tualatin 5049 He•manlmulu-motlalrmprvvemen[i,CgoleralE4[M11 54}W.GOB Muhlm°tlal _ x X _ J
ANcg TnnfperlaXenP-joi
IurhtlkNon Proketlp Pmktt Tllk Idleded Coal Pamary ki IMTdertl BgTTlprtl OqT TuahNn ggLSM we°G Mup LSpke
..$hervrootl 94w Petlerrhahl o"Pree," SS.OAD.PA'M ewNilnae,
Sherwo°a 6043 4904-SlreMnotl i<Bi ryele/PN BrlEges $13.30J,PU pike/Pod
sIoi 9aa3 ro,+aum S,m i kd 11x1
sherwo°a 4av eeearcreek Tran
SP.. Trak
5hei WZP wenriaeTraL '.
$Sgp.Cgo h¢N - x x x
T°ehuo 9os9 94w Pamll¢I pztn 55P5,a0q T-1
r CorridbrTransportation Projects - Section
r
,,� r •c f I i y •,_205r�
= u, Commercial
Essential
N y • s � y m ,•••.
.a ,•••. Urban Growth Boundary
mO • E p _ Employment W Priority
• '�-` �'`�" m d Mixed Use Y d Opportunity Parks
M .a Auto/Freight v V Data Collection Area (_!yM
Multimodal C HD Residential Neighborhood r,'
XaaEwaT PmfeNs
il ID
B /RTXIa Romatedca PllmaryMotle \0.i i16atG dall BRTRammal XYb�Spbe
UI W hmem,LO M. BWmotdo"goa0l a Nt 0an RYm ea IX to L.-o'Oaoma iNry1 31x,3W'(xq .,a)"d(At �®
% W N'tt-Co 1135 ammesF Iry(I( eROYB I F 'TS Road
TY $]6,BC(1 Auto/Felgll\ % %
Alls6mwoov aseTi,Waanm�len ux Total Aiei.Yoed Rd lRdaRa PMdladw Tom.Ave . . >I x x
P60./90e fS�aldmxV\oSW�if 1+M F$6iL9B.WB RMto!fnlyryt _ x ®�
Tualatin Sp1B Herman mUFl-modal lmPl-mmems,I'll to Tuall Xtl.I Sx,SW,ppp Multimodal _ k %
Ill Tramspaltitlon
1urlWktlen
Pro"10 Pladal Me Raddal tot Ptlmary Motle iTlgntl BRTTI%ard 9RTTmlapn BPTSX.... XUbl Sal
Naklln ]OB3 ryn $3W.IXA Pl3.4Vitn x 1
x x
TiRa.d.nalaem 90xg TYaaan Rloet Pa[Fwav 9B.6WOrp Tad
SUalaun 9Qt, Mrramt, µ6rtervnr Iter - - -
. SSDJ.6tl 1'raq a %
TualoXn 9066 NomAoUN-S Parallel Pall, $9..,mm Tml _ _ %
Corridor Transportation
A
1062-
r.
r • _. . 2 1 O 1068 I/
1154
1068
1.r i a1.
5020
I d, s +-
At
J
commercial 1
y 0 Essential ��� Urban Growth Boundary n 0'25 "=
Miles
y O • :ij. O. p` Employment T Priority
.O. y d Mixed Use Y Opportunity Parks
Z Auto/Freight I
a Ja U G
gyp Data Collection Area
Multimodal (D 4C Residential Neighborhood N
_ _ _ £kbuary5.30.19
Rwtlway Proje<h
I uaBtlltllen Raktt10 ptekR ilt4 Ellmated Cefl PSImary Mede LRTMgrd BRT)I tl
- pa BRT}uaMtln BRi SM1alwoed Nub6lpka
Shetwnetl 1062 Xnm¢n Rekd iPsmw Sert[[101i134nes wl1 Sldewalky and M.Mnal $8.190,(Xp Aute(Fae18M k
_ k _
SheM'eetl IOSB Ta ryn 11n1e l Signal$I—e Il-lmploVemenls l0owm.,,SM1,dj 53AS3A00 Auto/freight x %
Twktle Slpnped.tipp}.y/ysglr,9mfi iss, Tbayryn9mrvood Rtl pNperpBM1yJ,.b TepnAw)-MRtlenpBm B4mkMRr x %
m, PBlA6Xm. 6#cNWNoo. Hula/rmtht
50$0 OrtgomTaigmn Ntersealen 65tmtlmprovemetda $],9k5,000 Muhlmetlel
IiEdre TnnSpertatlon Prof6b _ _-..
lutlstlleplon 4rokat lO o.akel Tide Fsllmaletl CeN pelmaryMetle IRT TIpttl BRi TIpN BRf LW1aXn BRL SM1e wood NUBB ipke
SFelrwd 20p0 93W
I..-.I.P. 58,U50,¢p PaQestmn x C
31,¢iw0otl WC8 99W Shemootl iC Blrytle/ked Btidgpi $1313W,W1 Bike/Pee % %
x
SM1pfNaN 907) CesarR 1.1 smm Tnll