11/06/2013 - Packet Completeness
91 Review for Boards,
Commissions and
Committee Records
CITY OF TIGARD
TTAC Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee
Name of Board, Commission or Committee
November 6,2013
Date of Meeting
C.L. Wiley
Print Name
W
Signature
12/11/113
Date
'' City of Tigard
Transportation Advisory Committee Agenda
MEETING DATE/TIME: November 6, 2013 -- 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 Sept 4 Meeting Summary Steve
Visitor Comment Steve
2) Walnut Street improvements Kim McMillan 6:40
3) CIP Project Descriptions Mike/Carissa 7:10
4) Comments/recap from Joint meeting with council Steve/All 8:00
5) Paving Report (if time allows) Mike 8:15
6) Other Updates All 8:25
7) Adjourn Steve 8:30
Supporting materials/handouts
September 4, 2013 meeting summary
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA— November 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 1
City of Tigard
TIGA .
Transportation Advisory Committee [TTAC] Meeting Summary
Wednesday, November 6,2013, 6:30 PM— 8:30 PNI
Tigard Library,2"d Floor Conf Room- 13500 S\X'Hall Blvd,Tigard, Oregon
MEMBERS PRESENT (7): Steven Bass (Chair), Karen Hughart (Vice Chair), Mark
Bogert,Evelyn Murphy,Jennifer Stanfield, Mike Stevenson,Don Schmidt
MEMBERS ABSENT (1): Dennis Mitchell
OTHERS PRESENT
City Councilor Marc Woodard, liaison to the TTAC, Elise Shearer, CCAC
representative; Kevin Watkins, Tigard resident; Wade Scarborough, Kittelson and
Associates; Wayne Bauer, WH Pacific; Patrick Oakes, Washington County Land
Use and Transportation
STAFF PRESENT:
Kim McMillan, Engineering Manager; Mike McCarthy, Streets and
Transportation Sr Project Engineer; Carissa Collins, Sr Management Analyst;
Toby LaFrance, Finance and Information Services Director; Chris Wiley, Sr
Administrative Specialist
1. Call to Order 6:36 pm— Chair Step-en Bass
Roll Call— Chris
Approval of Sept 4 Meeting Summary—Approved
Visitor Comment—None
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUMMARY—November 6,2013
City of Tigan d 113125 S lY/Hall Blvd, Tigan d OR 97223 1503-6394171 1 www.4eard=or. ov Pale 1 of 2
I/TranjporlationAdvisog Covwiitlee/2013/11—Nov/1106 13 Meeting Summa
2. Walnut Street Improvements (See Attachments 1 through 5) — Kim McMillan
A. Kim invited Patrick Oakes from Washington County Land Use and Transportation,
Wayne Bauer from WH Pacific, and Wade Scarborough from Kittleson and
Associates to participate in the review of the plan proposals with the committee
members. This 7.3 million dollar project is funded with MSTIP funds and funds
from the City. (Attachments 1, 2)
B. Wade said approximately 50 people attended the public meeting regarding the
project. Most inquiries were detail specific to individual property needs and desires
for access to sanitary sewer, etc. Chair Steve Bass commented on the sidewalks and
walkability in the school area, noting there was a long sidewalk with no intersection
for crossing the street. Wade responded that one possibility might be to install a
flashing pedestrian crossing sign or there are other options that could be considered
for traffic calming in other areas. Kittleson will take a look at it.
C. A great deal of discussion was specific to the intersection alternatives presented for
the intersection at 135th and Walnut. (Attachments 3, 4, 5, 6) Kittleson reported
there was no preferred option among the three alternatives for the intersection.
From staff perspective, a signal costs less money and moves traffic a little more
efficiently during the peak times; roundabouts move traffic more efficiently the rest
of the day. Either option will handle traffic capacity through 2035 anticipated
growth. A roundabout won't allow for a gap in the traffic like a signal will.
Roundabouts have less delay than signals. Wade said safety in a roundabout is
minimally better than an intersection. At the end of the discussion, Chair Bass asked
the members for a vote on which alternative they felt was the better option. It was
unanimous for all TTAC members present for a roundabout configuration versus an
intersection signal.
3. CIP Project Descriptions —Mike McCarthy (Attachments 7, 8, 9)
A. Finance Director Toby LaFrance explained that TTAC's task is to choose which projects
they believe most represent the community's interests without regard for funding sources.
This is the priority stage, not the budgeting stage. That step takes place later on in the
process.
B. Staff presented the list of proposed and a scoring sheet for the members to fill out and asked
members to help them with the following tasks:
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUMMARY—November 6,2013
City of Tigard 113125 SIHall Blvd, Tigard OR 97223 1503-6394171 1 avxx.tigard-or.vnov I Pagel of 2
I/TraiuportationAdvisog Committee/2013/11—Nov/1106 13 Meeting Summary
1. Committee members should choose three to five top projects they'd like to see done
and three to five projects they're placing at the bottom of the priority list.
2. Staff asked TTAC members to please put their explanatory= notes about why they
chose those particular projects as their top five or bottom five. Rate each selection on a
scale from 0 (no desire to have the project) to 5 (Extremely Important), individually, not
in relationship to each other. In other words, there could conceivably be three projects
that are rated a 5. The ratings guidelines are as follows:
5 —Extremely important
4 —Very important
3 — Important
2—Somewhat important
1 —Neutral
0 —Do not want it
3. Committee members make their choices and return the scoring sheet to staff by
Monday, November 25.
4. Staff will come back to the December TTAC meeting to present the aggregated
scoring so the TTAC members can review the rankings.
5. Can the TTAC chair or another designee from the committee attending the quarterly
Budget Meeting on Tuesday,January 21 when the listing is presented to the Budget
Committee.
C. At the conclusion of the presentation, the committee agreed:
1. The committee wants the rating form emailed.
2. They acknowledged it needs to be returned the by Monday, November 25.
3. Steve Bass will be going to the quarterly budget committee meeting on January 21 at
6:30 pm
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUMMARY—November*2013
City of Tigard 113125 SIYI Hall Blvd,Tigan d OR 97223 1503-6394171 1 avwly.tigard-oov I Page 1 of 2
I/Transportation Advisory Committee/2013/11—Nov/1106 13,Weeting Summag
4. Comments/recap from joint meeting with council- Steve/All
A. Mike McCarthy passed out copies of the paving report and associated maps.
(Attachments 10, 11) He will be going before Council on November 19 to discuss
street maintenance fees and other aspects of the paving program.
B. Steven reported the September 17 joint TTAC/Council meeting went well.
5. Adjournment
Steven adjourned the meeting at 8:37 pm.
APPROVED CL"Chris"Wiley,TTAC A1Qti Secretary
ATTEST: Steven Bass, Chairman
Recording Secretary's Note:To requests copies of the attachments to these minutes,please email:
christinew@tigard-or.gov
The next TTAC meeting will be held on Wednesday,December 4, at the Tigard Library
2nd Floor Conference Room, 13500 SWC Hall Blvd.from 6.30pm- 8.30pm.
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUMMARY-November 6,2013
City of Tigard 113125 SIV Hall Blvd, Tigard OR 97223 1503-6394171 4and-orgov I Page 1 of 2
I/TransportationAdvisog Committee/2013/11—Nov/1106 13 Meeting Summary
F
wt
LW
a
s
SN Ann 5�� SW WALNUT STREETFowler Middle School
— — SIF 116th Avenue -SWI AvenueFTI
°
$ l m
in
1
� }.
.•� °( ....... _ - =-ras°-_ �%� \�` t�� I .t'-t•I' °' j I
oJ
Ise
IEGFND.
-•.:. �. �r:� .oars-� — r �\ --
_ I \ I1
I EdN m
N�°Ig
NvetlaMhai^ fn
ProWsetl ImCraV I
S.W.Bambi Lane �1 \. <n I ,.:e..• v�wo�.umaM
.ter.. ....._ I .
l I 1 ",
II Rapc�e smpvl9 i
TYPICAL SECTION 4
I
WORM 1
October 17th,2013
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
Attachment 2 (1 s/s pg)
� T ' 1 LANE — 2 LANE e� SW WALNUT STREET SIGNALIZED ,f
ROUNDABOUT - SW1135th Avenue Intersection INTERSECTION
E
• M Conceptual Alternatives -
r J.
S.W /atn - Street
S W Walnut
.: ut Street
i
a •
Ito
^
•
L' r � +�'C r �� *4
All
t _
144S 1
. 1 �� .` . , ' •�. .. :« `tea << r`-
I
WHPid,fic G
3 1
PPNmiO.OFt 9)715
X266155 Fm 503 5 76-0-/15
°REG°`' October 17th, 2013
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
Attachment 3 (1 s/s pg)
SW WALNUT STREET
SWI 133th Avenue Intersection a
LO Conceptual Alternatives
I
,a
o '
WQ Facility , I .
S.W. VV WQ Facility
nut Street
V
6a_ 9•
1
WQ Facility I /
6`d #
LEGEND: A
LEGEND: �
Existing building \ Existing building \ I
Proposed roadway ` e Proposed roadway
Proposed curb /ate\ Proposed curb �i0\ Q
Proposed sidewalk �Qr` �7O
� Proposed curb ramp
Proposed combinedGC'\ rL \
bike/ped sidewalk Proposed sidewalk �o
X. Proposed striping \�
Proposed curb ramp
Proposed landscape \
Proposed striping
4
A- ,GTON CO 1 �� 1 00
WHPacific
Be
0722255 Supe 300 ' ' O '
hen- R 9J
503-62-0—Fax 5oS 52s oJJs , SCALE SCALE
.w+,.wnoa=R.om
O*EGOa
pR October 17th, 2013
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
Attachment 4 (1 s/s pg)
Walnut Street - 135t'Ave Enterseetion Alternatives Analysis Summary Matrix �
E
"Proposed"
Signal One-Lane Roundabout Roundabout
CostC CM
Lane Diagrain
4 �.r j
._.. + V + U
� Q Lr)
Constriction Cost -$800k -$1.3M ^-$1.3M o
ROW Needs (if Any) 750 sf City Property 28,000 sf City Property 28,000 sf City Property. Q
Total Iinpervious Area 36,000 sf 61,000 sf 61,000 sf
Property Impacts 1 Detention Pond 2 Detention Ponds 2 Detention Ponds
Traffic Operations
2013 PM Peak Performance (LOS and V/C) A / 0.53 A / 0.61 A/0.62
2013 AM Peak Performance A / 0.56 A / 0.67 A/0.56
2013 24-Hour Total Vehicle Delay 34.8 veh-hrs 31.9 veh-hrs 30.9 veh-hrs
2035 PM Peak Performance A / 0.65 B / 0.76 B/0.76
2035 AM Peak Performance A / 0.66 C / 0.88 B/0.72
2035 Additional Growth PM Peak Performance B / 0.73 C / 0.88 C / 0.88
2035 Additional Growth AM Peak Performance B / 0.74 D / 1.01 B / 0.83
2035 24-Hour Total Vehicle Delay 45.5 veh-hrs 54.3 veh-hrs 50.6 veh-hrs
Safety
HSM-Predicted 2013 Crash Rate (crashes/year) 1.60 1.19 1.30
HSM-Predicted 2035 Crash Rate (crashes/year) 2.27 1.68 1.84
Bicycle Usage Bike Lanes Bikes in lane or on Bikes in lane or on
sidewalk sidewalk
Pedestrian Usage Signalized Crosswalks Two Unsignalized Two unsignalized
50 to 60 feet long Crosswalks 20 feet long crosswalks 20 to 30'long
Turning Radius 45-ft 457ft 45-ft
(30'Firetrucl- SU-30) (30'Firetruck, SU-30) (30'Firetruck, SU-2))
What is a roundabout? Why consider a roundabout?
A roundabout is a type of circular intersection Compared to other types of intersections,roundabouts
with yield control of entering traffic,islands on the have demonstrated safety and other benefits. Efficient during both peak hours and other tim
approaches,and appropriate roadway curvature to Typically less delay
reduce vehicle speeds. Roundabouts: ,
Modern roundabouts are different from rotaries and Fewer stops and hard accelerations,less
other traffic circles.For example,roundabouts are • More than 90%reduction in fatalities" time idling
typically smaller than the large,high-speed rotaries • 76%reduction in injuries"
still in use in some parts of the country. In addition, • 35%reduction in all crashes'" •
roundabouts are typically larger than neighborhood • Often no signal equipment to install,power,
traffic circles used to calm traffic. • Slower speeds are generally safer for pedestrians and maintain
• Smaller roundabouts may require less right-of '
A roundabout has these characteristics: way than traditional intersections
Often less pavement needed
With roundabouts, head-on and • t
• high-speed right angle collisions are
• - virtually eliminated. • We er open n
s • Functional and aesthetically pleasing
e
Tips for safely walking and biking
through a roundabout
• Potential vehicle conflict point ,
• - Ii
-Safety Effect of Roundabout Conversions in the United States:Empirical Bayes
Observational Before After Study"Tran d born Research Record 1751.Transportation
Research Board(TRB).National Acade ces(NASO,Washington,U.C..2001. Research is ongoing on additional
and design considerations to addre
Source:RaundftfflM hldrmanonal Gude.Federal Highway Administration, NCHRP Report 572.Roundabouts in th ited States.National Cooperative Highway visually impaired pedestria
Wesionoon,U C.,latest version,except as nowd. Research Program.TRB,NAS,Washington,0 C.2007.
FHWA-SA-08-006 ,u u,.•„r „n ,„,,rr„o„,
QW federal Highway Administration
j r
"Personally, I love them, and 17/ tell you i Education is key. i
why. You only have to stop one lane of !
traffic, then go to the middle and wait. Education is vital to the acceptance and success of a roundabout.
The cars can't o much faster than 20 m h
Navigating a roundabout Is easy.But because people can be
g g p � apprehensive about new things,it's important to educate the public � Roundabouts
through the roundabout so the crossingabout roundabout use.
aspect is great." There are just a few simple guidelines to remember when driving A Safer Choice
Denise Haltom i through a roundabout:
w,scow;w t. .Slow down.
Cdeen Hdy 17es.+t,alrur � �,�
February 6.2001 ! 2. It there's more than one lane,use the left(ane to turn left.
the right(ane to turn tight,and all lanes to go through.
unless directed otherwise by signs and pavement inarkings. = 1 f
"We have had a lot of people not very s. Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists.
i
happy about the idea of roundabouts, but i 4. Yield at the entry to circulating traffic.
after they are constructed, those fears 5. Stay in your lane within the roundabout and use your right 4tOld
turn signal to indicate your intention to exit. ._._
mostly go away.'
6. Always assume trucks need all available space— �_
Brian Walsh don't pass them!
Wasnurgton Slate Department of fransportatron 7. Clear the roundabout to allow emergency vehicles to pass.
Seattle rimes
,lune 5.2002
Visit to learn
"We all know people speed up to get F
through a yellow light. But at the more about roundabouts
; tittles
roundabout, all the vehicles have to slow
down ... we have almost 50 roundabouts
now, we have a lot[fewer]personal ,:
injuries. We have fewer fatalities."
James Brainard ! `
Mayor City of Carmel,Indiana
www nbc l7.com
Novernber8.2007
U.S.Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1
.9+
Design standards for roundabouls continue to evolve,and not -
roundabotds meet current recommend bre.Please rel"
for recomnlemtaht design practice
Original source photo by Lee Rodegertres Pluto has been altered to illustrate
roundabout and updated signage.
FHWA-SA-08-006 ,u s n.•„,r r, r,t id Transpor krho
qW Federal Highway Administration
i
t
r
"Personally, I love them, and 171 tell you j Education is key.
why. You only have to stop one lane of 1
; Education Is vital to the acceptance and success of a roundabout.
traffic, then go to the middle and wait.
Navut.tt•r: luundabout Is easy,taut because people can be
The cars can't go much faster than 20 mph + applen"11",tve about new filings,It*,unportant to edur;ate tile.puhhc
through the roundabout so the crossing about lotlndaboul use. Roundabouts
aspect is great." There are just a few simple guidelines to remember when driving A Safer Choice
Denise Haltom ; through a roundabout: !
"J".., ,�.. ,. ,,,t, �u:unrco.wiscatsm 1. Slowdown. a
1 2. If there's more than one lane,use the left lane to turn left,
the right lane to turn right.and all lanes to go through, " ^N
,
unless directed otherwise by signs and pavement markings.
"We have had a lot of people not very 3. Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists. 3.�.= +- t!. It
happy about the idea of roundabouts, but 4. Yield at the entry to circulating traffic. :• .. �� -
after they are constructed, those fears i `. Stay in your lane within the roundabout and use your right-
mostly go away." s
turn signal to indicate your intention to exit.
[ •< �•
6. Always assume trucks need all available space
Brian Walsh don't pass them!
Wasnurpton State OeparYrnent of Transportation -
7. Clear the roundabout to allow emergency vehicles to pass.
Seattle Times
June 5.2002 _
"We all know people speed up to get } _
through a yellow light. But at the
tttt�
roundabout, all the vehicles have to slow
down ... we have almost 50 roundabouts
now, we have a lot[fewer]personal
injuries. We have fewer fatalities."
James Brainard L
Mayor.City of Carmel.Indiana
www.007.aom
November 8.2007
1 U S Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Ue,tun stmaards lot r"undatwuls cunhnue to evolve,and nut all features.;f ex.islmu -- - - _
roundabuuta mer4 current recunimendtd nractwe. Please retet to I HVJAs creb vtr• - _ f
lot recommendations Int design practice
Onanal source phuho by I re Rodegeoto has been altered to illustrate
rotmObout and updated signage +
i
What is a roundabout > Why consider a roundabout?
A roundabout is a type of circular intersection Compared to other types of intersections,roundabouts
with yield control of entering traffic.islands on the have demonstrated safety and other benefits. • Efficient during both peak hours and other times
approaches,and appropriate roadway curvature to • Typically less delay
reduce vehicle speeds. Roundabouts:
t717-7.r1117
Modern roundabouts are different from rotaries and • Fewer stops and hard accelerations,less
other traffic circles.For example,roundabouts are • More than 90%reduction in fatalities" time idling
typically smaller than the large.high-speed rotaries • 76%reduction in injuries"
still in use in some parts of the country. In addition. ,. " ' '
roundabouts are typically larger than neighborhood • 35%reduction in all crashes"" • Often no signal equipment to install,power,
traffic circles used to calm traffic. • Slower speeds are generally safer for pedestrians and maintain
A roundabout has these characteristics: Smaller roundabouts may require less right of
way than traditional intersections
• Often less pavement needed
With roundabouts, head-on and • t
_ high-speed right angle collisions arechangelan
tin exit virtually eliminated. Quieter operation
eY"ield signs • Functional and aesthetically pleasing
eat entries-
400
Tips for safely walking and biking
Generally through a roundabout
Circular Shape
vGeometry
forcesthat Potential vehicle conflict point slow speeds
Can have
more than
r:'a
onelane4
a
"Safely Effect of Roundabout Conversions in the United states Empiticai Bayes
Observational t3etme Alter Study"lion rtataidn Rernid 1757 Transpatalion
Research Board 1TRBt.National Acad J�.nl=(NASI,Washington.D C,2001. Research is ongoing on additional ntsand design considerations to addresds o
Source:Rvunrlatx> rtnrmanonal Guide.Fedenat Highway Administration. NCHRP Report 572 Roundabouts in ed states.National Cooperative Highway visually impaired pedestrians.
Washington.D C,latest version,except as noted Research Program.TRO.NAS,Washington,D.0.2007.
CIP SUMMARY PROJECT LIST
Projects to be considered for FY 2015-19
lubruitted
Slat- I
'ge#s
nt Current Pavement Management Program In adopted CIP
..urrent Current Walnut Sf Improvements-1161h Ave to Tiedeman&135th Ave Intersection In adopted CIP
Current Current Citywide Pedestrian&Cyclist Improvements In adapted CIP
Cwrent Current Pacific Highwoy/Goorde Street/McDonald Street Improvements In adopted CIP
Current Current 72nd Avenue/Dartmouth Street Intersection Improvement In adopted CIP
Current Current 92nd Avenue Sidewalk(Waverly Dr.to Cook Park) In adopted CIP
Current __Cu_rrent Main Street/Green Street Reti4it _ In adopted CIP
Current Current Main Street/Grecs Street Improvements-Phase 2 In adopted CIP
Current Current Tiedemmr Sidewalk(Tigard St to Greenburg Rd) In adopted CIP
Current Current Update Transportation System Plan for River Terrace In adopted CIP
Current Curium Tigard 7"ransporlotion SDC In adopted CIP
Current Current Upper Boones Ferry Rd/Durham Adoptive Signal Coordination _ In adopted CIP
Current Current Commercial 5t.Sidewalk(Lincoln to Main)-Phose 1 In adopted CIP _
Hall/McDonald Intersection Improvements Left-Turn Lane;Right-Turn onto westbound In adopted CIP
Current Current McDonald;Extend left-turn lone northbound McDonald 51.) P
Install sidewalks on Murdock Street from 103rd to Tuality Middle
New Citizen Murdock St.Sidewalk(103rd to Tuality Middle School)
School/Templeton Elementary(10001).
Install sidewalks on 100th from McDonald to Murdock(2300'±). If
New Citizen 100th Avenue Sidewalk and/or Speed Humps(McDonald to Murdock) unable to do this,install sidewalks and install speed humps.[Can be
combined with 95027-Pedestrian/Cyclist Improvements]
Install a sidewalk from Greenburg Road which crosses the bridge and
New Citizen North Dakota St.Sidewalk(Greenburg Rd to Fenno Creek Trail) connects the two trails.This would require construction of a new
bridge.
New Citizen 78th Avenue Sidewalk(Pfaffle to Spruce St) Install curb/sidewalks on both sides of 78th from Pfaffle to Spruce
Street 1500't).
New Citizen Commercial Street Extension(Lincoln to 95th)-Phase 2 Construct complete street Improvements Including sanitary,storm,
and water.Sidewalks to be Installed on the south side only.
Install sidewalks(both sides)Intermittently to fill in gaps from
New Citizen 98th Avenue(Commercial to Greenburg Rd)
Commercial Street to Greenburg Road,
Install sidewalks(both sides)on Hall from Pacific Highway to Durham
New Citizen Hall Boulevard Sidewalk Improvements(Pacific Hwy to Durham) Road.
Provide a safe route via widening streets,providing designated
Citizen Pedestrian Connectivity(Downtown to Cook Park) crosswalks,sidewalks and trails as necessary to travel from
Downtown,up Ash St.to 100th Ave,to 98th Ave.and eventually
looping around/through Cook Park.
Construct the necessary Improvements to provide safe
New Citizen Tigard Street Bicycle/Sidewalk Improvements(Downtown to Dirksen Nature Park) pedestrian/bicycle passage from the downtown area to Dirksen
Nature Park
Widening of Tigard Street along the Dirksen Nature Park frontage
New Staff Tigard Street(Dirksen Nature Park frontage)
(2000).
Construct sidewalks on both sides of the street from Hall Blvd to
New Staff Hunziker St.Sidewalk(Hall Blvd to 72nd Ave)
72nd Avenue(4000±)
Construct new connection from Hunziker Road to Tech Center Drive
New Staff Well Street-Hunziker to Tech Center Drive
including street,sidewalk,planter strip,and utilities.
Install traffic signal to alleviate safety concerns and reduce peak hour
New Staff Hall Blvd/Pfaffle St-New Traffic Signal
delays.Intersection is currently a two-way-stop.
Widen 72nd Avenue from Dartmouth to Pacific Highway to five lanes.
New Staff 72nd Avenue Improvements(Dartmouth St.to Pacific Hwy) Sections include 2 travel lanes in each direction with a center turn
lane;wider pedestrian friendly sidewalks;street trees;sewer and
storm water treatment along with LED street lights.
Unfunded 121st Avenue(Walnut to Gaarde)&Complete 121st(Whistler to Tippitt St.) Widening of Walnut to 3lanes includes curb,sidewalk and utilities.
Widen Walnut St.with two travel lanes and one turn lane;and
Unfunded Walnut Street(Tiedeman to Pacific Hwy) Including sidewalks and storm drainage.
Unfunded Tiedeman/Greenburg Rd./N.Dakota Intersection Improvements Realign these three streets to provide a safe and efficient traffic flow.
Determine,design,and construct the necessary reconfiguration to
Unfunded Tiedeman/N.Dakota/Tigard St.Realignment elevate the congestion on these three roadways due to the high
traffic volumes and the close proximity to the existing intersections.
Unfunded Ash I.crossing of the WES Rail Line Complete the Ash Street by constructing a crossing over the WES rail
line.
Unfunded River Terrace Capital Improvement Projects-Transportation Street projects developed from the Master Plan
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
Attachment 7 (2 s/s pgs)
itt.uiw
CIP SUMMARY PROJECT LIST
Projects to be considered for FY 2015-19
Submitted
Status Bv 1P,.yt,ctN,tm, Comments
New Staff 72nd Avenue Sidewalks on eastside(Gonzaga to Hampton) Install approximately 350'of sidewalk on the east side of the street.
Staff Bonita Road/Sequoia Parkway Intersection Improvements Install traffic signal and turn lanes to alleviate safety concerns and
reduce peak hour delays.
NInstall traffic signal and turn lanes to reduce peak hour delays.
New Staff Tiedeman Road/Tigard Street Intersection Improvements
Intersection is currently an all-way-stop.
New Staff Greenburg Road(Tiedeman to Hwy 217) Widen to five lanes.Include double left turn lanes on Tiedeman.
Widen to 3lanes from Pacific Highway to Hall Blvd.including center
New Staff McDonald St.Widening(Pacific Hwy to Hall Blvd) turn lane,bike lanes,curb/sidewalk,planter strips,retaining walls
and the necessary signalization.Significant right-of-way would need
to be purchased.
New Staff Upper Boones Ferry Road and Carman Drive(Durham to Sequoia) Widen to 5 lane complete street plus turn lanes as appropriate.
New Staff 72nd Ave./Hwy 217 Interchange Construct interchange capacity and bridge widening Improvements.
New Staff Pacific Hwy/Walnut St.Intersection Improvements Construct additional turn lanes and signallzation.
New Staff Pacific Hwy/Durham Rd.Intersection Improvements Construct additional turn lanes and signallzation.
New Staff Durham Road Widening(Upper Boones Ferry Rd to Pacific Hwy) Widen Durham Road to five Innes.Include turning lanes and
intersection improvements.
New Staff Durham Road Widening(Upper Boones Ferry to Hell Blvd.) Reduced scope of the above
New Staff Bonita Road Widening(72nd Ave,to Hall Blvd.) Widen Bonita Road from the current 3 lane configuration to 5 lanes.
Replace bridge.Bridge is narrow and constricts not only vehicular
Unfunded N.Dakota St.Bridge Replacement traffic,but pedestrian access to the trails and surrounding
communities.
Unfunded Hall Blvd Sidewalks(Bonita Rd.to Durham Rd.) Construct sidewalk on both sides of Hall Blvd,Bonita Road to
Durham Road.
Unfunded Scoffins/Halt/Hunziker Realignment Reallgn Scoffins Street with Hunziker Road at the intersection of Hall
Blvd.Improvements would include street,utility and signalization.
Unfunded Hall Blvd Sidewalks(Bonita Rd&McDonald St) Construct sidewalk on both sides of Hall Blvd,from McDonald to
Bonita.
Widen approx.2000 lin
feet of roadway including utilities,
n
Unfunded 72nd Ave.Improvements(Hwy 217 to Elmhurst St.) curb/sidewalk,planter strips and signalization upgrades.
Connect the multitude of missing sidewalk pieces along 72nd Avenue
Unfunded 72nd Ave.Sidewalks(Hwy 217 to Bonita Rd) from Highway 217 south to Bonita Road.
Unfunded Bull Mountain/Benchview/139th Roundabout Construct a roundabout at the intersection of Bull Mtn.Rd.,
Benchview Dr.and 139th to alleviate the congestion.
Construct a bridge which will connect two pieces of Greenfield Drive
I Infunded Greenfield or(North of Bull Mtn.Road and across ravine) which fall north and south of a ravine.Connecting from Bull Mtn
Road to Benchview Terr.
i Construct sidewalk on both sides of Park St.from Pacific Highway to
.,unded Park St Sidewalk(Pacific Hwy to Watkins) Watkins Street
Warner Street runs relatively parallel and is half way between
Unfunded Improve Warner Street(Pacific Hwy North to end) Highway 217 and Hall Blvd.Currently serves as more of a parking lot
access.
Unfunded Watkins Sidewalk(Park to Walnut) Construction of curb/sidewalk on the approximate 2000 linear feet of
roadway.
Unfunded Main Street Bridge Painting/Rehabilitation Conduct the necessary repairs(pressure washing,patching,joint
repair,patntin,etc.),
TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FY 2015-19 Capital Improvement Program Rankings
Please give your reason for recommending this
Project Priority
LARGE PROJECTS
72nd Avenue (Hwy 99W to
Dartmouth St) Complete Street
121st Ave (Walnut to Gaarde)
Complete Street
Ash Avenue Crossing of the
Portland&Western Railroad
(and WES)
Hall/ McDonald Intersection
Improvement
North Dakota Street Bridge
Replacement
Tiedeman/Greenburg/North
Dakota Intersections
Tiedeman/ North Dakota
Realignment
Wall Street(Hunziker to Tech
Center) New Complete Street
Walnut Street(Tiedeman to
Hwy 99W) Complete Street
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
Attachment S (3 s/s pgs)
—-- --
Pagel
TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FY 2015-19 Capital Improvement Program Rankings
SMALL PROJECTS
78th Ave (Pfaffle to Spruce)
Sidewalk
98th Ave (Commercial to
Greenburg) Sidewalk
98th Ave (Murdock to Sattler)
Sidewalk
100th Ave (McDonald to
Murdock) Sidewalk
Ash Ave (Fanno Creek to
McDonald) Sidewalk
Commercial Street(Lincoln to
Main) Sidewalk
Commercial Street(95th to
Lincoln) Complete Street
Hall / Pfaffle Intersection
Improvement(Traffic Signal)
Hall Blvd (Burnham St to South
of Bonita) Sidewalks
Hall Blvd (Bonita to Durham)
Sidewalks
Page 2 - —
TIGARD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FY 2015-19 Capital Improvement Program Rankings
Hunziker St(Hall to 72nd)
Sidewalk
Murdock St(103rd to
Templeton School) Sidewalk
North Dakota St(Greenburg to
Fanno Creek Trail) Sidewalk
Tiedeman Ave (Tigard St to
Greenburg Rd) Sidewalk
Tigard Street(Gallo Ave to
Fanno Creek Trail)
➢ Please provide a reason for each of your Lqg 5 recommendations for council consideration.
y Please provide a reason for each of your bottom 3 ranked projects for council consideration.
— Page 3 — — --
LARGE PROJECTS (In Alphabetical Order)
72nd Avenue (Hwy 99W to Dartmouth St) Complete Street
Description: Widen 72 d Ave to five lanes with sidewalks, bike lanes, landscaped medians, and landscaped
planter strips from Hwy 99W to the existing 5-lane plus sidewalk section near the Winco shopping center,
and other potential sidewalk provided by private development. This would complete the five-lane complete
street (with sidewalks,planter strips, and bike lanes) from Hwy 99W to Dartmouth St.
Reasons to Construct: 72nd Ave carries a relatively high volume and speed of traffic. Pedestrians and
cyclists currently have no sidewalk,no bike lane, and in many areas, no place to walk outside the busy travel
lanes of this Arterial and primary access to many Tigard Triangle businesses. The lack of space to walk and
high volume and speed of traffic results in significant accident potential.
Daily Traffic Volume: 8,500 Functional Class:Arterial
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 19 Injury: 11 Ped: 0
Length: 2,200 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
v
Iii r _ • �' _
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
11/5/2013 7:42 AM Attachment 9 (24 s/s pgs)
121St Ave (Walnut to Gaarde) Complete Street
Description: Construct sidewalks,bike lanes, and some landscaped planter strips along 121"Avenue from
Whistler Lane to Tippitt Street,which would complete the sidewalks and bike lanes from Walnut Street to
Gaarde Street. We would anticipate this being a context-sensitive design to minimize community impact,
with two lanes (no center turn lane), and the planter strip narrowing in spots with physical constraints.
Reasons to Construct: 121"Ave carries a relatively high volume and speed of traffic. Pedestrians and
cyclists currently have no sidewalk,no bike lane, and in many areas,no place to walk outside the busy travel
lanes of this Collector that is the main access route for a significant area of Tigard. The lack of space to
walk and high volume and speed of traffic results in significant accident potential.
Daily Traffic Volume: 4,700 Functional Class: Collector
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 3 Injury: 1
l rY� Ped: 0
Community Interest: This is one of the most-requested projects in the City,behind Walnut St
Length: 2,500 feet
Prospective Funding Partners: Various bike/ped and active transportation funding programs
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 10
r
r
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Ash Avenue Crossing of the Portland & Western Railroad (and WES)
Description: Connect Ash Avenue from Commercial St across the railroad tracks to Burnham St. This
would be an at-grade crossing. A bridge over or tunnel under the tracks would not be feasible due to grade,
community impact, cost, drainage,and/or flood plain issues.
Reasons to Construct: The existing rail line is a barrier to mobility in and around downtown Tigard. This
crossing could enhance circulation options for people, especially pedestrians and cyclists,in the downtown
area depending on development patterns. It would reduce potential traffic congestion on Hall Blvd and
Main St, and would provide a closer alternate to the Hall Blvd crossing.
Daily Traffic Volume: New Street Functional Class: Collector
Project Difficulty: Depends on regulatory requirements to get a new crossing
Complicating Factors: Regulatory authorities,based on state law, do not allow new at-grade rail crossings,
and typically only grant exceptions if a jurisdiction is willing to close an existing `meaningful,crossing. One
option would be to reconfigure Tiedeman and/or North Dakota so that one meets the other west of the
tracks, and a crossing can be closed.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 2
Ole
10
C.
61
r r#
is
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Mall / McDonald Intersection Improvement
Description: Construct capacity improvements at the intersection of Hall Blvd and McDonald St. This
would likely include a southbound right turn lane, second southbound through lane (extending to Bonita),
extension of the eastbound right turn lane, and a second northbound left turn lane and the corresponding
receiving lane on McDonald. Sidewalks and bike lanes would be included throughout the project area.
Reasons to Construct: Congestion; Significant delays are observed at this intersection,particularly in the
afternoon peak hour. Complete the requirement for a southbound right turn lane conditioned by ODOT
on the library construction.
Daily Traffic Volume: 17,500 (Hall South); 14,000 (Hall North); 11,000 (McDonald)
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 24 Injury: 10 Ped: 0
Functional Classification: Arterials Intersection Level of Service (LOS): F (PM Peak)
Funding: Partially funded in adopted 13-18 CIP, but being reprioritized because work has not started on
the project yet.
Jurisdiction: Hall Blvd is a State Highway;it is not Tigard's responsibility to maintain Hall Blvd.
McDonald is a city street.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 4
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
North Dakota Street Bridge Replacement
Description: The existing North Dakota Street bridge over Fanno Creek is very narrow,lacks space for
pedestrians and cyclists, and may have deteriorated to a condition in which it map be eligible for bridge
replacement grant funds. This project would replace the existing bridge with a new bridge wide enough to
accommodate pedestrians and cyclists along with motor vehicles. Environmental regulations would require
a new bridge to be significantly higher and longer than the current bridge.
Reasons to Construct: Narrow bridge; No sidewalks; No bike lanes; High volume and speed of traffic;
Deteriorating bridge condition; Key connection across Fanno Creek
Daily Traffic Volume: 5,500 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 0 Injur 0
S'� Ped: O
Prospective Funding Partner: Federal Hazardous Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (when
bridge deteriorates into eligible condition).
Complicating Issues: North Dakota / Tiedeman realignment discussions
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 10
a
1
K
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Tiedeman/Greenburg/forth Dakota Intersections
Description: Widen Greenburg Road to include a second northbound lane from Tiedeman Avenue to Hwy
217 and add a second left tun lane from Tiedeman avenue onto Greenburg Road. May include minor
reconfiguration of the Tiedeman/North Dakota Intersection
Reasons to Construct: Significant traffic congestion occurs in this area,particularly during the morning
rush hour.
Daily Traffic Volume: Greenburg: 20,000 (north), 11,000 (south); Tiedeman 11,000; North Dakota 4,000
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 49 Injuq: 17 Ped: 1
Functional Classification: Arterial (Greenburg) Collector (Tiedeman); Neighborhood Rte (North Dakota)
Estimated Intersection LOS: F (AM peak)
Complicating Factors: Tiedeman / North Dakota reconfiguration discussions. This project would need
to include widening the Greenburg Road bridge over Ash Creek
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 7
i
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Tiedeman / North Dakota Realignment
Description: Reconfigure Tiedeman Ave and/or North Dakota St so that one meets the other west of the
railroad tracks. Several options are possible. Staff is modeling the alignment options requested by Council
Reasons to Construct: This would address traffic problems at the Tiedeman/North Dakota intersection
caused by its proximity to the Tiedeman/Greenburg intersection. This project would also allow closure of
an at-grade rail crossing,which could possibly be `traded' for an Ash Ave rail crossing in downtown Tigard.
Daily Traffic Volume: 11,000 (Tiedeman East); 8,000 (Tiedeman West); 4,000 (North Dakota)
Project Area Crashes (2007-10): Total: 10 Inju 3
� Ped: 0
Functional Classification: Collector (Tiedeman);Neighborhood Route (North Dakota)
Complicating Factors: Significant property, building, and/or environmental impact
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 10 (North Dakota Bridge)
. i 25x
D?
MP3
77, 735 07 10�'138� i
ys * X11 , �r _7 11133317311711511121 �E,�y '0-
't �9�5 _. � fS4371'. 17141 ♦'117sbV
� 1 i
f
to
�y 1122 n
10140 Y
` 10250
IA t 5
1003
1050 �r�
.4
11530 11-040
Y64
BO '
fi4 1 d
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Wall Street (Hunziker to Tech Center) New Complete Street
Description: Build a new street connection from Hunziker St across currently vacant land to Tech Center
Dr,which connects to 72"d Ave the railroad tracks to Burnham St. The new street would include sidewalks,
bike lanes, and planter strips.
Reasons to Construct: This project would provide a way to connect from Hunziker St to 72"'Ave without
going through the congested Hwy 217/72"`'Ave interchange area. It would also facilitate economic
development by opening up access to one of the few remaining large vacant parcels of industrial-zoned
property in Tigard.
Daily Traffic Volume: New Street Functional Class: Local Industrial
Length: 3,500 feet
r,
d . w
f.
r` vr,
z
I
P-!Tq
1
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Walnut Street (Tiedeman to Hwy 99W) Complete Street
Description:This project would construct a three-lane road with center turn lane, plus sidewalks, bike
lanes,planter strips, and storm drainage along Walnut Street from Tiedeman Ave to Hwy 99W. This would
include adding turn lanes to help ease congestion at the Walnut/Hwy 99W intersection.
Reasons to Construct: No bike lanes; sidewalk only on one side; Once the 116`''- Tiedeman section is
complete, this will be last remaining piece of Walnut to upgrade from a country road to an urban street and
would complement all the work already completed; Congestion at the Walnut/Hwy 99W intersection.
Daily Traffic Volume: 10,000 Functional Class: Arterial
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 55 (most at 99W) Injury: 22 Ped: 1
Length: 2,400 feet Intersection LOS: F
Complicating Factors: Tight right-of-way (buildings close to road); Wetland crossing
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 8
rt
i,Cyd
-
,,ss i-
,
t.
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
SMALLER PROJECT'S — In Alphabetical Order
78`h Ave (Pfaffle to Spruce) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6'curb-tight sidewalk along one side
of 78`h avenue from Pfaffle Street to Spruce Street. This would likely be along the east side of 78th,
connecting to the existing sidewalk extending south from Spruce St.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 22 feet wide. Pedestrians either walk in the travel lane,
or across the fronts of people's yards.
Daily Traffic Volume: 1,400 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 0 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 1,300 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
;r
prim- oft-
r.+
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
98th Ave (Commercial to Greenburg) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6' curb-tight sidewalk along the east
side of 98`h Avenue from Greenburg Rd to Commercial St. This would connect to the existing sidewalk
extending north from Commercial St, existing sidewalk near Pihas St, and existing sidewalk near Greenburg
Rd. Additional right-of-wail would need to be acquired for the majority of the new sidewalk.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 22 to 32 feet wide. Pedestrians either walk in the travel
lane, or across the fronts of people's yards.
Daily Traffic Volume: 600 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 0 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 700 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
5
NO
•1
y y
i
t�•
s�*
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
98" Ave (Murdock to Sattler) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6' curb-tight sidewalk along one side
of 98`h Avenue from Murdock St to Sattler St. This would likely be along the east side, extending from the
edge of the existing shoulder bikeway.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 28 feet wide. Pedestrians typically walk in the shoulder
bikeway. Connects to elementary and middle schools via 300' of Murdock St.
Daily Traffic Volume: 1,200 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 3 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 1,100 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
� �SPEE
t t
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
1001h Five (McDonald to Murdock) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6' curb-tight
of 1001' sidewalk along one side
Avenue from McDonald Street to Murdock Street. Some right-of-way will be necessary, and some
grade issues will add difficulty to the project.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 22 feet wide. Pedestrians typically have to walk in the
travel lane. Within '/a mile of an elementary and middle school.
Daily Traffic Volume: 1,,001— '1 Q Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 0 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 2,100 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
•F
-•F y�
ti
s.
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Ash Ave (Fanno Creek to McDonald) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6' curb-tight sidewalk along one side
of Ash Avenue (and 100`''Ave) from its current end near Fanno Creek to McDonald Street. This will likely
be along the northwestern side of the street, connecting to existing sections of sidewalk. Some right-of-way
will be necessary.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 22 to 32 feet wide. Pedestrians typically have to walk
in the travel lane or across people's front yards where sidewalk does not exist.
Daily Traffic Volume: 1,000 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 0 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 3,000 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
r
' ,r
i
br�rr._
,.i.:. Y
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Commercial Street (Lincoln to Main) Sidewalk
Description: Construct a sidewalk along one side of Commercial Street under the 99W viaduct to connect
the adjacent neighborhood to downtown Tigard.
Reasons to Construct: High pedestrian volumes despite lack of facilities. The existing neighborhood has
hundreds of houses within easy walking distance of downtown Tigard's businesses, attractions,and transit,
but lack of sidewalk under the bridge is a major impediment to walking. High accident potential
Daily Traffic Volume: 1,000 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 1 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 800 feet
Prospective Funding Partners: Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Enhance Funds
in 2016-18. This project is on the list recommended for funding as a cooperative project with Trimet and
other cities to improve pedestrian access to transit in the southwest corridor,pending STIP finalization.
Complicating Factors: The property south and west of Commercial is owned by the railroad; rail safety
goals include keeping pedestrians far away from rail lines. To the northeast of Commercial,it would be
difficult and very expensive to get a sidewalk around the bridge supports and fill slope.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 7
d' S E�
.�y
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Commercial Street (95" to Lincoln) Complete Street
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6' curb-tight sidewalk along the north
side of Commercial St from 95`h Ave to Lincoln Street. This would connect with existing sidewalk along the
north side of Commercial west of 95th, and may be possible in conjunction with a cooperative project (with
the state and Trimet) to add sidewalk from Lincoln St under the 99W bridge, and connecting to Main St.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 22 feet wide. Pedestrians either walk in the travel lane,
or across the fronts of people's yards.
Daily Traffic Volume: 900 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 1 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 600 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
1
.A
f, f
.1.
_ KIZ,
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Hall / Pfaffle Intersection Improvement (Traffic Signal)
Description: Construct a traffic signal at the intersection of Hall Blvd with Pfaffle St and widen a short
section of Pfaffle to provide longer separate right-turn and left-turn lanes approaching the intersection. Hall
is currently free-flowing,with Pfaffle drivers needing to stop before entering Hall. Hall Blvd is a State Hwy.
Reasons to Construct: Drivers have difficulty pulling out from Pfaffle Street, especially during the
afternoon peak hour, due to high traffic volumes and reduced visibility. The crash rate is higher than
normal for intersections of this type and volume. The bridge railing and vertical curvature make visibility
difficult for drivers pulling out from Pfaffle St.
Daily Traffic Volume: 11,000 on Hall; 5,100 on Pfaffle Functional Class:Arterial/Collector
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 12 Injury: 6 Ped: 0
Community Interest:This is one of the most-requested projects in the City
Current Level of Service Estimate: E
Complicating Factors: Hall Blvd crosses a bridge over Hwy 217 immediately south of this intersection.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
;t95-f• i I
J
i
A
y f
4 .
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Hall Blvd (Burnham St to South of Bonita) Sidewalks
Description:This project would fill in the gaps and complete sidewalks along Hall Blvd from Burnham St
to Murdock St,which is just south of Bonita Road. This would be sidewalks along both sides of Hall Blvd
from Burnham to Bonita. If not constructed with the Hall/McDonald intersection, sidewalks should be set
back to accommodate the intersection project.
Reasons to Construct: This section of Hall Blvd carries a very high volume of traffic. Sidewalk exists
along about 70% of this section, but neither side of the street provides a continuous connection. There are
few nearby pedestrian alternatives to this route.
Daily Traffic Volume: 13,000 to 17,000 Functional Class: Arterial
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 60 Injury: 28 Ped: 1
Jurisdiction:This project is on a State Highway; it is not Tigard's responsibility to maintain Hall Blvd.
Length: 3,200 feet missing sidewalk
Prospective Funding Partners: ODOT, especially their bike/ped program.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 9
Af
i
i
t,.
f
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Fall Blvd (Bonita to Durham) Sidewalks
Description: This project would fill in the gaps and complete sidewalks along Hall Blvd from Bonita Road
to Durham Road.
Reasons to Construct: Hall Blvd carries a high volume of traffic. Sidewalk exist along about 70% of this
section, but neither side of the street provides a continuous connection.
Daily Traffic Volume: 13,000 Functional Class: Arterial
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 28 Injury: 19 Ped: 2
Jurisdiction: This project is on a State Highway;it is not Tigard's responsibility to maintain Hall Blvd.
Length: 2,800 feet missing sidewalk
Prospective Funding Partners: ODOT, especially their bike/ped program.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 9
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Hunziker St (Hall to 72nd) Sidewalk
Description:This project-would build sidewalk along the north side of Hunziker St west of 72nd Ave,
connecting to the existing sidewalk along the north side of Hunziker St that connects to Hall Blvd.
Reasons to Construct: Hunziker St carries a high volume of traffic and many large trucks. Sidewalk exists
along about 75% of the north side, but does not connect to 72nd Ave (and its bridge over Hwy 217). The
"d
transit stop near 72 Ave is currently on gravel. The nearest other connections between 72nd and Hall are
Bonita Rd (4,000 feet south) and Hwy 99W (400 feet north).
Daily Traffic Volume: 6,500 Functional Class: Collector
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 6 Injuq: 1 Ped: 0
Jurisdiction: Most of this section of Hunziker is under state jurisdiction (in the Hwy 217/72"'Ave
interchange area) and not Tigard's responsibility to maintain.
Length: 1,200 feet missing sidewalk
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
� x
t�
i
t
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Murdock St (103`d to Templeton School) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width plus 6' curb-tight sidewalk along one side
of 100t''Avenue from McDonald Street to Murdock Street. Some right-of-way will be necessaq, and some
grade and ditch issues Nvill add difficulty to the project.
Reasons to Construct: Pavement is currently about 22 feet wide. Pedestrians typically have to walk in the
travel lane. Connects to elementar-y7 and middle schools
Daily Traffic Volume: 1,200 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007 - 11): Total: 2 Injury: 0 Ped: 0
Length: 2,200 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
r� ;p
TV
AIL
� r
`Y Y
x
A�
^y.
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
North Dakota St (Greenburg to Fanno Creek Trail) Sidewalk
Description: Construct standard neighborhood route half-width (with bike lane) and sidewalk along one
side of North Dakota St and some of Tiedeman Ave from Greenburg Rd to the Fanno Creek Trail. The
project would need to modify a railroad crossing, and could include a pedestrian bridge across Fanno Creek.
Reasons to Construct: Narrow road; No sidewalks; No bike lanes; High volume and speed of traffic;
Project would connect Fanno Creek Trail to Greenburg Rd,which has sidewalk over Hwy 217 to the
Washington Square Regional Center.
Daily Traffic Volume: 5,500 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 6 InjUr)7: 1 Ped: 0
Complicating Factors: Another project candidate would reconfigure Tiedeman and/or North Dakota to
meet each other west of the railroad tracks; Railroad crossing; Creek crossing; Steep cross-slopes
Length: 1,000 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
{�aw.
p.
;K �t
i
r
4'
_ J
Y!.
C
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Tiedeman Ave (Tigard St to Greenburg Rd) Sidewalk
Description: Construct sidewalk and bike lane along the southeast side of Tiedeman Avenue for 900 feet
southwest of Greenburg Road,which would complete the sidewalk from Greenburg Road to Tigard Street.
This could be constructed in conjunction with the Tigard Street Trail Project along the old rail line.
Reasons to Construct: Tiedeman Ave carries a relatively high volume of traffic. Pedestrians and cyclists
currently have no sidewalk or bike lane through much of this corridor that is the main connection between
significant areas of Tigard.
Daily Traffic Volume: 12,000 Functional Class: Collector
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 8
Injury: 3 Ped: 0
Length: 900 feet
Funding: This project is funded in the adopted 13-18 CIP, but is being reprioritized because work has not
started on it yet.
Complicating Factors: Railroad crossing; Larger project candidates in the area make it possible this project
(if constructed by itself) could need to be removed later.
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale): 8
r
ir+
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Tigard Street (Gallo Ave to Fanno Creek Trail)
Description:Widen Tigard St to allow parking and construct a separated multi-use trail along the south side
of Tigard St from just east of Gallo Avenue to the Fanno Creek Trail.
Reasons to Construct: Narrow road with intermittent sidewalks and no bike lanes. Project would connect
Fanno Creek Trail to existing sidewalks to the west,improving connections to western Tigard and
eventually to Summerlake Park. This project would bridge a gap in the bicycle and pedestrian facilities
network, as there is a lack of good bicycle and pedestrian facilities between western Tigard and the Fanno
Creek Trail and the areas east of the trail.
Daily Traffic Volume: 3,000 Functional Class: Neighborhood Route
Project Area Crashes (2007-11): Total: 0 Inju 0
r3'� Ped: 0
Length: 1,800 feet
Pedestrian/Cyclist Subcommittee Benefit Rating (0 to 10 Scale):
i
IAF
.f^+Y
♦; �•5�..!_"yam �' - ..
.s
w
11/5/2013 7:42 AM
Paving Report For 2013 =
This report outlines the paving and pavement preservation work completed in
2012 and 2013 and lists the actual,anticipated,and budgeted expenses for fiscal
years '12-13,'13-14.
The Tigard Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance of 152 miles of paved
streets. The maintenance strategy for each street varies depending on the adjoining land use,age,
average daily volume,heavy vehicle traffic,and character of that street.
Accomplishments for 2012 and 2013
Pavement projects completed in 2012 and 2013 are summarized in the following table and are
shown on the attached maps (Attachments A and B).
Project 2012 Pavement 2012 Slurry and 2013 Pavement 2013 Slurry and
Overlays Crack Seals Overlays Crack Seals
Length 3.1 miles 16 miles 3.9 Miles 14 Miles
Completed
Area 540,000 2,700,000 650,000 2,300,000
Completed s
Cost (Includes
Design and $1,020,000 $530,000 $1,220,000 $480,000
Inspection)
Cost Per Mile $329,000 $33,000 $316,000 $34,000
Cost Per
Square Foot $1.89 20 cents $1.88 21 cents
In addition to the recently completed citywide pavement overlay project,the Street Maintenance Fee
will also fund a pavement overlay of 92nd Avenue (from Waverley Dr to Cook Park)in conjunction
with a sidewalk project being constructed in fall 2013,and an overlay of a small portion of Barrows
Road in coordination with the City of Beaverton.
The remaining funds each year are spent sealing cracks in street pavement,and on pavement
inspections and inventory (the source of the Pavement Condition Index or PCI).
The Pavement Condition Index(PCIS
Pavement condition is measured by the PCI,with zero being the poorest condition (total pavement
failure) and 100 being the best condition (just constructed pavement). PCI factors include pavement
condition, cracking,pavement distress,weathering,structural strength,and smoothness of ride.
Tigard Street Network Condition
2012 and 2013 have seen the average PCI of Tigard's city streets increased from 68.9 at the end of
2011 to 69.3 at the end of 2012 to and 70.0 at the end of 2013. This was better than our projected
PCI of 68.7 at the end of 2012 and `holding the line' to keep the 68.7 PCI at the end of 2013. Two
factors were significant contributors this improvement:
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 1
11/06/13 TTAC Meeting Summary
Attachment 10 (7 s/s pgs)
1. Successful completion of large slurry seal projects in southern Tigard in 2012 and central
Tigard in 2013. The 2012 slurry seal project was the largest in Tigard's history.
2. City street crews completed many `digout'repairs of small areas of failed pavement around
valve boxes and in the wheel paths etc.This was coordinated with the work of the private
contractor to slurry seal some streets that would otherwise have been in too poor condition
to do so effectively.
Previous Council Action and the Street Maintenance Fee
Pavement maintenance is primarily funded through the City's Street Maintenance Fee,a monthly
user fee dedicated to the maintenance of existing roadways in Tigard.The fee was recommended by
a citizen task force and established by Ordinance No. 03-10 in November 2003.
Council revisited the Street Maintenance Fee in 2009 and 2010. Recognizing funding constraints
and the difficulties of raising revenue in a recession,Council adopted Resolution No. 10-01 which:
1. Established a long-term Pavement Condition Index (PCI) goal of 72 to 75.Based on cost
estimates, the Council quickly recognized that the level of adopted funding would not be
adequate to get to a PCI of 75 and set an interim goal to "hold the line"by maintaining an
average PCI of at least 67.Beyond this point, streets require more extensive reconstruction
prior to paving,which results in substantially higher street maintenance costs.
2. The ordinance also directs that the fee be adjusted for inflation. Fee amounts are adjusted
based on the methodology originally adopted in Ordinance 10-01,updated in Ordinance 13-
06 to a composite of 85% of the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index
for Seattle,which measures general construction and labor cost,and 15% of the Oregon
Monthly Asphalt Cement Material Price,which measures asphalt prices and parallels fuel
prices. These percentages approximate the percentage cost of a typical project that matches
the labor or material price measured by the index. This inflation adjustment will increase the
fee by 4.9% on January 1,2014.
Current street maintenance fees,as they appear in the City's 2013-2014 Master Fees and Charges
Schedule,are as follows:
Effective Dates 2012 2013 2014
Residential (Per House or Unit) $5.45 $5.56 $5.83
Commercial and Industrial
(Per Required Parking Space) $1.23 $1.25 $1.31
Note that the fee for commercial and industrial properties is calculated based on the number of
parking spaces that would be required by TMC 18.765 if that building were constructed today (as an
approximation of the traffic generation of the site),which is often different from the number of
spaces in the existing parking lot.
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 2
Recent Paving Hi_itory
Attachment C is a map showing the paving projects that have been completed in the past five years,
which illustrates that more than half of Tigard's City Street network have been paved or slurry sealed
(pavement overlays on 16 miles of streets,and slurry seals on 64 miles of streets).
In order to maintain the overall street network in the best possible overall condition, street
maintenance work has focused on three main priorities:
1. Pavement overlays on major corridors. Approximately$2.24 million(including staff costs) is
being spent in fiscal years 12-13 and 13-14 constructing pavement overlays on 7 miles of
important through routes.
2. Crack seals and slurry seals on residential streets. Approximately$1 million has been spent
in fiscal years 12-13 and 13-14 placing slurry seals on 30 miles of residential streets. All of
the Tigard City Streets that are good candidates for slurry seal projects have been slurry
sealed.
3. Crack sealing along arterials and collector streets.Approximately$90,000 is spent in the
spring each year sealing cracks along major streets to preserve the existing pavement.
These priorities are reflected in the following Graph:
Pavement Condition Index by Functional Class
80.0 - - - -
ax, 75.0 —— — —
c
c 70.0 Arterial
° — -- —
Collector
0 65.0
U Commercial/Industrial
£ 60.0 ----------..- Residential
a
> Overall
M
a 55.0
50.0 —
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Tigard's Arterials and Collectors have an average condition of 70 or higher.
The graph below shows Tigard's systemwide average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) at the end of
each paving season,and compares the actual PCI to those forecast when the Street Maintenance Fee
changes were adopted in 2010.
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 3
Citywide Pavement Condition by Year
85.0
80.0
75.0
70.0
60.0
55.0
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
—Forecast PCI for Fee Levels Adopted 1/5/10 —Actual Through 2013
----------
The PCI at the end of the 2013 paving season is 70.0,which is better than the forecast of 67.1.
Paving Backlog
There are many local streets (both residential and commercial) in Tigard on which the pavement
condition has deteriorated beyond the level at which most preventive maintenance treatments can be
effective. These streets need more extensive repairs such as pavement overlay and rehabilitation. In
pavement management terms, these are called 'backlog' streets. The table below shows how this
backlog has grown in recent years:
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 4
Mileage of Poor Pavement (PCI < 50)
25.0
20.0 .........
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0 -
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
■Mileage of Poor Pavement(PCI<50)
There are approximately 21 miles of these 'backlog' streets on the Tigard city street system that need
paving. This is approximately 14% of our total street mileage. The cost to pave these streets would
be approximately$10 million.
The graph below shows the current backlog of streets in poor pavement condition,and the
additional miles that would be in poor condition if the last five years of paving had not been
completed.
Effect of Recent Paving on Backlog Mileage
40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
■Backlog Mileage of Poor Pavement(PCI<50) N Additional Backlog if No Paving after 2008
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 5
It is anticipated that the amount of this backlog will remain at about this level now that Street
Maintenance Fee revenue is fully phased in,assuming that revenues and asphalt prices remain
relatively consistent. Additional funding would be necessary to restore these streets to good
pavement condition.
Finance Director's Findings
The Finance Director has reviewed this report and future pavement maintenance funding
requirements as identified in the Pavement Management Program(PMP). Data has not changed
significantly from what the Council considered after the 2009 paving season.
Actual revenue collections for fiscal year 2012 and 2013 were analyzed and they were sufficient to
meet the annual funding level set from the street maintenance plan along with the FY 2011-2012
and FY 2012-2013 Adopted Budgets. Completion of the street maintenance fee phase-in,along
with an inflationary adjustment(s),is expected to generate sufficient revenue to fund the PMP in the
coming years.The 2014-2018 CIP PMP approved budget is as follows:
Fiscal Year 2014 = 2015 2016 2017 2018
PMP $1,660,000 1 1,800,000 1,800,000 1,800,000 1 1,800,000
Additionally,the split between customer types was analyzed to determine if costs were equitably split
when compared to revenues collected. The allocation of the costs of the five-year plan is set in
TMC 15.20.050 and is summarized as follows:
Road Type Percentage of Residential Percentage of Non-
Allocation Residential Allocation
Arterial 62% 38%
Local Commercial/Industrial 0% 100%
Collector 50% 50%
Neighborhood/Local 100% 0%
It is important to realize the fee is based on a five-year plan and that there will be variance from one
year to the next where one customer group may subsidize another in any given year;the important
thing is that the program costs reflect the revenues collected by customer type over the five-year
period. If they do not,the TMC instructs the Finance Director to make recommendations based on
this review.The following tables summarize my findings:
Total 2012 PMP Percentage
Expense Related of Total Percentage Share of
to Street 2012 of Expenses Based
Maintenance Expense Revenue on Revenue
Customer Class Fee per TMC Collection Collected Variance
Residential $623,829 62% 65% $654,014 $30,185
Non-
Residential $382,347 38% 35% $352,162 $30,185
Total $1,006,176 $1,006,176
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 6
Total 2013 PNIP Percentage
Expense Related of Total Percentage Share of
to Street 2013 of Expenses Based
Maintenance Expense Revenue on Revenue
Customer Class Fee per TMC Collection Collected Variance
Residential $1,240,855 75% 67% $1,108,457 $82,720
Non-
Residential $413,560 25% 33% $545,957 $82,720
Total $1,654,414 $1,654,414
Tigard incurred$1,006,176 in FY 2011-12 in the PMP expenses related to the street maintenance
fee. Based on the types of roads, (arterial,collector,etc.), that received pavement maintenance
through the PMP,$623,829 (62 percent) of the PMP expenses should have been born by residential
customers and $382,347 (38 percent) of the PMP expenses should have been born by non-
residential customers.
The actual revenues collected in FY 2012 have a slightly different split. Sixty-five percent of the
revenues came from the residential sector and 35 percent of the revenues came from the non-
residential sector. Based on the size of the PMP and the way revenues were collected,a more
equitable split would have been for$623,829 to come from the residential sector and for$382,347 to
come from the non-residential sector. During the last year,the residential sector subsidized the non-
residential sector by$30,185,or three percent of the total PMP.
The actual revenues collected in FY 2013 reversed the trend of residential customers subsidizing
non-residential. Sixty-seven percent of the revenues came from the residential sector and 33 percent
of the revenues came from the non-residential sector. Based on the size of the PMP and the way
revenues were collected, a more equitable split would have been for$1,025,737 to come from the
residential sector and for$628,677 to come from the non-residential sector. During the last year,
the non-residential sector subsidized the residential sector by$82,720,or five percent of the total
PMP. When the reports for FY 2010 and FY 2011 are taken into account to provide a four year
picture,non-residential customers have subsidized residential customers by 4%. The Finance
Director does not find this difference to be material enough to necessitate a recalculation.. In the
long term, engineering staff estimates that the actual paving expenses will be consistent with the
residential/non-residential revenue split.
Fall 2013 Paving Report Page 7
Greenway
2012 Pa vin g� Pro e c is w Pork � Crescent -
Sovthrrdge NS Q Grave
_ ,/` Cemetery j
N
•-- Pavement Overlay
-- Slurry Seal /95TH AVE
R� 0 {�
Ash,Creel—_
Q
�I
,
r Q11125 SW 0.4hd ■ ii 4
VA'•D •.PS 1 trrard; Oregon 9711 m t i vLOMW
�d 50 639 4171 8 1 Ipwk
www.t,yard-or gov
; � kF
21 . 99W R
ftwy
• q' -- fowler � � '\• '_ .,``.-,�
Progress t- MS
Qoorry
Joke
i�1 G
w
'4 O
j
MELROSE ST i
J .- Fdnno Trek
Park
N l. .
'7 <G e, x j
_ 'GOLloNY �• 4
_ SE ST EKGT _ �a KRUSE-W/sy
/ ? * JA VIEW ? aTH CT
OWEAVER z...MEA'DOWS pD
BUtLMOU�NTAINRO+ t J �4-- R i FA KESELP �/— m
}C Lu5 CT _CREEK CT
B0NITrW.
twohty / � MORA CT t
MS 1 4
oCK T' a a pa, 9f o
RM G a _
LTH
3 I TTHE SGP -7 & fn
jj 07TH EL T- _ ARK S Q C�
ERDR LN�A I D T� Q C Q
N OR T TH E 82 D 1 !_ U) X
GREEN'- ARC T E 84T, VE
G EENLEA9CT N TREtST �-
M IELD L CHd CHILL
4 ° N IL o I CT q �3' J Q� p(t cca) fn
�. HIG NDPQ�a> G co
B � `B rit DUR Ata Fla i AV DRU�FIAM RDk T.C
{ 1S_ ! `p S��C•
j { I `O" 0 v H +
r
.__ Tfgord HS r ��A 1 Q co C�C
r C
O m U
fx s
xO z r
LIP
uaatln Yer r.cook %� � ... Q
tyTualatin Rover - ? � JEAN RD
IL
00000
i
(0jS^ n +�� Greenwoy Crescent ,w - - 1Z
� `a( vorw
Grove
Southdd4e HS w Cemetery r ' - ,,
ment
i
Management Projects � 0 �OCUSTST
t- ¢ w
IN
217 - Q
--- Asphalt Overlay OAK ST OAK' POMONAST� P A�r
-` ST w m B
FERR RD h PINE S sr _ �� OL HWY
gra 1`� 4 ,_ =w w
Slurry Seal & Crack Seal So�o� Ash geek a
- P? 2" VE ST r 2
0Scale j NORTH DAKOTA ST Z >
- � ut ¢Q
UJ F �\ w o
Questions? Contact' > - -
Senior Project Engineerz LACE Q - '
p Mike McCarthy P.E. s . PA RIS ATLANTA R ? _ ' > 99W > ST Park
62 C t`� Q _
Q5 W
+► �( 503.718.24 Q
M'` mikem@tigard-or.gov F w �. o
m n
M Q -- KAT 8T I E TH �'S�i SFS
cD- C0
r _ _ EAINE S q -. -..._. G
9 Q r f rO
crescent F w Q Q A _ f _ «LU
OA
RTIYlC7UT1i ST
Grave j / ep> NN$T Fowler C - bn J f/
Cemetery Progress' Q MS
tV N w a 'C/
quarry 1 f-�i'.L
Coke t�I Wj_ ST EL ✓O C1P` S r > +,
-w, ERROL ST
Q ' :w W
WALNUT St ONNEIST_. �_. ST .y4'li 1i/� � m
- to: F NER ,. R - O
=s-IAT, 00
I O = MELROSE ST
ju HOLLOW j
L2 =
--
111M J
_ SNL _
F
N�O t-W
�\. . y
G 5R Z 4AA'12DE > o '
D WAY
� `t
i
GAARDE 5T 9A „> __
f
�.. . . �- � r KRUSE
MCDONALD .. ..
�r
�,, MEADOWS �p
BULL MOUNTAIN RD > > iEw
m' z
ER
BONITA RD BO'NITA RD
_ P Twalrty
VIE ; _ --- -- , ; m
F w •F.
o �w• OAKS
to
W.
9
W. w Coo
w
O ATTLERST
gRp1E1 O OR F -
v�! SUiMM
O
BEEF BENDS � DU ,HA
yaC� DURHAM RD DURHAM!RD
F
4O iiP
w f A
� gg
- N Tigard NS w.
o z
m`
g?� Tualatin Rrver O
Cook w' f Q 0
ualatin River Park 9L Z, JEAN RD
LY J
;. J CL 1
2009 - 2013
1 o r Pavement
z17 1
Overlay
m
&
Q Al h£reek
Slurry Seal
w - Projects
BF N
us w �P� C o
D
� y 99W � 1 � 2013 Projects
r QO�/ L0 1` _:, —. Slurry Seal
�UTH=S. �■ Pavement Overlay
N :Q►
2012 Projects
. •/`, R . Slurry Seal
!1 DRQ . Pavement Overlay
2011 Projects
/ QQ= Slurry Seal
U, �"� ��Pavement Overlay
G;A'A R•DiE SST MSC N A-LD- �
,ST
r_
L iu 2010 Projects
U'N=T;A" N R;��--� ._ ® Slurry Seal
� Pavement Overlay
r
Jl- � •' ,%� z ® Federal Stimulus
� "' N a c Pavement Overlay
mom z
/ Q J 2009 Projects
Slurry Seal
Pavement Overlay
l = a
F g:E N D-R� D'U-R*H=A;M
f R•�ile_
�. jualatrn River L _
J }
LCI — +