01/16/2008 - Packet City of Tigard
City Center Advisory Commission — Agenda
MEETNG DATE: Wednesday,January 16th, 2008, 6:30-8:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Public Library, Pt Floor Community Room
13500 SWI ill Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
1. Welcome and Introductions......................................................................................................6:30-6:35
2. Review/ Approve Minutes .......................................................................................................6:35-6:45
Action Items
3. Annual Elections - Chair/ Vice Chair....................................................................................6:45-7:00
4. Appointment of Alternate to Joint Committee Land Use / Design Guidelines..............7:00-7:05
Fanno Creek Park&Downtown Plaza- Recommendations..............................................7:05-7:30
Other Items
6 Leland Development Strategy- Discussion ..........................................................................7:30-8:20
7. Other Business/Announcements .............................................................................................8:20-8:30
CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA-January 16, 2008
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 Center Advisory Commission
Meeting Minutes
Date of Meeting: January 16, 2008
Location: Tigard Library Community Room
Called to order by: Chair Carl Switzer
Time Started: 6:30 p.m.
Time Ended: 9:06 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barkley; Elise Shearer, Chair Carl Switzer, Lily
Lilly; Alice Ellis Gaut; Alexander Craghead (alternate)
Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Hughes and Murphy
Others Present: Lisa Olson, Marland Henderson, Pete Louw
Staff Present: Phil Nachbar, Downtown Redevelopment Manager; Tom Coffee,
Community Development Director;Jerree Lewis, Executive Assistant
AGENDA ITEM # 1: Welcome and Introductions:
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Elise Shearer, new CCAC member, was
welcomed.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #2: Review/Approve Minutes
Important Discussion and/or Comments:
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Lilly, seconded by
Alexander Craghead, to approve the November 14, 2007 meeting minutes as amended. The
motion passed unanimously.
It was requested that the December 12, 2007 meeting minutes be amended to strike the
word "blessed" on page 8 and replaced with the word approved. Motion by Commissioner
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 1 of 8
Barkley, seconded by Commissioner Ellis Gaut, to approve the December 12, 2007 meeting
minutes as amended. The motion passed unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM #3: Annual Elections - Chair/ Vice-Chair
Important Discussion and/or Comments:
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Commissioner Ellis Gaut was nominated to be
Chair. Motion by Commissioner Barkley, seconded by Commissioner Lilly, for a unanimous
vote to elect Commissioner Ellis Gaut as Chair. The motion passed unanimously.
Motion by Commissioner Barkley to nominate Commissioner Lilly as Vice-Chair. The
Commissioners discussed different options for transitioning into the Chair and Vice-Chair
positions, including having the past Chair move into the Vice-Chair position or serve in an
ex officio role as an advisor. It was decided to discuss this issue at a future date. There was
no second to the original motion.
Commissioner Switzer was nominated to be Vice-Chair. Motion by Chair Ellis Gaut,
seconded by Commissioner Shearer, to elect Commissioner Switzer as Vice-Chair. The
motion passed unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM #4: Appointment of Alternate to Joint Committee Land Use /
Design Guidelines
Important Discussion and/or Comment:
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Barkley, seconded by
Chair Ellis Gaut, to appoint Commissioner Shearer as the alternate to the joint committee
for land use and design guidelines. The motion passed unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM #5: Fanno Creek Park & Downtown Plaza - Recommendations
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Vice-Chair Switzer gave an overview of the
work accomplished by the steering committee. He advised that the committee provided 22
pages of comments on the first draft of the plan. The vast majority of the comments were
incorporated into the final draft; those comments not incorporated were not incorporated
based on the steering committee's recommendation. Last night, the steering committee
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 2 of 8
unanimously decided to support the final draft. There is still some work that needs to be
done and the consultants and staff will make those changes.
It was advised that an executive summary will be prepared, as well as a clearer vision
statement. Key concepts will be incorporated into the executive summary.
There are two new pieces of information: the outstanding master plan comments (Exhibit
A) and the cost estimate (Exhibit B). Staff was asked if the Downtown Design Standards
sub-committee has looked at the master plan with regard to the building envelope standards
and the architectural design standards. Staff answered yes,the sub-committee has looked at
it. It was advised that the component in the park plan that discusses the design standards
around the plaza is only a suggestion; the final form will be taken from what is produced by
the advisory team. This was one of the comments brought up during discussion of
traditional look (page 9). The response from Walker Macy was that the design standards are
preliminary and will be further developed by the City in the redevelopment section.
Staff advised that the consultants came up with a broader set of design guidelines that
address the buildings next to the plaza. They also serve as a working document for the
design guidelines that the design standards sub-committee is involved with. It's basically the
same document. It's incorporated into the Master Plan because it's representative of the
kind of building and development that we would like to see next to the plaza. There is a
statement that qualifies this: "With an understanding of the potential for redevelopment next
to the plaza, preliminary design guidelines were developed to ensure future design quality
and the development would be compatible to future function and use of the plaza. This
work is preliminary and provides a working framework for development of final design
guidelines by the City. Adoption and use of such design guidelines will occur at a later
time." This is on page 67 of the draft plan. It was noted that the Downtown Design
Guidelines sub-committee has not yet come to any final conclusions about design guidelines.
It was also advised that all of the visuals in the plan are just placeholders; they're just
graphics.
The Commission discussed the cost estimates (Exhibit B). It was noted that the cost for
restoration planting is missing. Staff advised that the consultants left it out with the
assumption that CWS would be doing the work. Phil Nachbar said his understanding is that
CWS would be doing restoration related to the work that they are doing (re-meandering of
the creek). He will check with CWS on this. The consultants will come up with a dollar
amount for restoration which will be added to the list.
It was also advised that land acquisition is not included with this estimate; neither are other
soft costs such as permit fees. It was suggested an asterisk be added to indicate that this is in
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 3 of 8
2007 dollars. Nachbar said that the consultant came up with an inflation figure of 8% per
year.
The timing of the construction schedule was asked. Also, where will money come from? It
was advised that those questions are outside of scope of this work. The steering committee
talked about a phasing plan and schedules, but the scope of work for Walker Macy did not
include a phasing plan. Now that we have the cost estimates, we can start to think about
when we want to do things. Through the budget process,the City can look at funding
options.
Visitor Pete Louw asked about ongoing costs and maintenance. Staff said that when a
project like this moves to a Capital Improvement Project (CIP), we show ongoing costs.
This will be an annual operating budget issue. We can't address it until the design elements
are decided.
With regard to the draft master plan, it was noted that the steering committee made a
number of refinements to the document at their meeting last night. One of the comments
had to do with using asphalt for paving trails. Phil Nachbar read the revised language for
this particular item. The first sentence will read, "In keeping with the Fanno Creek Trail
action plan, the multi-modal regional trail shall be of hard surface material." After the fust
sentence, add, "The upper park trail shall be concrete and the lower park shall include an
evaluation of materials that are the most environmentally-friendly and feasible at the time of
construction." Sentence # 3 shall read, "Materials will be selected based on ADA
accessibility, year-round durability during flooding, and future ease of maintenance." The
last sentence was kept as is.
Visitor Marland Henderson urged that the next step in the process be a very open forum.
He was assured that, although the form of the group has not been decided as yet,
Downtown business owners and the CCAC will be involved in the process. It won't happen
until we're ready to design those elements.
With regard to the concern about the conceptual elements, Lisa Olson said she would like to
see disclaimers under each illustration; however, she is satisfied that it will be thoroughly
covered.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Barkley, seconded by
Commissioner Lilly, to recommend that the City Center Development Agency adopt the
Fanno Creek Park and Plaza Master Plan, final draft,to include all the changes made by the
steering committee on January 15`x'. The motion passed unanimously.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 4 of 8
Staff will send the Commissioners a CD with the final version of the plan showing all the
changes made.
AGENDA ITEM #6: Leland Development Strategy - Discussion
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Phil Nachbar gave a quick overview of the
Leland Study. He advised that the Leland strategy was analyzed as compared to staff's
strategy. The matrix overlays the Downtown implementation strategies with the Leland
strategies. It also includes timelines and priorities.
Nachbar referred to a letter sent to the Mayor from the Tigard Central Business District
Association asking how that group can participate in review and inclusion of the Leland
strategy into the City's plan. The group was invited to attend CCAC meetings.
Sean Farrelly gave a PowerPoint presentation that Leland Consulting showed to City Council
in November (Exhibit Q. It's an overview of what we are trying to achieve with the study
and includes some key recommendations.
Phil Nachbar reviewed the draft work program for next year (Exhibit D) with the
Commission. All of Leland's items are in blue; the City's items are in black. Key items are
written in bold. The last page of the document lists new tasks that require additional
funding or staff. Rather than assume that Council will fund these items, they were not
included in the work program. They are noted because they are actions that Leland has
suggested. They will need further discussion by the CCAC and Council.
Staff advised that the funded position shown in the Leland strategy would be for an
executive director for the private sector. The City would kick start the funding for $25,000.
Eventually it would be privately funded.
There was discussion about a funded economic development position who could also act as
a Downtown liaison. It was reasoned that, given workload, it would be impossible for
current staff to act in their current capacity, be a Downtown liaison, and do economic
development. A Downtown liaison that was also a Citywide economic development person
and had a specialty in real estate, finance, or urban renewal would be more valuable.
Commissioner Lilly remarked that people whose skills interrelate with developers may not
always be the same people who do best relating to business owners. Having a person who
can bring developers together and address their issues is crucial and is a job by itself. A
person able to do that may not also be able to take care of the Downtown.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 5 of 8
An economic development person could be a City position that could spend a portion of
their time focused on the Downtown and a portion focused on the rest of the City. It could
be funded proportionally by urban renewal and the general fund. Staff noted that the Leland
recommendation was for a Downtown liaison working in Current Planning. They could
shepherd applications in the development process.
Suggestions for some of the duties of a Citywide economic development person included
improvement of new employment, general outreach to existing businesses, and keeping track
of how the business community is doing. This would be a Citywide scope.
Chair Ellis Gaut remarked that there is support for a new position. She encouraged the
other members to be activists about this. She likes the idea of someone whose focus is to
coordinate the redevelopment of the Downtown.
Tom Coffee observed that economic development has not made any difference in the towns
where he has worked. Businesses happen because of the community, not because someone
is knocking on their door. It was noted that there will be time in the coming year to have
monthly contacts with both of the Downtown shopping center owners/agents. Once we
find out what they're willing to do, we can seek out developers who may have the same
interest. There will be some consultant money set aside for this work. Also, Leland has
reported that the only real market in the Downtown now is for housing. There's no
commercial demand right now.
Commissioner Lilly believes that if you don't have what developers want, they won't come.
Developers are smart - they do their homework, they go where the land is cheap and where
they can get fast-track development through, they go to a city that is easy to work with.
That's something that can be done with staff. We can give developers something concrete
and make it easy for them to work with us.
With regard to retail development, Phil Nachbar said that one of Leland's strategies is to
look at acquiring option agreements with property owners who are interested in working
with us. We could then convey property to a developer. For example, if one of the property
owners is interested in selling to us, we could start marketing that property to a developer
who we would then re-convey the property to for redevelopment.
Staff remarked that a code amendment for an expedited permitting process could require
that Downtown projects go to the front of the line and that a Downtown development team
would do the review. This can be done administratively after being adopted by the CCDA.
It was recommended holding off on this until the new design guidelines are completed.
OCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 6 of 8
It was noted that there is no discussion about a relocation strategy in the Leland Report.
Vice-Chair Switzer thinks this is essential and needs to happen soon. Staff agreed, but said
that having money to implement it is an issue. It was suggested that maybe the City could
use their technical resources to help business owners identify where they can relocate and
advise them as to what their options are.
Pete Louw wondered why we can't integrate workplaces and residential areas into a
community and make it all one rather than relocate businesses. Staff replied that the layout
of the Downtown has to do with the characteristics of the activity. For example, City Hall
which is a public use will not be relocated. Public Works has a maintenance yard with
equipment and does not belong in the Downtown where we're trying to put together
residential and commercial uses.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #7: Other Business/Announcements
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Phil Nachbar referred to a letter to the Mayor
from Pat Schleuter suggesting some immediate beautification ideas for Main Street.
Nachbar remarked that the CCAC might want to think about what they would like to do in
the short-term, perhaps cleaning up the Downtown or removing the concrete canisters with
the signage.
Staff reported that the installation of the new lights should begin in a couple of months. We
have 3 years of lead time for construction on Main Street — the fust year is preliminary
design, second year is right-of-way, third year is construction drawings. We're looking at
spring of 2011 before starting construction on Main Street.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Phil Nachbar asked the Commissioners to organize
how they would like to conduct their joint meeting with Council on the 22'. The
Commissioners can send their suggestions to Chair Ellis Gaut. Nachbar will provide
Council with copies of the final draft of Fanno Creek Park and Plaza Master Plan at the joint
meeting.
The Commission would like a current roster and a list of staff contact information.
It was reported that the final changes were made to the annual report and distributed to City
Council.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 7 of 8
Jerree ewis, CCA Secretary
1
ATTEST:
Chair Afice Ellis Gaut
CCAC Meeting Minutes for January 16,2008 Page 8 of 8
Outstanding Master Plan Comments for Discussion
Steering Committee Member#2
• pp.35-36 re: Plaza Concept Alternatives: Have we not selected Scheme IA
already?If so,the document should reflect that; if not, should it not include the
fact that this was widely preferred by the Steering Committee&CCAC as well as
by several members of the public, &the reasons therefore?Those reasons
include: dramatic entry,clean visual lines,nice contrast between the hardscape
(urban elements)&the open areas/park. (No changes made -The document does
reflect the decision to select scheme 1 a. It is identified in the Master Plan Section
of the report.—the concept section page 35-38 is documenting the alternatives
that were considered. The master plan section beginning on page 43 describes
scheme, how it was modified, and the final plaza master plan on page 44. It is
clear that the Plaza Master Plan is the decision because it is in the Master Plan
section and the first sentence states the `park designs were refined into a final
master plan' in the first sentence page 43.)
Steering Committee Member#4
• Page 32- Sustainable Building Design-need to insert"Traditional"as specified in
TDIP.
• Answer—The Sustainable Building design section on page 32 describes how
sustainable ideas can be used in building design. It does not state that any building
will be designed that way. Remember as part of our last discussion, it was
decided that specific design of elements such as the shelter, would be part of a
future design process.
• Here is the language I added to the report on page 43, para 1 to clarify this. "The
future design ofprogram elements which have the capacity to impart a unique
architectural character to the Upland Park or Plaza such as gateways. the
pavilion, lighting,light columns, the fountain, seating, and the ploXround will
undergo an inclusive design process to make sure they reflect the desires of City
Council and the community".
• Page 33-Parking-change"important"in first line to"imperative."(Answer—The
word"important"seems adequate.This can be discussed by the Committee.)
• Page 44-remove specific design of all "placeholders" including pavilion.
(Answer—The placeholders show the design context of the master plan and are
needed in the drawings. There is no specific design assumed in the drawing. The
location of key design elements, such as the shelter, is part of the master plan. As
mentioned above,the specific design will be accomplished in a later design
process per page 43 para 1.)
• Page 45- Same- remove specific design features of commercial building. Change
sentence describing pavilion as to intended construction materials to traditional
design concepts as agreed to in TDIP.Answer— The mixed-use building
indicates the type of structure not the final design of it. The Committee agreed
that certain design elements would not be designed as part of this master plan.
The paragraph indicates this as follows: "The character of the pavilion will be
defined in future design efforts. It is intended to be constructed of rich durable
materials that are endemic of the northwest such as stone and wood and
incorporate sustainable technologies".
• Page 46-Remove construction details from structure in picture. (Answer—The
rendering explains important visual aspects of the design of the plaza. The
building is generic,and does not represent final design. It does, however,
represent the size and scale of a building that could be built there, and the Leland
Associates references as feasible for that location. This is important to
understanding how the plaza and ad-joiningd� evelopment can be built in concert.)
• Page 51-Map defines undecided elements as apparent"done deals." IE"New
Bridge and Boardwalk"off Main Street, and"New Housing"between Burnham
and Festival Street. (Answer—The site plan describes the preferred design of the
gateway from Main St., and our consultants best judgement as to what could be
built next to the Festival Street)
• Page 54-A lengthy description of the realigned Main Street entrance without
discussion of the cost and formal approval. Who's to say the brewpub will exist
there? Why is the previous expense and placement next to ABoy's not addressed
in more detail. (Answer—The cost of all items in the master plan will be
identified in the appendix. Whether the Brewpub will exist there or not, the
preferred design option for theag teway represents the best design for the reasons
stated in the paragraph. Please note its reference to the TDIP. The Master Plan is
aplanning and design document,and is supposed to represent what the desired
course of action is for the project. However, the master plan and its preferred
,options does not preclude the use of other alternatives. The Streetscape Plan,
although it did includes some preliminary design ideas for the Gateway at Main
Street, was not done in the context of a larger park and plaza plan. The Walker
Macy design for the Main St. Gateway takes the Streetscape Plan's design idea
and makes it work within the context of the larger park and plaza master plan.)
• Page 62 and 63-All structures in pictures on other pages should look like these-
no architectural details. (Answer—there is a new reference in the master plan
indicating that the illustrations are examples only.)
• Page 64-Design Standards- should again refer to TDIP, Streetscape Design and
previous agreed upon concepts. Answer—The Design Guidelines that were
developed as part of the Walker Macy contract are preliminary only, and do not
represent what the final guidelines will be for the Downtown. There is a separate
process for the development of Downtown Land Use and Design Guidelines.
Steering Committee Member#5
• Page 43: First paragraph (Plaza and Upland Park),third sentence—Reads"The
Master Plan is intended to locate the program elements, define their size and
general character, and establish key design attributes". It needs to read "The
Master Plan is intended to locate the program elements, define their size and
general character, BUT NOT establish design attributes". (Answer—The term
"Design attribute" is not the same as its design character or architectural design.
Attributes here means what should go into the design. For example, a shelter
should provide for picnicking, concerts, aata hering_place, etc. Or the fountain
should be designed for flexible use of the plaza, be interactive,etc. These
are"attributes"of the design but does not pin down what it will look like.)
• Page 50, seventh paragraph—references a 10 foot path but on page 52 under `trail
width and cross section' the number is 10 plus two, two-foot shoulders.Also we
didn't really address material but do we really want asphalt paths cutting through
the upland park and plaza area?That's going to look cheap and out of character
with the rest of the plaza. I'd advocate for concrete paths in the whole of the
upland park. (Answer—the trail width is 10 feet for the regional trail: the
shoulders are 2 feet. It's a consistent 10 feet. A note aboutoy ur suggestion for a
concrete trail in the Upper Park is noted in the report on page 50. We can discuss
this with our consultants.)
Steering Committee Member#6
• 12. CWS plans. The intentions of Clean Water Services is a huge contribution to
the success of the park and the costs of this project overall. This might be
covered in the appendix via documentation but their efforts and cost commitments
needs to have stronger reference in the master plan body text. (Answer—the City
has an Intergovermental Agreement with CWS with regard to their
responsibilities. Remember the Master Plan is a planning and design document.
The financial plan, commitments and responsibilities are assembled outside of the
Plan. The Master Plan is not a legally binding document,but more a policy
document that sets forth Council intentions.)
• Plaza management and Ms. Whitman's ideas. Karen Whitman had a lot to say
about ways of managing the plaza programming,etc. yet"Management"on page
31 does not come close to her input. Maybe Karen can embellish this area. I'm
not looking for a book here,just her ideas and recommendations. (Answer—I can
ask Walker Macy to provide some summary of her work on the proiect, and will
forward your comments, which are comprehensive. Please keep in mind that Ms
Whitman work in this contract is relatively small, and a more comprehensive look
at the aspect of management of a plaza will be needed. What is important though,
is that it is mentioned in the report as an important item for on-going success of
the laza.
• A final word: This report lacks inspiration and a sense of how important this
project is not only to downtown Tigard but to all residents of Tigard. Surely the
consultants can add some words of inspiration, express the pride we all have in a
job well done, assist the reader in seeing why they too should carry forth the plan,
and instill how important this project is to the City of Tigard. (Answer—added
language in 0 paragraph in the intro. One suggestion would be to write a
dedication on the inside front cover- such as"Dedicated to the many individuals
who have worked so hard to create a stronger sense of community for Tigard".On
the other hand, the plan is factual, connects the vision with past planning efforts,
and performs exactly the way it was intended -to gide future construction of the
park and plaza.
P 33,2"Upland Park&Plaza Design Objectives"—
• I've refined the objectives created by the consultant by referencing notes from
meetings and other community input. See what you think. (answer—Nice job
documenting this information. These design objectives for both the plaza and
park are all relevant, as well as those relating to the Park. For the list to be
meaningful, it should be fairly concise. The Upland Park and Plaza Design
Objectives are very specific with regard to design, while yours are broader and
less specific. My suggestion would be for the Committee to consider
incorporating objectives as Steering Committee objectives for the Park&Plaza as
an appendix. Since they represent your notes, and communityput they could be
referenced in that manner.Please note that Walker Macy has concisely captured
the objectives of the project that affect design,which is the focus of the master
plar►2
P 39 , 2.Park Design Objectives
• Again, I've refined the objectives created by the consultant by referencing notes
from meetings and other community input.Key words are highlighted for
emphasis (answer—Nice job documenting this information. These design
objectives for both the plaza and park are all relevant as mentioned above, as well
as those relating to the Park. For the list to be meaningful, it should be fairly
concise. The Upland Park and Plaza Design Objectives are very specific with
regard to design,while yours are broader and less specific. My suggestion would
be for the Committee to consider incorporating these objectives as Steering
Committee obiectives for the Park&Plaza as an annendix. Since they represent
your notes,and community input they could be referenced in that manner. )
• P 50 Is this the place to talk about what kind of phasing can be achieved(i.e. trails
moved around)and how this will be handled as the plan for the upper area of the
park and the plaza take shape?Please reference#11 (phasing)of my"General
Comments"document. (answer—no discussion of phasing per above comments .
City will undertake this separate from the master plan. WM not tasked for this)
anno Creek Park and Plaza: Master Plan Cost Estimate
Walker Macy January 15, 2008
PLAZA
Site Preparation $82,089.00
Plaza Paving/Structures $813,820.00
Light Columns $50,000.00
Fountain $500,000.00
Pavillion $437,000.00
Utilities $225,580.00
TOTAL: $2,108,489.00
FESTIVAL STREET
Site Preparation $20,246.00
Paving $568,584.00
Site Improvements/Landscape $166,850.00
Utilities $65,000.00
TOTAL: $820,680.00
UPLAND PARK
Site Preparation $127,370.00
Paving $78,165.00
Bridges/Boardwalks $112,485.00
Landscape/Urban Creek $524,556.00
layground $103,505.00
0 tilities $30,000.00
TOTAL $976,081.00
BURNHAM STREET by others
MAIN STREET ENTRY
Site Preparation $20,929.00
Boardwalk/Bridge/Light Columns $589,880.00
Landscape $61,300.00
Utilities $20,000.00
TOTAL $692,109.00
LOWLAND PARK
Site Preparation $294,167.00
Paving $104,064.00
Bridges & Boardwalks $783,310.00
Utilities $35,000.00
Trail Edge Planting $87,180.00
Restoration Planting- By Others
TOTAL: $1,303,721.00
TOTAL
Net Cost $5,901,080.00
General Conditions/Bonds $631,415.00
Overhead & Profit $391,949.00
esign Contingency $1,384,888.00
TOTAL COST: $8,309,332.00
Downtown Tigard
Development Strategy
City Center
a _ Advisory
Commission
A : January 16,
2007
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP
Introduction
Tonight's outline
■ Review project purpose
■ Fundamental principles
■ What we found
■ Where do we go next?
f
3 F:
L' LELAND CONSULTENG GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:Developmem SUategy
0
Leland Consulting Group
Introduction
Project Purpose
p
■ Review existing plans and policies
■ Research market conditions
■ Recommend strategies for:
- Prioritizing public investments
- Strengthening leadership and organizational capacity
- Creating incentives for development
- Removing barriers to development
- Assembling property
- Increase tax increment
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TICARD:DeacJup na•nt Stratayty
Introduction
Project components
■ "Kick-off" meeting and
tour
■ Assist Plaza planning
■ Review of existing plans ,.,
Is Market Reconnaissance
■ Stakeholder interviews �..
■ Developer interviews =` '
■ Development Strategy ;o - ...�.... —
LLELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TICARD:Ot-4opmem Strategy
Leland Consulting Group
Guiding Principles
Fundamentals of Successful Downtowns
o.
z: 1
L LEL.AND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:De 44-ent SI,wegy
Guiding Principles
Private Investment Follows Public Commitment
■ Downtown development is
- More complicated
- More expensive
- Riskier
■ Strategic public investments
- Reduce risk
- Demonstrate market potential
- Leverage investment
- Catalyze private investment
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD!Dc-4.p-1 Svm,g,
Leland Consulting Group
Guiding Principles
Many, Many Projects -- - ' k
■ Maintain momentum,
public interest ander°
support oft
�.
■ Big and small % _ •
■ Public and private
a
■ Physical and policy
■ Housing, retail, civic
■ 25+ at any time
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:lkxA pme w Straagy
}` ` Guiding Principles
Many, Many Stakeholders
■ The City cannot do it alone
■ Let people be a part of the solution
- Business
- Residents
- Civic
- Nonprofit
- Educational
- Government i1FA.
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:D-,A,pm"Soategy
Leland Consulting Group
Key Findings
{
i k
Downtown is on the Right Track
Progress is underway:
■ Plan adoptions -
■ Council priority
■ Street improvements funded
■ Recent redevelopments
■ Plaza and park planning
■ Staff dedicated to downtown
LLELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD;D-Op-I St,iIgy
0
Leland Consulting Group
The Foundation is Solid
The Fundamentals are good AL AL
■ Authentic "Main Street"
■ Fanno Creek Park "green"
amenity and catalyst for
development
■ Close to employment and retail
• Regional transportation access
■ Strong demographics :
■ Transit access
LLELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN DGARD:Divr„,,
I SlrauY
Y
Some Areas Still Need Attention
■ Property deterioration
■ Underutilized land
■ Weak organization
■ Limited access and
circulation
■ Incompatible uses
■ Not on developer's radar
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD Devi4,p—nl svaK-KY
Leland Consulting Group
Key Strategies
Strategic Recommendations
■ Where do we go next?
■ How to we leverage what's been done?
NYh CMaY1rtl h4Vn ww ftnr
LLELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD(3—d�.Wmm Sow ly
Key Strategies
Focus on Housing First
■ Market is supportive V
■ Residents will support
merchants
■ Playoff existing '
amenitiesfi,
• Burnham area firstSW
ry 1 L
LLELAND CONSULTING GROUP I)OWNIOWN TIGARD:D-dop—1$11X,p
Leland Consulting Group
-10
Key Strategies
Land Assembly is Needed
■ Primarily for housingrjy i
■ Few large parcels : `_ h'
exist
■ Critical mass needed 4?
for development =
■ Big incentive
■ Longterm - Public
Works yards and
3
building
L
Li.-.LAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN IIGARD:D,-4,gnem Suat.gy
Ke Strategies
Pursue Retail (Re)Development
■ Redevelop the 99W/Hall shopping
centers
■ Make incremental changes to
Main Street T
■ Contract with a retail consultant
■ Marketing and branding
■ Assist in improvements for j
smaller retailers
• Make room for locals and chains
L Lk?LAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:D—Apment S6ategy
Leland Consulting Group
0
Key Strategies
Improve Downtown Organization
■ Active, ongoing ■ Better collaboration
management needed and partnering
■ Establish a strong, ■ Resolve conflicts
private downtown early
organization ■ Unified public face
- Marketing . Shared vision and
- Advocacy goals
- Implementation
- Education
LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN IIGARD:Dcvelopmern Strategy
Key Strategies
Design Standards and Zoning
■ Always insist on quality
■ Developers prefer good standards
■ Link to other items (e.g., storefront
improvement)
■ Extend mixed-use to entire urban
renewal area ,
■ Special treatment/overlay for Main
Street and gateways
- Unique design standards
- Active ground floor uses
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:Development Strategy
Leland Consulting Group
Key Strategies
Improve Access and Connectivity
■ Every downtown needs convenient access
■ Tigard must improve connectivity:
- From surrounding neighborhoods
- Within downtown
- All modes (peds, cars, transit)
- Ash Avenue
■ Develop a circulation plan
LLELAND CONSULTING GROUT' DOWNTOWN TIGARD:0-4tifmcml StralrRy
Key Strategies
But Don't Sweat the Following
■ Post Office - a great Downtown anchor
■ Performing Arts Center - let private sector
lead
■ Parking - simple management is all that
is needed
■ Green Corridor - incorporate into planned
connections
L' LI;LAND CONSUL:PING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD D-,4,V enl Svau•gy
Leland Consulting Group
0
Key Strategies
Create a Low-Cost Revitalization Toolkit
High impact, low risk, low cost tools:
■ Development Opportunities Study (DOS)
programs
- Work with existing property owners
- Show development potential
■ Storefront improvement
■ Commercial redevelopment loan or grant
program
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD D—lop—M 51,atcgy
Key Strategies
Create an "Open for Business" Toolkit
■ Downtown Liaison in current planning
■ Expedited permitting process
■ Density bonuses for projects that meet
criteria
■ Increase property owner and developer
contacts
■ "Success audit"
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN TIGARD:D-4opmem Strategy
0
Leland Consulting Group
Conclusion
■ Get a catalyst project underway
■ Strengthen human infrastructure
■ Market your downtown
■ Maintain the momentum
TIGARD
L LELAND CONSULTING GROUP DOWNTOWN 11CARD:D-4opf Strategy
Leland Consulting Group
Tigard Downtown Work Program 1 --Year
DRAFT- JANUARY 16 FY 08-09
Project/ Task
Organizational Leadership & Capacity in Downtown
Strengthen coordination between the CCDA and other downtown organizations.
Appoint a Downtown Liaison within the City's Current Planning Division to serve
as a "go-to"person for private sector developers, and property and business
owners.
"Increase property owner and developer outreach.
Expand communications with property owners, developers, brokers.
Establish on-going forums with housing developers, commercial real estate
Create an ongoing "success audit'for Downtown Tigard
Facilitation of Downtown Redevelopment Projects
Downtown Plaza Development
Facilitate relocation of Stevens Marine (Plaza site)
Develop option agreement for acquisition /disposition of the Steven Marine site
Finalize Funding Strategy for Plaza
Housing Development
'Assemble land for housing downtown.
Conduct design and feasibility studies for housing and mixed-use
development on parcels adjacent to the Urban Plaza as specified in the
second phase of the Urban Plaza project.
Develop Disposition/Development Agreements with Key Property Owners
(Adjacent to Plaza)
Public Works Site
Prepare master plan/site development study
Appraise property based on site development
Work Program
Page 1
Tigard Downtown Work Program 1 --Year
FY 08-09
Project/ Task � � O� � �'
1 > Q C O > Q >
Commuter Rail Block
Transit Center Redevelopment
Monitor Grant Proposal with TriMet for Transit Site (MTIP)
Retail Development
Facilitate redevelopment of the two shopping centers
Develop incentives package
Evaluate strategies for acquisition/reconveyance of properties
Refine Urban Design Plan for Downtown
Develop conceptual framework for circulation, open space, pedestrian access,
and land use
Incorporate preferred urban design elements into Downtown Circulation Plan
Land Use—Regulations/ Design Guidelines
Design Guidelines
'Establish design standards for Downtown Tigard
Land Use Regulations
Development new land use regulations for Downtown
Implement Downtown Tigard Urban Renewal District Comprehensive Plan
policies and action measures.
Amend existing zoning standards to promote land use and development
that is consistent with the TDIP vision.
Institute an Expedited Permitting Process.
Work Program
Page 2
Tigard Downtown Work Program 1 --Year
FY 08-09
Project/ Task
Improvement of Fanno Creek Park / Open Space System
Fanno Creek Park
Strategic Actions
Incorporate Fanno Creek Park into Parks System Master Plan
Finalize Funding Strategy for Fanno Creek Park
Monitor METRO Natural Areas Grant(Fanno Creek Park)
Develop Phasing Plan for Fanno Creek Park
Design
Prepare Construction Plans for Fanno Creek Park
Construction
Construct"Re-meander"and Associated Improvements (CWS)
Land Acquisition
Land Acquisition for Park Expansion (floodplain properties)
Option Agreement (Stevens Marine Floodplain Property)
Develop Prospective Purchaser's Agreement(PPA)with DEQ, RR, City re:
Enviironmental Issues
Land Acquisition (Public Area)
Coordinate with affected property owners
Establish time frame for relocation/property conveyance
Rail to Trail (Hall to Tiedemann St.)
Prepare overall feasibility stud
Execute joint agreement with property owner
Urban Creek/Green Corridor
Phase I Urban Creek Corridor(Burnham St. to Commuter Rail)—Focus on
Phase I rather then expend resources now to develop a separate urban creek
as identified in the TDIP
Develop preliminary plans for new street/landscaped access from
Burnham St to Commuter Rail, and looped street from Main St.
Develop concepts for expansion of Urban Creek Corridor north of Commuter
Rail
Work Program
Page 3
Tigard Downtown Work Program 1 --Year
FY 08-09
�
Project/ Task >� Q � O� �� >�
Development of Comprehensive Street / Circulation S stem
Downtown Circulation Plan
Determine/Evaluate Circulation Plan Options
Coordinate Review/Select Circulation Plan Option
3.7 Achieve Consensus on Alternative
Downtown Access Improvements.
Implement long-term plans to increase connectivity to and within the
Downtown. (However, there is no need to pursue these in the short term
given that early projects will be located directly on Burnham and Main
streets.)
Incorporate Alternative Access Plans into TSP
Update Pedestrian/Bike Plan with Circulation Plan
Street Improvements
Burnham Street
Construction Bid /Contract
Construction (under roundin )
Commercial Street(Main to Lincoln)
Final design/ROW
Construction
Main Street Improvements
Develope preliminary design for Main St. (MTIP grant)
Identify ROW requirements
Review/Approve preliminary plans
Identify Main Street"Brand Tigard" Improvements
Street Trees
Work Program
Page 4
Tigard Downtown Work Program 1 --Year
FY 08-09
Project/ Task >`� Q �°' O� Q -S I°' e Q e 4
Development of Comprehensive Street / Circulation System (continued)
Ash Avenue Improvements
Ash Ave. (Burnham St. to Commuter Rail Parking Lot)
Provide grading/underground for construction
Construction (road improvements)
RR At-Grade Crossing (vehicular and pedestrian)
Initiate discussion with RR as to criteria/ requirements
Establish timeframes and agreement with RR
Hall Blvd./99W Downtown Gateway
Gateway Conceptual Design
Intersection Design Input/Washington Count
Coordinate Review of Preliminary Design
ROW Acquisition
Review Gateway Preliminary Design
Construction
Work Program
Page 5
New Tasks Requiring additional Funding or Staff
Organizational Leadership & Capacity in Downtown
Establish a strong downtown organization (funded position)
Develop a branding campaign for Downtown Tigard to market the downtown to the
development community, potential tenants and patrons.
Retail Development
Form a relationship with a retail consultant to work with property owners and
retailers to attract desired retail development downtown
Create a Main Street commercial redevelopment loan or grant program to
encourage development along Main Street that is consistent with the TDIP vision.
Create a Main Street storefront improvement program.
Similar to the recommended housing DOS program, create a retail-focused DOS
program for Main Street and the section of Burnham Street between Ash Avenue
and Main Street.
Housing Development
Create a Development Opportunities Study (DOS) Program to encourage
property owners to explore redevelopment.
Relocate Tigard's Public Works yards and make this prime site available for
housing development.
Redevelop the Tigard Public Works property at the intersection of Hall
Boulevard and Burnham Street.
Work Program
Page 6
Downtown Stakeholder Interview List
Interviewed July 2 and 12, 2007 by Leland Consulting
Name Affiliation/Position
Marvin Bowen Max's Fanno Creek Brew Pub
Alexander Craghead City Center Advisory Commission, vice-chair
Steve DeAngelo DeAngelo's Catering/Burnham Street Business Assoc.
Craig Dirksen, Tigard Mayor
Dan Dolan A-Boy, owner
Sheila Greenlaw-Fink Community Partners for Affordable Housing, executive director
Marland Henderson Tigard Downtown Business District Association
Roy Kim Central Bethany Development
Marjorie Meeks Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, president
Jeremy Monlux Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce, executive director,
Chuck O'Leary Bankers Investment Services
Craig Prosser Tigard City Manager
Steve Roos Russ Chevrolet, general manager
Mike Stevenson B & B Print Source
Carl Switzer City Center Advisory Commission, chair
Chuck Woodard Tigard Liquor Store, owner
Developers Interviewed September 6 and 7, 2007 by Leland Consulting
Name Affiliation/ Position
Fred Bruning, Center Cal Properties, president
Thomas Kemper KemperCo. Development, managing member
Skip Rotticci Costa Pacific Communities, senior vice-president
Leland Report Exec Summary
Note: The following is a summary of the executive report. Highlighted in bold/italics
are the top 5 tasks that Leland ranked and put in a letter to the City when asked at the
Council presentation what the City should focus on.
1. The Downtown is poised to attract new investment—housing, retail, mixed-use
2. Downtown's unique features & amenities—Fanno Creek Park, traditional Main
St., access to freeways, transit, neighborhoods with demographics to support
retail.
3. Constraints—incompatible land uses, fractured land ownership, access, low
improvement to land value.
4. S key areas for City of Tigard to focus on—Organization, policy, housing, retail,
access/parking
• Organization
1. Strengthen private sector leadership and communications with Council
2. Establish strong Downtown Association
3. Increase property owner and developer outreach to reveal
development opportunities
4. "Success Audit"--Prepare a success audit document of recently
completed, underway, and planned projects. Post on City web site
and use as a marketing tool for Downtown.
• Policy
1. Maximize public investment to stimulate new investment—Make sure
you are putting the dollars where they can do the most good. Note: we
are by reconstructing Burnham St& Main St in the core area.
2. Improve regulatory framework—New Design Standards are key to
setting the foundation for quality development. They need to be in
place before undertaking development studies and storefront
improvements.
• Housing
1. Ideal location for range of housing types
2. Assemble propertyfor Housing- Housing is the single greatest
market opportunity and has the greatest potential to catalyze other
investments in Downtown.
3. Begin development opportunity Studies—work with property owners
of key properties(adjacent to plaza, Burnham St., Hall/99W
shopping centers)to assess what is possible.
• Retail
1. Strong potential as area's residential population grows
2. Will attract local/independent retailers on Main St. and regional /
national retailers at larger visible sites on 99W/Hall Blvd.
3. Use of research, marketing, design standards, storefront improvement,
loans/grants to attract quality retail.
•
Access/Transportation/Parking
1. Address poor access to and circulation with Downtown to realize full
potential
2. Significant on-street parking and commuter rail parking an asset.
Copies to:
Mayor � Other:
ter, Councilors _4Z
7iN
City ManagerCouncil MailMayor's Calendar
IGARDTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT ASSOCIATION
December 29, 2007
Mayor Craig Dirksen
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigard, Oregon 97223
Subject: Leland Consulting Group Report
Mayor Dirksen,
At the request of the Tigard City Council, the Leland Consulting Group (LCG) was
commissioned and completed a report to identify a strategy to guide future development in
Downtown Tigard. The basic goal of the LCG report was to help guide the City and community
partners achieve downtown planning goals and objectives set forth in the Tigard Downtown
Improvement Plan (TDIP), the City Center Urban Renewal Plan, and other relevant planning
documents.
During the seven weeks since the report was presented to Council, members of the Tigard
Central Business District Association (TCBDA), with significant interest and investment in the
affected area, have been reviewing the report and engaging in conversation about many of the
recommendations contained in it.
In general, we are excited about what has been analyzed and proposed. We are writing to you
with questions as to the status of the City Council actions regarding the recommendations
presented by the LCG report. Because much of what it takes to carry out the intent of the LCG
report involves costs, we are concerned about the means as to getting it done. As the budget
process begins soon for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 andpossible budget adjustments for Fiscal Year
2007-2008, we feel-that it is imperative.that serious consideration be given to necessary actions
for the success of the urban renewal in downtown Tigard.
As a partner in this endeavor, can you advise what detailed plans City Council is making in
accordance with the recommendations? Also, will City Council be holding any workshops, in
which TCBDA members and other concerned citizens might participate, for the purpose of
discussion about the many parts.of the report and the appropriate actions that ought to be taken?
We look forward to your timely advice.
Sincerely,-
Charles S S ift
P.O. Box 23992,Tigard,Or 97281 •503.684.9082
Instructions for review of Fanno Creek Park & Plaza Master Plan
Note: The revised master plan with comments (in red/blue) will be mailed out to you on
Friday, Jan 11. In red are comments prompted from the Committee; in blue are
additional staff comments. When you get it, you can look at the list of comments(and
my responses) made to the document provided in this packet, and see the changes. Please
review the Comments List, and the Master Plan before coming to the meeting so we are
all starting with the same understanding.
Thank you.
List of Steerint_, Com mittee Comments–January 6
Note: The following comments were made. The underlined text after the comments are
my responses indicating that a change was made to the report, referencing Walker Macy
to do something, or providing an explanation to a question or why something was not
added.
Steerine Committee Member#1: Very positive about the report. No comments.
Steering Committee Member #2: Very positive about the report.
p.33, para 2, sentence 2: could use some clarity re: the meaning of"interpreted"; e.g.,
"interpreted via the use of kiosks, plaques, or signage at key or representative features to
explain their function &value to the City's commitment to sustainable practices."
included
p.33, para 3, 1" bullet: Although this is discussed more fully on p.45, I suggest adding
language in this section such as: "as well as a visual cue to the plaza& park from the
corner of main&Burnham by extension of the plaza hardscape to that intersection."
(included as new bullet)
pp.35-36 re: Plaza Concept Alternatives: Have we not selected Scheme IA already? If so,
the document should reflect that; if not, should it not include the fact that this was widely
preferred by the Steering Committee &CCAC as well as by several members of the
public, &the reasons therefore?Those reasons include: dramatic entry, clean visual lines,
nice contrast between the hardscape (urban elements) &the open areas/park. No
changes made - The document does reflect the decision to select scheme la. It is
identified in the Master Plan Section of the report.–the concept section page 35-38 is
documenting the alternatives that were considered. The master plan section beginning on
page 43 describes scheme, how it was modified, and the final plaza master plan on page
44. It is clear that the Plaza Master Plan is the decision because it is in the Master Plan
section and the first sentence states the `park designs were refined into a final master
plan' in the first sentence page 43.)
p.39, para 3, sentence 3: could use expansion/clarification re: "future development
scenario"—what does this mean in the context of siting the remainder of the trail north of
Ash?(included–see additional language)
p.50, full para 4: add a bullet re: providing enhanced habitat for Western Pond Turtle
(listed as threatened); also reference other federally/state listed thereatened &/or
endangered species. I know this is mentioned elsewhere, but a bullet list is an opportunity
to reach the casual reader&this was a huge factor in the discussions. (included–see
additional language)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 1
Steering Committee Member#3:
Page 3 -Check spelling-paragraph 2 included
Page 29 - What is a 24 hour population?(included- added language)
Page 33 -Is the purpose of the urban creek to clean stormwater from the entire city or just
from the plaza?(answer to question: The urban creek will help clean storm water
primarily from the plaza though it will convey other water from run-off in downtown.
The run-off from downtown will be cleaned before entering the urban creek so as to
avoid highly contaminated or dirty water entering the urban creek)
Page 35 - Why are the 3 plaza concept alternatives included in the plan? I thought we
had decided on scheme IA. (Answer-Because our consultants are documenting what
the alternatives were that were presented and discussed. The section title"master plan"
shows what the decisions were.)
Page 42 - Why the inclusion of the main street enttrance alternatives? Didn't we decide
on alternative plan 2?(Answer—again, our consultants are documentingthe options
considered. The preferred option, alternative 2, is part of the master plan section, and
referenced as"preferred" in the bottom paragraph page 54)
Steering Committee Member#4:
I'll start with the appendix attachment. I didn't see Items G, I or J. In Appendix E, there
is reference to a Luma Lighting Narrative on page 2. Where is it and what does it say?
(Answer—Item G is in the appendix and says"Faring Creek, 62191 Plumbing systems"
in the upper left corner of the page. It is an analysis of plumbing code requirements for
the restrooms in the shelter. Appendix G, Design Guidelines, is summarized in the report
on page 64. There are some minor changes to the Guidelines which are being worked on
now, and will likely be available at our meeting of Jan 15'h.
What is"Plan B" if required land acquisitions, right of ways,etc, don't take place?
(Answer—The master plan is based on the assumption that the properties the City needs
to execute the Plan will become available. Every attempt was made to select options
such as the plaza location where the property owner has shown an interest in working
with the City. For other properties;east of the plaza site,the new festival street, and
upper park will be developed in conjunction with redevelopment of those properties.
There may be a need to construct a temporary trail on public property north of Ash St. to
the plaza until properties become available.)
------------------------------------------------
Comments and questions about the draft:
Page 9-Fill in the blank before "acres"(,Answer-added)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 2
Page 10- What is the connection and responsibility of the relationship between streets and
sidewalks inside and outside the Master Plan Site Boundary. IE: Festival Street and
Sidewalk from Plaza to Main Street. (Answer—Part of the Right-of-Way (ROW) for the
expanded sidewalk from the Plaza to Main St. will come from the adjacent private
propertyupon redevelopment The festival street will likely be a public street but that
will depend on the development conditions for the appropriate properties.)
Page 11- Legend at bottom -#4 Bridge and# -there is nothing specified after the# sign.
Boundary line needs to extend up along side ABoy and Main.(Answer—what that means
is when you see a number like#4 that means it's a bridge and that's the number of the
bridge. Boundary will be changed by Walker Macy)
Page 16- paragraph 3- What is grated "weir"? Should that be"wire"? (Answer-A
"weir" is a dam in a stream or river to raise the water level or divert its flow. It has a
grate. It's correct.)
Page 27- Lower Park is referred to here and other pages. What are the boundaries or
description of this area?(Answer—note to Walker Macy to define Lower Park either by
graphic or description)
Page 32- Sustainable Building Design- need to insert"Traditional"as specified in TRIP.
Answer—The Sustainable Building design section on page 32 describes how sustainable
ideas can be used in building design. It does not state that any building will be designed
that way. Remember as part of our last discussion, it was decided that specific design of
elements such as the shelter, would be part of a future design process.
Here is the language I added to the report on page 43,para 1 to clarify this. "The future
design o„Lprogram elements which have the capacity to impart a unique architectural
character to the Upland Park or Plaza such as gateways, the pavilion, lighting light
columns, the fountain, seating, and the playground will undergo an inclusive design
process to make sure they reflect the desires of City Council and the community
Page 33- Parking-change"important" in first line to"imperative."(Answer—The word
"important" seems adequate.This can be discussed by the Committee.)
Page 44- remove specific design of all"placeholders" including pavilion. (Answer—The
placeholders show the design context of the master plan and are needed in the drawings.
There is no specific design assumed in the drawing. The location of key design elements,
such as the shelter, is part of the master plan. As mentioned above,the specific design
will be accomplished in a later design process per page 43 para 1.)
Page 45- Same-remove specific design features of commercial building. Change
sentence describing pavilion as to intended construction materials to traditional design
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 3
concepts as agreed to in TDIP.Answer— The mixed-use building indicates the type of
structure not the final design of it. The Committee agreed that certain design elements
would not be designed as part of this master plan. The paragraph indicates this as
follows: "The character of the pavilion will be defined in future design efforts. It is
intended to be constructed of rich durable materials that are endemic of the northwest
such as stone and wood and incorporate sustainable technologies".
Page 46- Remove construction details from structure in picture. (Answer—The rendering
explains important visual aspects of the design of the plaza. The building is generic, and
does not represent final design. It does, however, represent the size and scale of a
building that could be built there, and the Leland Associates references as feasible for
that location. This is important to understanding how the plaza and adjoining
development can be built in concert.)
Page 51- Map defines undecided elements as apparent"done deals." IE"New Bridge
and Boardwalk"off Main Street, and"New Housing"between Burnham and Festival
Street. (Answer—The site plan describes the preferred design of the gateway from Main
St., and our consultants best judgement as to what could be built next to the Festival
Street
Page 54-A lengthy description of the realigned Main Street entrance without discussion
of the cost and formal approval. Who's to say the brewpub will exist there? Why is the
previous expense and placement next to ABoy's not addressed in more detail. Answer
The cost of all items in the master plan will be identified in the appendix. Whether the
Brewpub will exist there or not, the preferred design option for theatg eway represents
the best design for the reasons stated in the paragraph. Please note its reference to the
TDIP. The Master Plan is a planning and design document, and is supposed to represent
what the desired course of action is for the project. However,the master plan and its
preferred options does not preclude the use of other alternatives. The Streetscape Plan,
although it did includes some preliminary design ideas for the Gateway at Main Street.
was not done in the context of a larger park and plaza plan. The Walker Mac design
for the Main St. Gateway takes the Streetscape Plan's design idea and makes it work
within the context of the larger park and plaza master plan.)
Page 61- Development Sequence-who determined this plan? (Answer-The
Development sequence is based on conversations with consultants Leland &Associates
and SERA architects working under Walker Macy. The idea was to determine a likely
sequence of development in order to understand the challenges, the type and scale of
future development. It is preliminary. The actual sequence will depend on cooperation
with property owners.)
Page 62 and 63-All structures in pictures on other pages should look like these- no
architectural details. (Answer—there is a new reference in the master plan indicating that
the illustrations are examples only.)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 4
Page 64- Design Standards- should again refer to TDIP, Streetscape Design and previous
agreed upon concepts. Answer—The Design Guidelines that were developed as part of
the Walker Macy contract are preliminary only, and do not represent what the final
guidelines will be for the Downtown. There is a separate process for the development of
Downtown Land Use and Design Guidelines.
Steering Committee Member#5:
I hope WM hires a professional proof reader for the document before submitting the final
to the City. It's rife with mistakes that a spellchecker won't catch. Also, I have some
concern that the images don't clearly line up with the abutting text. There is a lot of
information in the graphics that isn't explained anywhere and that's just sloppy work.
Nothing should be in a picture/figure/illustration that isn't referenced/explained
elsewhere. This should not be accepted by the City. (Answer—this will be done)
Page 2: Acknowledgements—Roger Potthoff s name should be listed with the CCAC.
Even though he wasn't around for the last two months of this he was around for the first
six and provided valuable input. (Answer—Walker Macy to add his name)
Page 43: First paragraph (Plaza and Upland Park),third sentence—Reads"The Master
Plan is intended to locate the program elements,define their size and general character,
and establish key design attributes". It needs to read "The Master Plan is intended to
locate the program elements, define their size and general character, BUT NOT establish
design attributes". (Answer—The term"Design attribute" is not the same as its design
character or architectural design. Attributes here means what should go into the design.
For example, a shelter should provide for picnicking, concerts, aatg hering place,etc. Or
the fountain should be designed for flexible use of the plaza, be interactive, etc. These
are"attributes"of the design but does not pin down what it will look like.)
This sentence should be added at the end of the first paragraph: "Some illustrations
contain examples of features but should only be considered graphic placeholders".
(Answer—change made.)
Page 46: First and fourth paragraphs(Fountain and Festival Street)—These sentences
need to be added (respectively): "The character of the fountain will be defined in future
design efforts", "The character of the festival street will be defined in future design
efforts". This mirrors the sentence in the 'pavilion' section and clears up any
ambivalence about final design. (Answer- Here is the language I added to the report on
page 43, para I to clarify this. "The future design ofproQram elements which have the
capacity to impart a unique architectural character to the Upland Park or Plaza such as
gateways, the pavilion, lighting, light columns, the fountain, seating, and the playground
will undergo an inclusive design process to make sure they reflect the desires of Citv
Council and the community". Note: I have added "festival street"to the list in the
paragraph.
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 5
Page 48: Last paragraph (Gas)—Should talk about installation timing as in other places
(sanitary,water,etc.) for consistency and to ensure it's clear that we don't want to cut up
the street when we do the plaza. (Answer—Good point, but this will be done as part of
the construction plans.)
Page 50, seventh paragraph—references a 10 foot path but on page 52 under`trail width
and cross section' the number is 10 plus two,two-foot shoulders.Also we didn't really
address material but do we really want asphalt paths cutting through the upland park and
plaza area?That's going to look cheap and out of character with the rest of the plaza. I'd
advocate for concrete paths in the whole of the upland park. (Answer—the trail width is
10 feet for the reeional trail: the shoulders are 2 feet. It's a consistent 10 feet. A note
about your suggestion for a concrete trail in the Upper Park is noted in the report on page
50. We can discuss this with our consultants.)
Appendix A: Public meeting notes(Meeting No. 3)—Roger Potthoff was there and
should be listed under `meeting participants'.(Answer—he will be added)
Appendix F: A page with fuzzy images and no explanation should not be acceptable.
(Answer—Walker Macy to clarify images and captions.They should be larger for better
clari, too.)
Appendix G: Missing. (Answer- it's there as the Plumbing Codi
Appendix H: A page with fuzzy images and no explanation should not be acceptable.
(Answer— Will be done. Walker Macy to clarify images
Appendix I: Missing. (Answer—It's being refined and will be at the meeting,)
Appendix J: Missing. Why was there no cost estimate matrix?This should have been
included and people will want to see that.(Answer—It will be included in the final
report, but may not be available at our meeting Jan 15. Walker Macy is working on this.)
Steerine Committee Member#6:
Here are the broadstokes without wordsmithing.
1. Economic and community impact of the plaza and park. Where is the sense
of vision and purpose in this report? How about consultant's validation that
developing the park and plaza is a worth cause that they have seen transform the
communities they have worked with time and time again. What can we expect
from our efforts? Why should we work hard to make this report and its
recommendations a reality? Is this coming in the Executive Summary? Answer—
Yes, and there is reference in Leland's Plaza study to your ideas)
2. More clarity is needed between what the public wants (and why) and the
recommendations of the consultant. When reading through the plan it is not
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 6
always clear if the information presented is that of the consultants, implied to be
based on their past experience and expertise, and/or a decision that was made by
the Steering Committee, based on education provided by the consultants and our
values as community members. This is a weakness of both the TDIP and the
Streetscape Plan that is a lesson-learned and a mistake that we are having to
repeatedly stumble over today. It is naive to think that the same people(City
Staff and citizens) referring to it in years to come are those involved now and
therefore will have a"memory of the vision of this plan,the citizen preferences,
values and why decisions were made if these are not clearly stated. Answer
This remains the on-going challenge of public projects like these. How to find
out what the Public wants. That is why we set up a Steering Committee, hold
public Open Houses, and open up our meetings to the Public. Everyone heard the
comments of the public at each of these venues. As you know, the consultants
researched all previous planning documents, heard what the Committee said, what
the City Council said, and came up with design options. The consultants did
include design ideas that came from the public. For example, the alignment of the
trail and its looped system at Ash St and the Public Works site were mentioned
by the Public,ended up on Comment Cards, and were incorporated by our
consultants. Note: sometimes decisions are written, such as the program for the
plaza& upper park on page 3l, in a factual way. It is assumed, though, that if it is
in the master plan or program,the Committee decided it. There was lengthy
discussion on the program for the plaza)
3. Stronger references are needed to tie the content of the report back
recommendations to the big picture vision and context of the entire
downtown.The Fanno Creek Park and Plaza Master Plan, in its opening
Introduction section,with a paragraph quoted from the TDIP that states the vision
include the key vision of an"urban village." The Fanno Creek plan needs to
reference throughout the document more clearly how it is supporting what is
contained in the big picture,TDIP's vision paragraph. The information is all
there, it just needs its corresponding reference. (Answer—The Introduction was
rewritten to provide that connection to the TRIP. The first page of the
Introduction references the TDIP in terms of themes, process, and design
challenges. The TDIP is mentioned throughout the report.)
4. Tie-backs to the TDIP and the Streetscape Plan elements need to be clearer
in the detail.The Fanno Creek Plan does not give enough reference in the detail
to a) show how it dovetails with either plan or b) shows decisions that were made
that furthered the vision of either plan. Again,the information is all there, it just
needs its corresponding reference.(Answer—additional language added. There are
thematic references to the Green Heart, the"Urban Creek"(a key design element
of the Upper Park& Plaza), the Plaza itself as a"Catalyst project" in the TDIP,
connecting Fanno Creek Park to the Plaza(a recommendation of the TDIP),
extending it to an open space system through Downtown, reference to the Urban
Creek Corridor as part of a past planning initiative enough?. Nevertheless, I have
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 7
added additional references based on yours and other's comments. Please review
the revised report. You may have ideas to bring up at our next meeting)
5. Movement from chapter/section to chapter/section needs to be more obvious.
As I was reading along it was not natural to look in the upper corner to see that I
was indeed moving from one section(i.e.concept design)to another section(i.e.
master plan). Because of this, I often was confused and felt like we were jumping
around when that wasn't the case at all. This was particularly confusing when I
moved sections and my clue was in the upper right corner(i.e. page 43)—just not
a natural place to look.(Answer—Ok. Chapter headers will be put on the pages
for reference. Walker Macy to address this,)
b. Photo captions/text needed to add clarity. Captions on the photos would be
very helpful as people may not be familiar enough with the area to recognize the
significance of the photo. This would assist with, "a picture is worth a thousand
words." (Answer—yes. All photos will have captions. Walker Macy to address)
7. Illustration would be more relevant to the text if referenced in the text. There
are some areas where the text is talking about a particular area but the illustration
or photo is not on that page. It would be helpful to the reader to have a reference
to a visual for better understanding. (Answer—where possible Walker Macy to
connect text with photo on same page.)
8. The word "programming"and "program elements" needs clarification
throughout. Although a word used frequently by industry professionals to
describe activities in an area, it is not a word that the laymen naturally associates.
It was also a word that threw many of us initially and led to contextual confusion
within conversation. As"programming" i.e.activities are a vital part of the park
and plaza design and design process, I think we should take a clue from this and
make sure that the meaning is clear before rattling on with the context. Answer—
Language added on page 29 to clarify the term.)
9. Plain English please. I understand appropriateness of industry-ease in this report
however,this work product is not intended for execution by people who will
understand all of this and will need a little guidance. Usually when people don't
understand something is just pass over it i.e.context is lost due to a lack of clarity.
My suggestion is to clearly state the meaning of these industry terms then proceed
using them in that section. New section? Clearly define again. A good example
of clarifying an industry term can be found on page 39 regarding "bank full."
(This whole section is well written in understandable text and great descriptions,
by the way.) Maybe there should be a glossary—we did this for the
Implementation Plan as I recall. (Answer—Walker Macy to define"bank full"
and technical terms in the report)
10. Adjacent Redevelopment Opportunities and Design Standards. It needs to be
clear that these are the opinions and recommendations of the consultant. This was
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 8
shown to the Steering Committee as a matter of information but we did not have
the time to delve into this and learn enough about it to actually have an opinion
about it one way or another. 1 think we need to be careful that someone else
reading this does not assume an implication that the Steering Committee or the
public involved in this process endorses this section. (Answer—new language
clarifies this on page 61)
11. Phases of the park and plaza. We talked a lot about how some of the plans will
be phased in over time and that affects how the trail system will appear in the
short and long term (i.e. prior to the public works property being included). There
seemed to be ideas on how the phasing might occur yet I did not see any
discussion of recommendations for how phasing can occur so as to have the least
impact on the park and the costs. Certainly the market will dictate some of this but
what ideas do they have for us to provide the leadership for progress? Answer—
a phasing plan is not formally part of the Walker Macy's scope of work. The
City will develop a phasing plan as a next step. Conversations with Walker
Macy and CWS will inform that plan.)
12. CWS plans. The intentions of Clean Water Services is a huge contribution to the
success of the park and the costs of this project overall. This might be covered in
the appendix via documentation but their efforts and cost commitments needs to
have stronger reference in the master plan body text. (Answer—the City has an
Intergovermental Agreement with CWS with regard to their responsibilities.
Remember the Master Plan is a planning and design document. The financial
plan, commitments and responsibilities are assembled outside of the Plan. The
Master Plan is not a legally binding document, but more a policy document that
sets forth Council intentions.)
13. "Traditional" look. The consultant has provided recommendations regarding
design standards and materials in several instances. It needs to be clear that
these are coming from them. The consultant's ideas need to be balanced in the
report (in several places)with text regarding the Steering Committee discussions
around the issue of the "traditional" look called for in the TDIP and Streetscape
report. Although there was no conclusion to this Steering Committee discussion
about what exactly "traditional" meant, nor was it intended to be a focus of our
work, it needs to be evident in the text that this discussion existed to give a
balanced account. Maybe the Steering Committee would like to make a
recommendation that a community group be formed (in accordance with the
TDIP "Brand Tigard" and possibly including former community members who
provided input initially) to visit the definition of"traditional" again and more clearly
define what is meant in order to provide a solid foundation by which the Fanno
Creek plan and the design process can move forward. (Answer—Additional
language indicating that the the Design Standards are preliminary and will be
further developed by the City was added to the Redevelopment Section. Please
see the following which was added to the master plan to clarify that no
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 9
architectural style is being recommended in the report : On page 43,para 1 to
clarify this. "The future design of program elements which have the capacity to
impart a unique architectural character to the Upland Park or Plaza such as
ag leways, the pavilion, fighting. ight columns, the fountain, seating, and the
playground will undergo an inclusive design process to make sure they reflect the
desires of City Council and the community". Suggestions as to a future process
can be aired with the Committee)
13. Pavilion as an icon? It was discussed in the Steering Committee that the plaza,
and specifically the pavilion, provides an opportunity for Tigard to provide some
thing unique(uniqueness is also part of the objectives)that will draw people to
downtown Tigard. This idea of an icon could also apply to other elements of the
plaza such as the fountain or the light columns this discussion needs to be added.
The pavilion design is discussed on page 45. Or,maybe"uniqueness"needs to be
its own section under"Design Elements"which starts on page 43. Page 32
includes an"Architectural Design Precedents"section that talks about
"architectural components"as a point of uniqueness where this could be added.
(Answer—the subject of design of the Pavilion was purposely left neutral per the
Committee in order to move forward with the Master Plan and allow the subject
to be more thoroughly addressed at a later time—see page 43. )
14. Plaza management and Ms.Whitman's ideas. Karen Whitman had a lot to say
about ways of managing the plaza programming, etc.yet"Management" on page
31 does not come close to her input. Maybe Karen can embellish this area. I'm
not looking for a book here,just her ideas and recommendations. My notes
specifically cover her thoughts on community involvement as vital to the success
of the plaza and included items such as...
a. The importance of having community involvement to strengthen the sense
of community ownership and commitment(i.e. Friends of Pioneer
Courthouse Square as an example of formal involvement, or forming a
Foundation for fundraising, etc.)
b. That groups(City, parks Dept., community) can interact for the common
good of the plaza/park.
c. The timing of forming a community group(i.e.asap)
d. What role a community group can play in the day—to-day management
e. How important constant attention to programming is vital, particularly in
our early years as Burnham Street is developing and the plaza isn't as
visible as it might have been on Main Street.
And what about Karen's commentary about...
f. How the plaza is a"strategic neighbor"related to all of downtown
(businesses, residents, commuters coming off the train, shoppers, etc.)
g. Plaza can be the economic underbelly for commerce and community pride
h. A plaza is a"welcoming"to citizens from Tigard and other communities
L The architecture needs to provide an obvious way to use it.
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 10
Ms. Whitman was inspiring about the potentials and far-reaching ramifications of
the plaza and how important this work is... that creativity is lacking in the report
overall. (Answer—I can ask Walker Macy to provide some summary of her work
on the project, and will forward your comments, which are comprehensive.
Please keep in mind that Ms Whitman work in this contract is relatively small,
and a more comprehensive look at the aspect of management of a plaza will be
needed. What is important though, is that it is mentioned in the report as an
important item for on-going success of the plaza.)
15. Lighting at the plaza/regional trial. Lighting along the regional trail at the point
in which it reaches the plaza was discussed and we all agreed on lighting that
focused toward the plaza, away from the park and disruption of wildlife. This
needs to be added, possibly to"Trail Lighting" on page 49-50 and/or page 54?
(Answer—Walker Macy to add wording referencing the shielded lighting in the
upper park.)
16. Pet control. There was considerable concern by the steering committee about
how pets could be controlled so as not to disrupt natural vegetation and wildlife
and mention that the dog park will eventually be eliminated. Add results of this
discussion to the report. i.e.Discussion about using vegetation (grasses, low
shrubs), possibly covering fencing, in transitional areas (plaza to park)to
discourage pets from entering natural areas, boardwalks to keep both pets and
owners above from sensitive areas. (Answer—Walker Macy to describe"buffer
and safety zone around the pond to prevent dogs, kids in the pond)
17. Little spot on Main Street—I don't see the little monument spot(would that
include a light column)on the other side of Main Street addressed. Is this an
oversight or was it dropped along the way? (Answer—no, the idea has not been
dropped. Walker Macy to include as reference the Plaza District Plan and
description of it, which was adopted by Council and includes the plaza location,
its connection to Main St. and the larger area plan. This a good point, and would
strengthen the Master Plan if it were included.)
18. Include the CCAC? I've noticed that when a list of those who were engaged in
discussion often doesn't include the CCAC (example: bottom of the 2nd paragraph
under"Park Alternatives" page 39). Is that because Walker Macy was not
involved in these discussions therefore it isn't appropriate for the CCAC to be
listed?The CCAC is listed in the Acknowledgements in the front of the report. I
vote the CCAC be added to these listings. (Answer—CCAC added page 39)
19. Are the cost estimate still on the way? What about the consultant's
recommendations for funding sources? (Answer—the cost estimates are on
their way, however,the consultants are not tasked to address funding. The Cityis
responsible for a funding strategy. The fundin strategy trategy however, is not part of
the Master Plan. It will become part of the Cit} CIP process, and budget.)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 11
20. What about an overall timeline estimate? In a chart maybe?(Answer—the
timeline for construction will depend on factors outside of the master plan. )
A final word: This report lacks inspiration and a sense of how important this project is
not only to downtown Tigard but to all residents of Tigard. Surely the consultants can add
some words of inspiration, express the pride we all have in a job well done, assist the
reader in seeing why they too should carry forth the plan, and instill how important this
project is to the City of Tigard. (Answer—added language in I"paragraph in the intro.
One suggestion would be to write a dedication on the inside front cover- such as
"Dedicated to the many individuals who have worked so hard to create a stronger sense
of community for Tigard". On the other hand, the plan is factual, connects the vision
with past planning efforts, and performs exactly the way it was intended -to guide future
construction of the park and plaza.
Page 3 —
1. 2"d paragraph, 7`h line,typo... "...with emphasis on..."(answer—changed)
2. Last paragraph, last FULL line "... behalf of the City of Tigard and the
contributing community members in formulating."(Answer—change made)
Page 4—
I. Site Assessment and Consideration paragraph: The TDIP had already
conceptualized a"central gather place adjacent to Fanno Creek supporting a
diverse range of activities..."(which is referenced on the previous page) making
this exercise redundant of the TDIP. So,maybe it should say something like,
"this is a detailed look at plaza sites beyond the conceptualized recommendation
of the TDIP."(Answer—In review, language seems adequate).
2. Program Development paragraph: Please reference my comments on #8
(programming) & 9(English) of my "General Comments"document. Suggested
wording could be:
"Program development addresses the kinds of activities that may occur
in the Park and on the Plaza as a starting point for the design process.
Program elements for Fanno Creek Park and Public use area were initially
developed through examining past city sponsored events and through
conversations...involvement process,ideas for additional programming
on the plaza and park...evaluated to determine the kind of space,
function and utilities required for each activity.(answer—see changes
made page 4)
Page 5 —"Cost estimate were developed for all proposed improvements."
Where are these? This implies costs were part of the review process and they were not, at
least by the Steering Committee. (Answer—cost estimates are in progress. The
references was moved to the end of the paragraph so it doesn't appear that the cost
estimates were reviewed by the group and public. )
Page 6— I" paragraph, second line, "urban vitality of a revitalized downtown and
supports the"urban village" mission of the TDIP." Refers back to page 3, TDIP
quote at the top of the introduction. (answer—added page 7, not 6)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 12
Page 9— Typo, fill in, and please reference my comments#3 (big picture)  (tie-
backs).
"...utilized throughout the year. As stated in the TDIP, the Stevens Marine site,
"utilizes the natural resource [of Fanno Creek] as an asset.The site of 24,000 sq. ft.
is large enough..."(Answer—reference to TDIP made, but modified to be clearer. See
a e9
Page 10—
The photo has nothing to do with the text. I suggested deleting it. This photo is more
appropriate to page 9. (Answer—Walker Macy to place Plaza District Plan in its place)
Suggested title revision: "Downtown Tigard Circulation and Land Use" answer—
good point, it should be the"plaza district plan"which was adopted by Council as part of
the plaza location study. Change will be made.)
Page 11 —Bottom of the legend. Isn't#4 a bridge? And what comes after the
# ?????(Answer—what that means is when you see a number like #4 that means it's
a bridge and that's the number of the bridge)
Page 16—3`d paragraph, 3`d from the bottom line. "... controlled by a grated wire
structure..." (answer—proper term is weir)
Page 25 —
1. These photos on the page are an excellent way to make your points. As the
reader, help me follow you and show me the significance of each photo. Maybe
number each photo and reference them in the text. For instance: Proximity to
Urban Residential Areas is photo 2. This one is pretty obvious but others aren't
so obvious if you don't know the area really well.(Answer -Walker Macy to
provide captions)
2. Last line on the page. Huh? Plain English please. (answer—note to walker
maa to be more specific)
Page 27 -Please reference my comment on#8 (programming) of my"General
Comments" document.
Suggestion: "... should remain a natural area for passive activities. Possible activities,
also known as program elements,were identified..."(answer—change made (activities
added
Page 29 - Please reference my comments on #1 (impacts) & #8 (programming) of my
"General Comments"document.
What are the economic impacts? Quick mention here as you can elaborate on page 31.
(answer—reference to economic impacts are already made: "Plazas, in turn,provide a
visual amenity, attract people to the area, and can assist in catalyzing adjacent property
development"t. This section is not about the economic impacts. It is intended to describe
the design and functional relationships.
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 13
2. Bullet#2 "Program/Activities" (answer—change made)
Page 30—Please reference my comment#8 (programming)of my"General Comments"
document.
1. IS`sentence—"... possible programmed events that could..." (answer—change
made
2 2nd sentence—"Daily activities for the..."removing the word "programmed"
(answer-change made)
3. 3`d paragraph—"... typical amounts of space required for the desired program
element(activity)."Answer—these program elements such as fountain rest room,
lawn are not activities but the program element that houses an activity. Left alone
for clarity)
Page 31 —
1. Please reference my comment 48 (programming)of my"General Comments"
document. 2nd line. "... located to support the activity."(answer—definition of
program described on page 29—see change)
2. Last bullet capitalize"Market"(answer—corrected)
3. "Management" section—needs to be stronger in recommendation. Please
reference#15 a-e of my"General Comments"document for details. answer—
WM asked to expand section based on kim whitman's input)
Page 32—
1. "Architectural Design Precedents" section- Please reference#14 (Pavilion as an
icon)of my "General Comments"document for details.
2. "Sustainable Building Design" section—
a. Please reference#13 (Traditional look)of my "General Comments"
document for details. (addressed above in 13)
b. 3`d line—"... water, photovoltaic(solar) panels to..."correction made
Page 33 -
l. "Sustainable Development Objectives"
a. "The City of Tigard and its community committee members are committed
to..."correction made
b. "... community's"Green Heart" concept initiated in the TRIP and a focus
of the Streetscape Plan." Correction made
2. "Upland Park& Plaza Design Objectives"—
I've refined the objectives created by the consultant by referencing notes from
meetings and other community input.See what you think. (answer—Nice job
documenting this information. These design objectives for both the plaza and
park are all relevant, as well as those relating to the Park. For the list to be
meaningful, it should be fairly concise. The Upland Park and Plaza Design
Objectives are very specific with regard to design, while yours are broader and
less specific. My suggestion would be for the Committee to consider
incorporating objectives as Steering Committee obaectives for the Park& Plaza as
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 14
an appendix. Since they represent your notes, and community input they could be
referenced in that manner. Please note that Walker Macy has concisely captured
the objectives of the project that affect design, which is the focus of the master
Ian
Key words are highlighted for emphasis in a sea of alphabet characters.
■ Create an environment that is unique to Tigard for our citizens to enjoy
and to attract people from neighboring communities to interact with us
and provide economic support.
■ Develop a plaza that symbolizes Tigard's vitality and values.
■ Establish a place where diverse groups of people can gather and recreate.
• Utilize the building, restoring, maintaining, and activities of the plaza and
park to build a sense of community among Tigard residents.
■ Include sustainable elements and practices wherever possible such an
"urban creek"that provides stormwater cleaning.
■ Incorporate the visions of the TDIP for design and as the"Heart of
Downtown"and "central gathering place."
■ Connect the downtown and the greater community with the Fanno Creek
corridor by providing direct visual access to the creek from Burnham
Street, Hall Blvd,and Main Street.
■ Provide open spaces that are flexible and can accommodate all sizes of
groups.
■ Provide a space that is active and vibrant and can accommodate the
needs of planned events like concerts and the Farmers Market, as well as
everyday uses like sipping a mocha with a book under the shade of a tree.
■ Design the space to provide a natural transition between urban city life
and the natural resources available of the park.
■ Link the plaza with downtown redevelopment efforts in Tigard for further
encouragement of investment and to stimulate further development.
Page 34.—
1. 2"d line—delete the close parenthesis.
2. "Tigard Farmers Market and the Festival Street"
a. Add, "Farmers Market organizers were consulted as to their needs for
space, utilities and other amenities so as to assure that the Master Plan was
feasible."(Walker Macy to add)
b. I thought that one of the points was that, as the Farmers Market grows, the
master plan allows for spillage of activities onto the plaza and grass areas?
Can we add this? (Answer- Walker Macy to add. )The space available
was a significant issue in a City Council meeting and is likely to come up
again if we don't address it here.
Page 35 —
1. "Public Restrooms,""Covered Gathering Area,"and"Storage and Maintenance
Area": As written, these appear to be separate items from the"Pavilion" section
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 15
on page 34. Was this your intention? If you intend for them to be UNDER the
"Pavilion"section you will need to make that more obvious in how it is
organized. Answer-The restrooms and covered space is part of the pavilion,
storne is not. Walker Magy to clarify.
2. "Plaza Concept Alternatives" 3` line—add CCAC to the list. (answer-added
Page 36—
The small illustration on the left appears to be the same as the larger illustration in the
text. Are you intending to show that there is a difference? I understand that 1-A has an
curving urban creek but will others be able to notice this level of detail. Maybe 1-A
needs a further caption?(answer—the smaller illustration referenced the curved urban
creek—walker macy to add "soft edge"to IA. Caption)
Page 38—This seems to end the plaza section abruptly. Maybe a sentence can be added
at the bottom of the page that says something like, "The scheme chosen is covered in the
next chapter, "Master Plan."(answer—once the chapters are shown and numbered, it
should be clearer)
Page 39—
1. I've refined the objectives created by the consultant by referencing notes from
meetings and other community input.
2. Park Design Objectives
Again, I've refined the objectives created by the consultant by referencing notes
from meetings and other community input. Key words are highlighted for
emphasis (answer—Nice job documenting this information. These design
objectives for both the plaza and park are all relevant as mentioned above, as well
as those relating to the Park. For the list to be meaningful, it should be fairly
concise. The Upland Park and Plaza Design Objectives are very specific with
regard to design, while yours are broader and less specific. My suggestion would
be for the Committee to consider inco[VoratinQ these objectives as Steering
Committee objectives for the Park&Plaza as an appendix. Since they represent
your notes, and community input they could be referenced in that manner. )
■ Strike a balance between human enjoyment of the park's natural resources and
protection of this natural resource.
■ Utilize elements of design and ecological protection to provide a pleasant park
experience for all.
■ Restore the park to a more natural, native state that will encourage healthy
wildlife, be properly maintained, and enhance the quality of the Fanno Creek
watershed and floodplain.
■ Provide for obvious park access and educational opportunities for community
members so to encourage an appreciation and interest in protecting this
natural resource.
■ Encourage a diverse group of people to enjoy the park.
■ Make the park accessible to all citizen groups including the aged and disabled.
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 16
■ Utilize the park to provide citizens an enjoyable route from other areas of the
city to access the amenities of downtown.
■ Provide a circulation system that provides for a safe environment from crime
and potential conflict of uses.
■ Provide for low-impact interaction for passive recreation including biking,
walking,jogging,and learning about the environment.
■ Provide for the link in the regional Fanno Creek Trail (Hall to Main)that
connects Tigard and Fanno Creek Park to many areas of the of the metro area.
■ Use varying sizes of trail to accommodate for primary and secondary uses.
Page 41 —
1. It's a good reference photo but not real obvious to the reader it's significance.
Maybe a caption that says, "Proposed Main Street Entrance location at Main
Street bridge." (answer—walker macy to provide caption)
2. I have some concerns about us talking about Max's Brew Pub as if that will
always be the use of that building. This building has turned over many times and
does not have the long-term standing and commitment to the community that a
business like A-Boy does. We have spoken of integration of activities as if it will
always be a restaurant(and/or Max's)and a central reason why to locate the Main
Street Gateway here. I would suggest we de-emphasize the fact that this building
houses a restaurant and focus a lot more on other aspects of the site. Answer—
good point—changes made on page 42: all specific references to Max's as a basis
for a design decision will be taken out of the report)
Page 42—
1. 2"d paragraph:
a. Note#2 on page 41 above.
b. Doesn't this alternative include re-vegitating the A-Boy side?Add this
text?Walker Macy to describe re-vegetation
c. Do you know that the owner of the Brew Pub building has recently
changed?You say"potential right-of-way"so we're covered but the old
owner, Chuck O'Leary, has given his blessing so you might want to talk
with Phil about the new owner's thoughts on this.
2. This seems to end the park scheme section abruptly. Maybe a sentence can be
added at the bottom of the page that says something like, "The scheme chosen is
covered in the next chapter, "Master Plan."Answer—chapter headings to clarify
Page 43 —
1. This is the big kahuna of our plan. Can we make it clearer that we have entered
this section. Also please reference#5 (moving)of my"General Comments"
document for additional comments. (answer-Walker Macy to address document
layout)
2. V' sentence: Add CCAC to the list. Please reference#19 (CCAC) of my
"General Comments"document. CCAC Added
3. 2nd paragraph, 3`d line add,"... visually to Fanno Creek. This supports the TDIP
sustainable practices vision and the park and plaza as a catalyst project,and
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 17
1
a Great Idea of"The Heart of Downtown"which designates this area as, "the
central gathering place adjacent to Fanno Creek supporting a diverse range
of activities..."answer—sentence cleaned up but added as suggested.
Page 45 —
1. "Light Columns"—
a. Expand the description of where the light columns would be placed to
include the western edge of the Festival Street and the play area ending at
the regional trail.Answer—language added page 45
b. Make it clear that the use of light columns or markers, which were agreed
upon by everyone, will be designed at a later time. Answer-Note this is
referenced as to design on page 43.
2. "Pavilion"—
a. 0 line. "An outdoor fireplace could be an added feature to provide
ambience to the space." Let's not present this as a done deal but instead
an idea for future design detail that everyone agreed upon. (answer—
change made)
b. Paragraph 2, describing construction materials. As it is currently written,
someone referencing this in the future could naturally assume that this text
is at the direction of the Fanno Creek Plan. It is not. If the last very long
sentence is to be kept in, it needs to be very clear that the ideas are
presented by the consultants onl the TDIP and Streetscape plans call for
"traditional"designs and materials,and actual design specifications will
be determined at a later time. Please reference#2 (clarity), #3 (references),
#4 (tie-backs), and#13 (traditional look)of my"General Comments"
document for additional comments. Answer—page 43 language addresses
future design of any elements. Also this paragraph reference durable
materials which everyone wants regardless of design, and it
says..sustainable elements that can be .... It is open.)
c. Last line. "... or photovoltaic(solar)cells."Answer-corrected
3. Illustrations- It needs to be made clear, possibly by caption, that, "The
illustrations are conceptual representation only and are not intended to represent
the design of the fountain, light columns or other structures. The actual design
step will come at another time."(answer- comment made earlier from someone
else addresses this.)
Page 46—
I. "Fountain"—Please add information the covers that this water will be circulating
only in the fountain and chlorinated/treated to swimming pool specifications(1
just made that up—please include appropriate wording). Answer-added
2. Illustration—It needs to be made clear, possibly by caption, that, "The
illustrations are conceptual representation only and are not intended to represent
the design of the fountain, light columns or other structures. The actual design
step will come at another time." Answer—referenced in general comments and
new comment on illustrations.
3. "Cafd Space"—should it be, "... to help activate the plaza..." ???(answer yes)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 18
4. "Open Lawn Area"—Since the visual on the page does not pertain to this section,
could we maybe reference a visual that does? For instance, "See figure 5.1 Plaza
Master Plan."Answer -walker mace to see if photo will fit there
5. "Festival Street"- Since the visual on the page does not pertain to this section,
could we maybe reference a visual that does? For instance, "See Figure 5.1 Plaza
Master Plan, Figure 5.2 Section A, and Figure 5.5 Section of Festival Street."
(answer—walker mace to adjust photo locations)
Page 47—
1. "Children's Play Area"
a. 2"d line—"Adjacent to the festival street, a short distance to the pavilion
and restroom facilities, the area was strategically placed for
convenience,safety and where parents can supervise their children
while within listening distance of musical events and other
programmed activities. The area is also located adjacent to an open
lawn..."(answer - sentence cleaned up but added)
b. Since the visual on the page does not pertain to this section, could we
maybe reference a visual that does? For instance,"See Figure 5.1 Plaza
Master Plan."(answer—Walker Mac two adjust photo locations)
2. "Urban Creek"—4`h line from the bottom. "... dispersed into the lower park
wetland area." Correct?(answer—yes, }
h
Page 48—typos
1. "Water" 0 line—"... upland park and plaza." Add period. added
f 2. "Storm"3`d line from the bottom—"...park.The conveyance portion..." Add
[ period. (answer—cant find it—walker maty to check)
Page 49—
1. "Ash Street Trail Connection"
a. 2nd line from the bottom - "...and photovoltaic(solar) panels for..."
(answer—added)
b. Are the call boxes a recommendation of the full group or the consultants?
I'm not recollecting this idea shared with the Steering Committee. Sounds
like an excellent idea to me. (answer—a few liked the idea, no one
obiected
c. Should the possible lighting of the trail be referenced here since this
section is talking about electrical distribution? Answer—No—but see page
54 —see added language
2. "Site Lighting Design—Plaza"(continues on page 50)—Should the discussion of
lighting the area of the plaza where the regional trail crosses through be addressed
here as this is under"Electrical Distribution?"Please reference#16 (lighting)of
my"General Comments" document for additional comments. ( answer—not here
—walker mace to confirm where)
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 19
Page 50—
"Trail Alignment Design Criteria"(answer—the trails were not sited for safety—see
criteria. They were"designed" for safety with wide corridors etc. Walker Macy chose to
use"criteria"—"criteria"are more scientific in general which this is )
a. Add bullet point—"Use design elements that maximize a feeling of safety
in the park."
b. Criteria or Objectives— We have used"objectives" in other portions of
the report. Would it be good to change"criteria"to"objectives" for
consistency? Or is there a specific reason to use"criteria" in this case?
3. Is this the place to talk about what kind of phasing can be achieved (i.e. trails
moved around) and how this will be handled as the plan for the upper area of the
park and the plaza take shape? Please reference#11 (phasing) of my"General
Comments"document. (answer—no discussion of phasing ger above comments_._
City will undertake this separate from the master plan. WM not tasked for this)
Page 51 —
I can see this map used as the"final, done deal" map in the future. Does this map
definitively represent the recommendations of the consultants and the committees?
Answer—It s not a done deal but the Committee seemed to prefer this as an option.—The
cost of all items in the master plan will be identified in the appendix. Whether the
Brewpub will exist there or not,the preferred design option for theag tewaLrepresents
the best design for the reasons stated in the paragraph. Please note its reference to the
TDIP. The Master Plan is a planning and design document, and is supposed to represent
what the desired course of action is for the project. However, the master plan and its
preferred options do not preclude the use of other alternatives in the event that the chosen
option simply could not work. The Streetscape Plan, although it did includes some
preliminary design ideas for the Gateway at Main Street, it was not done in the context of
a larger park and plaza plan. The Walker Macy design for the Main St. Gateway takes
the Streetscape Plan's design idea and makes it work within the context of the larger park
and plaza master plan. Group can discuss this again.
Entrance to Park-There still seems to be a controversy as to which side of the creek to
place the entrance;or did I miss something? Issues were:
a. Costs-Last I remember costs were going to be looked at but we never heard the
outcome of this investigation.
b. Disruption of a business—Max's Brew Pub(building now has a new owner)
c. Previous expense afforded to locate the trail on the A-boy side—The City Staff
was asked to look into this. What was the outcome?
I don't see any of these concerns mentioned in the text. How could this be addressed?
Should it be?
Maybe a way to handle this is to change the label to something like, "Alternate new
bridge and boardwalks"and let the text provide an explanation. ????
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 20
Page 52—
2" paragraph, 2nd sentence regarding CWS proposal—is this a time to mention what
CWS is paying for? Are there other areas we can cover this? Please reference#12 (CSW
plans) of my "General Comments"document for additional comments. Answer—the City
as an IGW with CWS for their responsibilities. Its not part of the master plan, which is a
City document.
Page 54—
1. "Trail Lighting"—
a. Add that people working in the downtown and using public transportation
(bus and computer rail)also use this trail in the evenings.
b. Add a new paragraph that addresses plans for trail lighting along the
regional trail at the point in which it reaches the plaza. We all agreed that
the lighting needs to focus toward the plaza, away from the park and
disruption of wildlife. (answer- walker macy to address)
2. "Overlooks and Interpretive Sites"—Add the technique of using bump outs as a
way of allowing people to enjoy the interpretive sites without disrupting the flow
of traffic. Answer—added
3. Last paragraph—Refer to comments on page 51 above. Was moving the entrance
to the west side of the creek the"preferred option?" Answer—I think the group
decided this yes. Remember, the master plan provides guidance, but do to
feasibility it cannot insure that it will happen.
Page 55—
1. "Bridges"
a. Bullet 3 has a weird wrap to it(answer yes it does! Wm will deal with the
details of layout—walker macy to define scour area)
b. )
c. Can this section and the criteria be written in more laymen terms.
d. Explain why the cable rail system is recommended: Easily seen through?
Durability?People are not as likely to climb on it?
2. Can "mitigation"be more clearly defined?Or is this just one of those"technical"
areas and maybe a glossary can be added for those of us who want to understand
but don't get it?Answer - Mitigation is a technical term but also its in the
dictionary. I think some of this is technical, most people can find out about it if
they want to.
Page 56—"Habitat enhancement and Restoration Activities"
1. 1 St paragraph, I" line—Capitalize"Creek"details
2 2nd paragraph, Yd line—"... measures that will help slow the velocity, reduce
channel..."answer-CWS is saving there will be no change in flow velocity
actually
3. This begins the commentary about what CWS intends to do but I don't see
anything about their commitment in dollars or even mention that this is already
funded. This should be added. (answer—this outside the scope of the master plan.
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 21
There responsibility is their own work, and part of an intergovernmental
agreement. Unfortunately they are not obligated by this master plan)
Page 57—"Species specific Habitat Elements"
1. Bullets 1-3 have weird wrapping. Details— WM to fix
Page 59—"Trail Safety Corridor"
Typo 4h line down—"trail to the shrub..."details to be corrected by Walker Macy
Page 60—"Water"
Should this be all one paragraph?Details wm
Page 61-65 —
l. Page 61, paragraph 1 -This is not just a"vision"for the area that we pulled out of
the sky. It is what is considered feasible based on market studies by both the
TDIP and the more recently Leland Report. Reference to these credible sources
needs to be added. (answer—yes good point,I had added some wordingto o this
effect. Please see new paragraph)
"Development Sequence"begins on page 61 —It needs to be made clear that these are the
recommendations or projected sequence as developed by the consult. We need to be
careful that the report does not imply(as we do in most other areas of the report)that the
Steering Committee or the public endorses this section. Please reference #120
(Redevelopment/design standards)of my "General Comments"document for additional
comments.
Steering Committee Member#7
My biggest concern is that the master plan for the Open Lawn Area (page 46) has no
consideration for the water quality impacts of a lawn on a slope above a pond and a
creek. At the meetings I saw all heads nodding when and got affirmative comments from
the consultants when I asked that the lawn be a native meadow grass mix and that the
plan include management guidance on how to maintain that lawn.
A chemically dependant green lawn will negatively impact adjacent waters and be a
geese magnet(which won't serve concert goers very well). What I asked for was a
similar treatment to Brown's Ferry Park in Tualatin. When that was tried behind the
library, staff tells me that an elected official ordered the lawn to be mowed before the
seed crop to sustain the lawn could develop. Thus it would be very good if the master
plan made explicit the type of lawn to be planted,the water quality and wildlife
implications,and the necessary maintenance procedures necessary to sustain the lawn
without negative impacts on the nearby pond,creek,and wildlife.
Thanks for the discussion of the trail alignment on pages 50-51.
Answer—Everyone is agreement that the lawn should not pollute the creek or pond
beyond. Runoff from the central lawn should be treated in swales, filter strips or by other
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 22
means so that any fertilizer is caught before going into the lower park. There are drought
resistant grass species that take less water and fertilizer and to maintain. The use of the
lawn will likely be high so the blends of grasses need to take the pressure of compaction
and foot traffic. The grass won't be"native" but should be climate adaptive and require
less water and fertilizer than a standard lawn. However, because this will be a highly used
area, for informal gatherings or events, it will not likely be a native meadow grass mix.
Please note that at our meeting, we discussed adding native meadow grasses west of the
trail between the pond and the lawn, but never discussed making the whole great lawn a
native meadow.
The management of the Great Lawn will be made part of a Vegetative Management Plan
developed for the Park. This will be referenced in the master plan Walker Mac to o add
language to Vegetation Management Plan with regard to Great Lawn.
Steering Committee Comments Jan 3
Page 23
Tigard Downtown Work Program Refinement January 2008
Current Priority and Timeline
COT work plan- Near-Term Long-'4
City of Tigard Timeline Actions(2-3 Actions'*10
Year 1 (FY 07-08) years) ,
Leland Consulting Group Timeline Priority Leland "Now" 1-3 years `
Key Strategy:
I. ENCOURAGE AND
FACILITATE
REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS IN
DOWNTOWN
Category Near Term Actions
Near Term Actions 1.1 Manage"Catalyst Projects"in Downtown X x x
Follow through with projects that are planned or currently underway.
•Fanno Creek Park Improvements.
Urban Plaza
Main Street Green Street
Burnham Street Improvements
Policy RecornmendMon 1 Hall Boulevard/99W Intersection Improvements High X x
To leverage public dollars for high impact projects, make the following
adjustments to planned projects.
1.Phase I Urban Creek Corridor(Burnham St.to Commuter Rail)—
Focus on Phase I rather then expend resources now to develop a
separate urban creek as identified in the TDIP
2.Performing Arts Center—Not expend dollars at this time,but remain
flexible to private sector interest.
3.Post Office Relocation—Relocating the post office is not a good use
Policy Recommendation 2 of public resources at this lime. Medium X
Create a Main Street commercial redevelopment loan or grant program
to encourage development along Main Street that is consistent with the
Retail Recommendation 2 1 DIP vision. Medium x
Retail Recommendation 3 Create a Main Street storefront improvement program. High X
\LRPLN\DOWNTOWN\Downtown Implementation Strategy\Strategy Matrix COT and Leland FINAL 01 10 2008 1
Current Priority and Timeline
COT work plan - Near-Term Long-Term
City of Tigard Timeline Year 1 (FY 07-08) Actions (2-3 Actions (4-10
years) years)
Leland Consulting Group Timeline Priority Leland "Now" 1-3 years 3-10 years
Similar to the recommended housing DOS programcreate a retail-
focused DOS program for Main Street and the section of Burnham
Retail Recommendation 4 Street between Ash Avenue and Main Street. High X
Housing Recommendation 4 Offer density bonuses to encourage housing developmeri downtown i m:, X
Near Term Actions 1.2 Identify Opportunity Areas for Redevelopment. X
Near Term Actions 1.3 Maintain a Dialogue with Developers. X X X
Organizational Recommendation 1 Establish a strong downtown organization. 1ril, X
Strengthen coordination between the CCDA and other downtown
Organizational Recommendation 2 organizations. tie!, X
Appoint a Downtown Liaison vothin the City's Current Planning Division
to serve as a go-to'person for private sector developers and property
Organizational Recommendation 5 and business owners. X
Form a relationship with a retail consultant to work with property owners
Retail Recommendation 1 and retailers to attract desired retail development downtown i X
4.Develop a branding campaign for Downtown Tigard to market the
downtown to the development community,potential tenants and
Organizational Recommendation 4 patrons
ligh
Near Tenn Actions 1.4 Develop a Program for Land Assembly. X
Housing Recommendation V Assemble land for housing downtown. High x
Near Term Actions 1.5 Evaluate City-Owned Property for Redevelopment. X
Relocate Tigard-s Public Works yards and make this prim.site
Housing Recommendation 5 available for housing development. Medium x
Redevelop the Tigard Public Works property at the intersection of Hall
Housing Recommendation 5 Boulevard and Burnham Street. ME-dinn, X
Near Term Actions 1.6 Refine Land Uses in Downtown. X
Near Term Actions 1.7 Develop Land UselDesign Guidelines for Downtown. X X
Implement Downtown Tigard Urban Renewal District Comprehensive
Plan policies and action measures.
Policy Recommendation 3 High X
Amend existing zoning standards to promote land use and
Policy Recommendation 4 development that is consistent with the TDIP vision. High X
Policy Recommendation 5' 1 Establish design standards for Downtown Tigard High X
Policy Recommendation 6 11ristiluite an expedited permitting process High X
1:\LRPLN\DOWNTOWN\Downtown Implementation Strategy\Strategy Matrix COT and Leland FINAL 01 10 2008 2
.,..;�ume�t;dP �arRd T�ir►ae _�..�:;,� � _
Jy�� 4j J11��/���/ i yV S•�•1 A
,of 9'r17M.0 rre we l
y;.
' ;�9
_ r
Leland Consulting Group Timeline Priority Leland "Now" 1-3 years 3-1 :
Near Temr ro 1.8 Encourage Public Involvement. X X X
Organizational Recommendation 3' Increase property owner and developer outreach. High X
Near Term Actions 1.9 Conduct a Housing Study X
Conduct design and feasibility studies for housing and mixed-use
development on parcels adjacent to the Urban Plaza as specified in the
Housing Recommendation 2 second phase of the Urban Plaza project. High X
reate a Developmeni Opportunities StudyProgram to
Housing Recommendation 3' encourage property owners to explore redevelopment. High X
Long Term Actions
1.10 Pursue Redevelopment Projects that Incorporate Public Open
Long-Term Actions Space. X
Long-Term Actions 1.11 Facilitate Business Relocation on Key Sites. X
Retail Recommendation 5 Facilitate redevelopment of the two shopping centers High X X
ll. DEVELOP FANNO
CREEK PARK AND THE
OPEN SPACE SYSTEM IN _ :,>
DOWNTOWN
Near Term Actions
Near Tenn Actions 2.1 Develop a new Master Plan for Fanno Creek Park. X
2.2 Incorporate Sustainable and Ecological Design of Fenno Creek
Near Term Actions Park and Downtown's Open Spaces. X
2.3 Determine the Feasibility of the
Near Tenn Actions Urban Creek Corridor in Downtown. X
Near Term Actions 2.4 Expand the Fanno Creek Trail West of Downtown. X
Long Term Actions
Long Term Actions 2.5 Develop Fanno Public Area as a Central Gathering Place. X
2.6 Develop an Expanded Open Space
Long Tern Actions System through Downtown. X
2.7 Determine the Design Themes and Progression of Pubic Spaces
Long Term Actions for the Urban Creek Corridor. X
I:\LRPLN\DOWNTOWN\Downtown Implementation Strategy\Strategy Matrix COT and Leland FINAL 01 10 2008 3
Current Priority and Timeline
COT work plan- Near-Term Long-Term
City of Tigard Timeline Year 1 (FY 07-08) Actions (2-3 Actions (4-10
years) years)
Leland Consulting Group Timeline Priority Leland "Now" 1-3 years 3-10 years
Long Term Actions 2.8 Develop a"Pail to Trail"corridor along Tigard Street into Downtown. X
Ill. DEVELOP
COMPREHENSIVE
STREET AND
CIRCULATION
IMPROVEMENTS IN
DOWNTOWN
Near Term Actions
Near Term Actions 3.1 Implement Comprehensive Slreetscape Design in Downtown. X
Near Term Actions 3.2 Develop a Gateway to Downtown at Hall Blvd./99W Intersection. X
Near Term Actions 3.3 Incorporate"Green Street'Design Where Possible. X
Near Term Actions 3.4 Improve Streets in Areas with High Redevelopment Potential. X
3.5 Assist Main St.Transition/Install Temporary"Brand Tigard"
Near Term Actions Improvements on Main Street. X
Near Term Actions 3.6 Refine the Circulation Plan for Downtown. X
Long Term Actions
3. Achieve Consensus on Alternative
Long Term Actions Downtown Access Improvements. X
.,J-ment long-term plans to increase connectivity to and within the
Downtown. However,there is no need to pursue these in the short
Access.Transportation and Parking term given that early projects will be located directly on Burnham and
Recommendations 1 Main streets. Hign x
Long Term Actions 13.8 Develop a Pedestrian/Bicycle Route Plan. X
Long Term Actions 3.9 Obtain a Railroad Crossing at Ash Avenue. X
Long Tenn Actions 3.10 Develop a Parking Management Plan. X
Access,Transportation and Perking Establish a shared parking program
Recommendation 2 Low X
I:\LRPLN\DOWNTOWN\Downtown Implementation Strategy\Strategy Matrix COT and Leland FINAL 01 10 2008 4
Current Priority and Timeline
COT work plan - Near-Term Long-Term
City of Tigard Timeline Year 1 (FY 07-08) Actions (2-3 Actions (4-10
years) years)
I
Leland Consulting Group Timeline Priority Leland"Now" 1-3 years 3-10 years
Pursue a very modest parking strategy:There are two specific actions
that the City should pursue. In both cases,the City should work closely
Access,Transportation and Parking with the private sector downtown organization to coordinate and
Recommendation 3 impliment the programs.
Low X
Long Term Actions 3.11 Develop Gateways at Key Intersections. X
Non-associated Leland
Tasks
Organizational Recommendation 6Create an ongoing"success audit"for Downtown Tigard High X
'Priority Items Per Leland Memo:
Immediate Next Steps for Tigard;16
November 2007
I:\LRPLN\DOWNTOWN\Downtown Implementation Strategy\Strategy Matrix COT and Leland FINAL 01 10 2008 5
Copies t
Mayor Other:
Councilors
City Manager _Z
Council Mail
Mayor's Calendar
January 11, 2008 RECEIVED
Craig Dirksen, Mayor JAN 14 2008
Tigard, Oregon City of Tigard
Administration
Dear Mayor Dirksen,
As a Tigard resident since 1979 I view with great interest your
grand plans, which seems to create an urban park area and will
take a few years to complete.
What bothers me is that the dozens of businesses that have
struggled to keep Main Street alive over the years have been
ignored. Could you not do something to beautify Main Street and
create a pretty shopping area with greenery, flower baskets or
whatever right now?
When people enter Tigard either from the south on 99 or from 217
coming from Beaverton, the first impression is always, trash,
weeds, thorny blackberry bushes or otherwise ugly scenery.
Would it not be possible to beautify the overview of Main Street
with more frequent trash pick-up and plantings or something else
creative and not terribly expensive?
I am sure all of us Tigard residents as well as the local businesses
would appreciate your efforts.
Si erely,
Pat Sc lueter
15505 SW 109'' Ave
Tigard, OR 97224 cc Tigard Times
City Center Advisory Commission
Sign-in Sheet
Meeting Date
COMMISSIONER NAME
�C/
VISITORS
City Center Advisory Commission
Meeting Date I —J 60 - D�
Please Print
Name Mailing Address Email Address
15A Dlsoh
BY LAWS OF THE QTY CENTER ADVISORY CONIlVIISSION
SECTION 1. CHARGE AND DUTIES
(a) The City Center Advisory Commission (the "Commission") has the powers
conferred by City Charter,the Tigard Municipal Code, the resolution
approving these bylaws, and such other powers as granted by the Tigard City
Council, but shall have no other powers. These by laws are adopted by
resolution of the Tigard City Council, are binding on the Commission, and
may be amended only by the City Council.
(b) It shall be the function of the Commission to act as an advisory body to the
City Center Development Agency(CODA), the Urban Renewal Agency for
the City of Tigard, or the City Council as appropriate.
(c) The Commission is charged with advising the CODA on matters pertaining to
Urban Renewal Plan implementation and tax increment fund allocations for
the City Center Urban Renewal District. Recommendations pertaining to
policy, budget, and implementation of urban renewal projects identified within
the Urban Renewal Plan and / or the annually adopted Downtown
Implementation Strategy and Work Program will be made to the CCDA or
City Council as appropriate for consideration, deliberation and action. The
Commission may also provide recommendations with regard to amendments
to the City Center Urban Renewal Plan.
(d) The Commission shall perform other duties as assigned by the CCDA.
(e) The Commission may form subcommittees to investigate areas relevant to its
charge or duties pursuant to this section.
SECTION 2. COMPOSITION
(a) The Commission shall consist of nine (9) members appointed by the City Council
who are residents of Tigard or own businesses or property within the City Center
Urban Renewal District with the following representation if possible:
(1) At least two (2) business owners or property owners whose business or
property is located within the City Center Urban Renewal District;
(2) Five (5) persons who are residents of Tigard and represent a cross-
section of interests in the community at large;
CCAC By-Laws
Page 1
1
(3) One (1) person residing within or adjacent to the boundaries of the
City Center Urban Renewal District;
(4) One (1) Tigard resident who possesses relevant professional expertise,
which could include but is not limited to, real estate development, land
use planning, affordable housing, or environmental design
(5) Two (2) alternates (non-voting) including one (1) at large resident of
Tigard, and one (1) business or property owner from within the City
Center Urban Renewal District
SECTION 3. APPOINTMENTS
(a) Council shall fill vacancies with individuals necessary to meet the
compositional requirements of above.
(b) In addition, Council shall determine a means of staggering appointments of all
current members initially using three (3) three-year terms, three (3) two-year
terms, and three (3) one-year terms.
(c) Appointments shall be made by the City Council with recommendations from
the Mayor.
SECTION 4. TERM OF OFFICE
(a) After the initial staggering of terms for current members as defined in Section
3(b) above,the term of office of all future, appointed members shall be three
(3) years or until their successors are qualified and appointed.
(b) All terms shall begin January Pt and end December 31St.
(c) Any vacancy in the Commission shall be filled by appointment by the Council
upon recommendation by the Mayor for the unexpired portion of the term.
The unexpired portion of a term does not count towards the two consecutive
terms limit in Section 4(d).
(d) Members may be reappointed for up to two consecutive three year terms. An
initial one or two year tern under Section 3(b) does not count towards the
two consecutive terms limit.
(e) Members of the Commission shall receive no compensation for their services.
CCAC By-Laws
Page 2
SECTION 5. ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMISSION
(a) At its fust meeting of the year, and thereafter annually, the Commission shall
elect a Chair and Vice Chair from its members who shall hold office at the
pleasure of the Commission.
(b) If the Chair or Vice Chair should resign, the Commission shall, at it next
meeting, conduct an election and provide a replacement.
(c) The Commission shall meet at least quarterly during a calendar year at a time
and place that is specified at least 5 days in advance.
(d) All meetings shall be conducted in conformance with Public Meeting Law.
(e A record of the Commission's proceedings shall be filed with the city
recorder.
SECTION 6. VOTING
(a) General procedures of the Commission, including voting, shall follow
Robert's Rules of Order.
(b) A majority of votes shall determine the official position of the Commission on
a given issue.
(c) Chair and Vice Chair shall vote on all matters before the Commission.
SECTION Z. COMMISSION MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES
(a) Members of the Commission shall:
(1) regularly attend Commission meetings and contribute constructively to
discussions,
(2) consider and discuss issues from a Citywide perspective, as well as that
of particular stakeholders or interests,
(3) understand and be able to articulate the Commission's charge,
responsibilities and adopted, annual work program,
(4) strive to reach consensus on matters under consideration,
CCAC By-Laws
Page 3
(5) act with respect and consideration for the viewpoint of others,
(6) review and provide comment on reports,presentations, and
recommended policies or strategies related to Downtown
redevelopment before the Commission, and
(7) vote on motions in front of the Commission,except where reasonable
abstention is necessary.
(b) Commission members may engage in general discussions regarding its charge,
responsibilities or projects within the Urban Renewal Plan or Downtown
Implementation Strategy, but shall not discuss specific real estate projects or
proposals with potential developers or property owners without the
authorization of the CODA.
(c) In addition, members shall not make representations on behalf of the City of
Tigard or CCDA without authorization.
(d) Members shall not make representations on behalf of the Commission
whether intentional or not,without the authorization of the Commission.
SECTION 8. ATTENDANCE
If a member of the Commission is unable to attend a meeting, he or she is expected to
notify the Chair or Vice Chair. If any member is absent from any six (6), regularly
scheduled meetings within one year or three (3) consecutive meetings without reasonable
cause,the issue shall be placed on the upcoming agenda, and upon majority vote of the
Commission that position shall be declared vacant. The Commission shall forward its
action to the Mayor and Council,who shall fill the vacant position.
SECTION 9. QUORUM
At any meeting of the Commission, a quorum shall be a majority of the current
members of the Commission. No action shall be taken in the absence of a quorum
except that the meeting may continue with discussion on agenda items. For the
purposes of forming a quorum, members who have disqualified or excused themselves
from participation in any matter shall be counted as present.
In the event a quorum will not be present at any meeting,the Chair or Vice Chair shall
notify the Commission members in advance so that a decision maybe made whether
to meet and take no action on agenda items or to reschedule to a different time.
CCAC By-Laws
Page 4
SECTION 10. REMOVAL OF MEMBERS
(a) The City Council may remove members of the Commission in accordance with
Section 8 Attendance.
(b) The Council may also remove members at its sole discretion.
(c) The Commission may make a recommendation to Council for the removal of a
member for failure to comply with Section 7 Commission Member
Responsibilities. The Commission shall forward a recommendation for
replacement to the Mayor and Council in a timely manner.
SECTION 11. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
(a) Not later than December 1 of each year, the Commission shall prepare and file
its Annual Report to the CC DA.
(b) The Annual Report shall include a summary of key activities and proceedings
and any specific suggestions or recommendations which the Commission
believes would assist its mission or the overall goals for the Downtown.
(c) The Annual Report shall not be submitted unless approved by the Commission.
CCAC By-Laws
Page 5