12/10/2008 - Packet City of Tigard
City Center Advisory Commission — Agenda
x
MEETNG DATE: Wednesday, December 10th, 2008, 6:30-8:15 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Red Rock Creek Conference Room, City Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223
1. Welcome and Introductions ....................................................................................................6:30 — 6:35
2. Review / Approve Minutes .....................................................................................................6:35 — 6:40
3. CPAH Project Update / Affordable Housing......................................................................6:40 —7:00
(Sheila Greenlaw-Fink)
4. CCAC Annual Report- Draft.................................................................................................7:00 — 7:15
(Discussion)
5. Council Goal Setting—CCAC Input......................................................................................7:15 — 7:30
(Discussion)
6. Main Street—Temporary Improvements / Facade Improvement Program ...................7:30 — 7:50
(Phil Nachbar)
7. Organizational Leadership —Downtown...............................................................................7:50 — 8:10
(Subcommittee / Discussion)
8. Other Business...........................................................................................................................8:10 — 8:15
9. Adjourn ......................................................................................................................................8:15 p.m.
CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA— December 10, 2008
City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 oft
r
City Center Advisory Commission
Meeting Minutes
Date of Meeting: December 10, 2008
Location: Red Rock Creek Conference Room, City Hall
Called to order by: Chair Alice Ellis Gaut
Time Started: 6:30 p.m.
Time Ended: 10:08 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barkley; Chair Alice Ellis Gaut; Ralph Hughes;
Kevin Kutcher; Vice Chair Lily Lilly; Peter Louw; Thomas Murphy; Elise Shearer;
Martha Wong; Alexander Craghead (alternate); Linli Pao (alternate)
Commissioners Absent:
Others Present: Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, Brian Carleton, Mike Marr
Staff Present: Phil Nachbar, Downtown Redevelopment Manager;Jerree Lewis, Executive
Assistant
AGENDA ITEM #1: Welcome and Introductions
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Introductions were made
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #2: Review/Approve Minutes
Important Discussion and/or Comments: The Commissioners reviewed the November
12, 2008 minutes.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by
Commissioner Shearer, that the minutes of the CCAC meeting of November 12, 2008 be
accepted as written. Chair Ellis Gaut asked that the words, "At the request of
Commissioner Hughes," be added at the beginning of the last paragraph on page 9 (under
Agenda Item #8). The motion was changed that the minutes be accepted as amended. The
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10, 2008 Page 1 of 7
vote passed unanimously. The secretary will make the change and bring the minutes back
for the Chair's signature.
AGENDA ITEM #3: CPAH Project Update / Affordable Housing
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Brian Carleton, Carleton Hart Architecture,
and Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, Community Partners for Affordable Housing (CPAH), briefed
the Commission on the new 50-unit affordable senior housing project which will be built in
the urban renewal area (Exhibit A). CPAH is currently going through a zone change for the
property.
In order to build a sustainable, environmentally friendly, energy efficient project, CPAH will
hold an eco-charrette and bring everybody to the table early to provide feedback. They will
spend the day brainstorming about the nature of the project, nature of the site, and nature of
the environment. Commissioner Lilly was asked to participate in the eco-charrette. She
agreed to do so.
Commissioner Murphy noted that City Council approved $10,000 in fee waivers for this
project, which is the maximum the City can allow in this calendar year.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Sheila Greenlaw-Fink advised that CPAH will need
letters of support when they go to the state with their application and asked that the CCAC
consider writing support letters for the project. She will email staff on the particulars for
community support letters; staff will forward the information to the Commissioners.
AGENDA ITEM #4: CCAC Annual Report - Draft
Important Discussion and/or Comment: The Commissioners added the following items
to the draft annual report:
• Community Partners for Affordable Housing met several times with the CCAC and is
now planning a 50-unit project within the urban renewal district, which was presented
to the CCAC at the December 10`h meeting.
• Commissioner Lilly will attend the CPAH eco-charrette.
• The CCAC has been aware of the CPAH properties since the previous owner had
asked to be included in the urban renewal district. She came to the CCAC in 2005;
the CCAC was encouraging and enthusiastic by including that property in the urban
renewal area. This piece of land is being used for one of the visions and goals of
urban renewal, which is affordable housing.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10,2008 Page 2 of 7
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Staff will re-write the draft and will email it to the
Commissioners for their final review. The annual report will be submitted to Council before
January 1"` and the CCAC will present it to Council at the February Council meeting.
AGENDA ITEM #5: Council Goal Setting—CCAC Input
Important Discussion and/or Comments: The Commissioners discussed suggestions for
Council goals for 2009. Following are their suggestions:
• Continue implementation of urban renewal plan projects with specific emphasis on
completion of Burnham Street and Main Street/green street improvements.
• Ensure that the Hall Blvd. and 99W gateway improvements are incorporated into the
final design for the intersection.
• Develop and promote a parks and greenspaces bond measure for the 2010 ballot
which would include acquisition and construction of the Fanno Creek Park and Plaza.
• Finalize and implement the new downtown design guidelines and ensure compatibility
with existing code.
• Finalize an option agreement for acquisition of the Stevenson property.
• Complete a circulation plan for downtown.
• Ensure that public comments are addressed in the design process of all downtown
urban renewal projects.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Staff was asked to bring plans of the Hall/99W
intersection to a future meeting so Commissioners could see the planned right-of-way
improvements.
Staff will provide a timeline for the Transportation System Plan Update, to include
downtown streets and a circulation plan for downtown.
Staff will draft the Council goal suggestions and email them to the Commissioners. The
Commissioners will review the goals and send their responses to staff.
AGENDA ITEM #6: Main Street—Temporary Improvements / Facade Improvement
Program
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Staff advised that the City is considering a
fagade improvement program for this year. The Mayor is supportive of the idea. Basically,
the City would provide a matching grant program for store front improvements in
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10,2008 Page 3 of 7
downtown, focusing on Main Street. Staff will try to have a draft of the program details for
the next CCAC meeting. Staff would also like to talk to downtown businesses to see if they
are interested in participating in the program. Staff will research the average amount for
grants of this nature.
Phil Nachbar provided an update of the pots for downtown. He advised that there was an
opportunity to buy some 4' pots from the City of Portland. It was determined that the pots
are too wide for Main Street sidewalks. Other options might be considered.
There was discussion about removing the existing concrete canisters with signage in the
downtown. The Commissioners would like to see the canisters removed. It was decided to
give businesses the option of having the canisters removed or not. Possible options for
reusing the canisters will be explored.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): As noted in discussion.
AGENDA ITEM #7: Organizational Leadership — Downtown
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Alternate Commissioner Craghead led the
discussion on where to go from here with regard to the 5 options for organizational
leadership in the downtown. He provided a timeline of the process (Exhibit B), including
public comment periods and outreach work. He reviewed the timeline with the
Commission. He advised that in January, the Commission will nail down a preliminary
recommendation to take to Council. For public outreach, Chair Ellis Gaut noted the
importance of going downtown to talk with property owners personally rather than just
sending out a letter or survey.
On the timeline, "implementation phase" was changed to "refinement phase."
The Commissioners decided to eliminate Option #1 (absolute yes — the City will provide
seed money and support to help form an association now) and Option #5 (don't make a
recommendation). Commissioner Craghead clarified that the subcommittee will analyze the
remaining 3 options and the CCAC will pick one as the final recommendation to present to
Council.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The subcommittee will analyze the 3 options and
come back on January 14'' with 3 separate draft recommendations for Council. They will
also give their individual opinions about the options. The CCAC will review the
recommendations and choose which one to take to Council on February 10'h
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10,2008 Page 4 of 7
AGENDA ITEM #8: Other Business
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Visitor Mike Marr expressed his concern that
there is no public involvement in the designing process of the gateway at 99W and Hall
Blvd. and the designing of Main Street. It's all being left to staff and all too often at open
houses where there's supposedly input, they are nothing more than staff announcing what
they're going to do. He has not heard any mention of the CCAC or anyone else being
involved in the processes and he has not heard of anyone involved in the Downtown Plan
being involved in the Transportation System Plan. He believes if too many people without a
connection or a vested interested in the Improvement Plan are doing things, we'll end up
with something we don't like.
Mr. Marr also noted that the commuter rail station on Scholls Ferry looks like what our Task
Force designed (black fencing, street lights, more of a traditional rail station look), but it's
not what was built in downtown Tigard. Commissioner Barkley said there was public input
during the process, but the citizens were ignored.
Mr. Marr commented that staff is working on the gateway on 99W and Hall Blvd. He asked
who the citizens are, connected with the Downtown Improvement Task Force or any
subsequent process, that are watching to see what the design is going to be. Commissioner
Louw asked why staff started working on this project without a request. Phil Nachbar
advised that it originates with the work plan that the CCAC adopts each year.
Commissioner Murphy asked what the opportunities are for public input regarding the
gateway. He asked staff to advise as to when in the process public input is taken, and what
the approximate dates are. This question also applies to the Main Street improvements. Phil
Nachbar said it was his intent to bring the Hall/99W gateway project to the CCAC when we
get to the stage of actual design. We're not there yet.
Nachbar advised that the CCAC will see the final plans for Main Street and will be able to
provide input. Chair Ellis Gaut believes vocabulary is an issue here. When the word "final"
is mentioned, people may think it's a done deal and there's no point for them to show up
and comment. Commissioner Wong provided information on how plans are developed.
There's a concept design where you say, "This is what we think we'd like to do" and you get
input on that. Then there's a stage where you go through schematics, where you make more
details of the concept; you get more comments and approval for that phase. Then you go to
design development which is again more details —determining all the important things that
go into the plan. She suggested this might be a better way to describe the phases.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10,2008 Page 5 of 7
It was suggested recommending a Council goal to have City staff respond better to public
input. Discussion was held on the possible wording for the goal. Staff summarized the goal
to read, "Ensure that public comments are addressed in the design process of all downtown
urban renewal projects."
Commissioner Craghead proposed that the CCAC develop a policy for public input about
downtown projects. Chair Ellis Gaut agreed. She would like to put this on a future agenda
(probably February) for further discussion. Mike Marr asked if the group, in the meantime,
would request that there be more citizen involvement on currently ongoing projects.
Commissioner Murphy said he first wants to know what is already built into the process and
scheduled for public input and comment.
Mr. Marr remarked that the University of Oregon visioning design study was done with very
little opportunity for comment. He feels there are many things that are their opinion; their
design isn't in sync with the task force people who created the Improvement Plan. He
would not want people to over-rely on that document as being what downtown Tigard
should look like. It was shocking to him that it was on the City's website before any of us
knew it was finished.
Commissioner Barkley thinks the same thing could be said about the Leland Report. It was
their opinion — Council read it, but they didn't adopt it. Staff advised that we had asked for
an independent opinion and Leland provided it. We then looked at it and decided what to
incorporate into our downtown strategy and what to leave out. Staff noted that the process
for the visioning is similar and recognizes the concern that it could be taken too literally.
There are things that are not in sync with the Downtown Plan and the land use design
guidelines. Chair Ellis Gaut suggested the City make it very clear on the website that this is a
concept; it is not a rendering of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan.
At the last CCAC meeting, Commissioner Hughes had asked for updates on the Burnham
Street property owners. He specifically asked what information was taken at the meetings
with the property owners and where that information was given. Chair Ellis Gaut took
notes during the meetings she had with the Mayor and the property owners. She will give a
copy of her notes to Commissioner Hughes and offered them to any other Commissioner
who would like them. It was decided that she would email them to all of the
Commissioners.
Chair Ellis Gaut advised that it is her intention to stay on the Commission; however, her
future availability for extra time on the Commission is uncertain at this point. There is a lot
of extra work involved in being the Chair. Vice Chair Lilly advised that her future is also
uncertain. She will not accept the Vice Chair position again for next year. The CCAC will
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10,2008 Page 6 of 7
elect new officers in January, so they have some time to think about what they want to do
next year.
It was noted that the by-laws are unclear about existing Commissioners who move out of
the district. The by-laws require Commissioners to live in Tigard, but do not clarify if that
means they must resign from the CCAC immediately or if they can finish their term before
resigning. It was suggested revisiting the by-laws on this issue.
Commissioner Shearer noted that the Commission should review the 2008 work plan in
January and see what items have been accomplished. It was suggested scheduling a separate
meeting for the elections and goal setting/work plan. If any Commissioners are interested in
one of the officer positions, they will email Alice or Lily and let them know. If the goal
session can't be done in January, it was suggested moving it to February.
Commissioner Murphy expressed his appreciation to the Commissioners for being so
hospitable and receptive to Community Partners for Affordable Housing.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Staff will come back with a matrix of projects and
when the concept designs are coming due for them. Staff will also put together a list of
current projects and where they are in the process.
Staff will keep the Commissioners updated on Burnham Street property acquisitions.
AGENDA ITEM #9: Adjournment
Important Discussion and/or Comments: The meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
le-
Jerree Lewis, CCAC Secretary
ATTEST:
Ch Alice Ellis Gaut
CCAC Meeting Minutes for December 10,2008 Page 7 of 7
Lm
as
In Cm m m mi -
4
Hall Street-Elevation
11.11.2008
COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR THE KNOLL AT TIGARD
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
TIGARD,OREGON CARLETON HART ARCHITECTURE
/ PRELIMINARY
� NOT FOR
/ CONSTRUCTION
_.-. _. ...._._�
k0c
5 105. °A T C M A T L M A T
VAN C ,,^.c �,C,y. �♦
F
CD
W
3 TURN
J I OUT 't .`• / I <
I i i 4' w r
W
' 3 - J'a a ♦,ti 1, '`� j � N
i/i• Z w z
Y Z N c
S
1 -
Co
SW HALL BLVD.
(70'R.O.W.)
Ploi NO.
20!25
11.2,2008
�y
Y
Sy@
3
__-______ __ __ __ __-____--
SITE
_SITE PLAN N
SCALE r.30'-W
PRELIMINARY
NOTFOR
CONSTRUCTION
msE
ML I
F w
u�
=o
ua—
<�a
meati
O ❑ O =�
5''ll"GE "01AGE
KRCHEN r
O O
REA
OzmBEDROOM 2❑ KAlli ® �❑ ol OL
LIVING Lu
❑ aa o
01
LNING H
NEI BEDROOM❑ - EI BEDROOM t ❑ b H LL D-' I
11 < W
1
n1 11 j K N
E ii i X _
Y Lu i
� � J
a
z y
n PLAN - UNIT TYPE IAI (668 SFS �1 PLAN-UNIT TYPE IBI (882 SF)
SCALE:1/9"=I'-0' 5,—L I/B"=t'-0' O
U
PRO I NO.
20825
6g 12,05.2008
yr)
gtlF
F P
v
s
4
f
P
t
PRELIMINARY
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
r.E
F.
u�
x"
u;—
I O1�-
<•
v 1
y
0
slN TTFL ( STAIR 3 O
EG ELE W
ir
Jm
_ LOBBY Q0 d
O F
— w
LAUND. STOR Y
Z
0 f y =
Y W Z
Z N
_ � x
Z N
0
O
U
1801 NO.
]Oe33
{p
11.24.2006
i
X33
8
y8
E
3
d
FLOOR PLAN- LEVEL 3
saab r.:o�• "
e
- CLERESTORY PITCHED METAL ROOF FOR
WINDOWS_� RAINWATER COLLECTION
I
RESIDENCE RESIDENCE
RETAINING WALLAS
LANDSCAPED BUFFER
PRIVATE RESIDE46E RESIDENCE \
PORCH
RESIDENCE RESIDENCE r
GREEN ROOF
RESIDENCE RESIDENCE
PRIVATE
BALCONY I
RESIDENCE RESIDENCE
COMMUNITY MANAGER'S
ENTRANCE RESIDENCE CARPORT WITH
RESIDENCEf TRELLIS
r
' 1 COMMUNITY - t
I ROOM
RESIDENCE t
Schematic Site Sections
III 1.2Tbe
COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR THE KNOLL AT TIGARD
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
TIGARD,OREGON CARLETON HART ARCHITECTURE
Draft Timeline OLCD Process
Concept Phase Implementation Phase
Dec 10 Jan 14 April/ June/
CCAC Mid-Dec Early Jan CCAC Early Feb 11-Mar May August Sept Oct
Concept narrowing
Approve timeline
City Council mini-update
Subcommittee crafts potential
preliminary recommendations to council,
recommends one of them.
Subcomittee delivers options, makes
recommendation to CCAC
CCAC votes on preliminary
recommendation
Preliminary recommendation and
timeline officially presented to council
for comment.
Refine timeline and approve a more
detailed work plan., including proposed
meeting dates and locations.
Open House for public input
One-on-one meetings with key
stakeholders
CCAC crafts implementation actions
based upon combination of previous
research and input from public and
stakeholders
Implementation plan open house for
refinement and comment.
Adoption of plan by CCAC
Presentation to Council for adoption.
Draft
2008 Annual Report of the City Center Advisory Commission
The CCAC addressed a range of issues and concerns throughout the year. These included review
and recommendation for adoption of the Master Plan for Fanno Creek Park&Plaza, review of the
Leland Development Strategy (Oct 07), review and recommendations for the annual work program
and urban renewal budget, study and review of the new Downtown Design Guidelines and the
Tigard Downtown Future Vision:a visual refinement of the TDIP, attendance at a joint meeting with
Council regarding the Burnham Street project, tours of two senior housing developments, and on-
going study of the downtown organization leadership issue as defined in the Leland Report.
The Fanno Creek Park&Plaza master plan was adopted by Council in February 2008. Although
there was a separate steering committee for the project, the Chair of the CCAC played a key role in
conveying important issues to both committees. The Commission recommended adoption of the
Master Plan by Council.
As part of the Commission's input in developing the annual work program for the Downtown, the
Commission reviewed the recommendations of the earlier Leland Report (September 07) and
provided oversight for inclusion of the recommendations into the annual work program. In support
of the Leland recommendations, the Commission recommended to Council that an additional
$100,000 for consulting services be approved for the Division's budget. The Council approved that
allocation in the final budget.
The Commission had formed a subcommittee to participate with the Planning Commission in the
review of new Downtown Design Guidelines. The CCAC has been closely involved in the
development of the new regulations, and initially had recommended the use of a "form-based" code.
As a result, City staff has pursued the idea,and is developing a "hybrid" code with form-based
aspects. Members of the Commission have participated in two separate seminars on form-based
codes.
The Commission also saw the results of a partnership between the City and the University of
Oregon's Portland Architecture Program to further develop the vision for Downtown. The final
Tigard Downtown Future Vision, a visual refinement of the TDIP was presented to the
Commission at their November meeting with good response. The document is intended to provide
visual suggestions of what the Downtown could look like in 5, 10 and 20 years including a grid-
based circulation system. The vision incorporates the basic design ideas of the Tigard Downtown
Improvement Plan, and a high density core intended to create a resident population. The vision
plan comes a year after the City Council along with former members of the downtown taskforce,
and staff took a trip to Port Moody, B.C. to see how that City had created a high density residential
community but was able to keep a small-town feel.
On a more specific note, the CCAC was invited to a joint meeting with Council in June to discuss
the challenges faced in acquiring right-of-way for Burnham Street,a key street in Downtown. The
meeting was attended by key downtown property owners, and was productive in providing a forum
for voicing concerns, and developing a game plan for how to address them. Top on the list were
improving communications with property owners as part of the acquisition process. As a direct
result of the CCAC's efforts, there was consensus to form a special committee to include the Mayor
and perhaps a member of the CCAC to work directly with property owners to address their
concerns. The committee was formed,and meetings were held with property owners. The result is
a better relationship with property owners and significant progress towards acquiring needed right-
of-way.
The Commission has maintained an interest in affordable and senior housing for Downtown. The
CCAC toured two facilities, Elite Care in Tigard, and The Watershed in Hillsdale. Both projects
were deemed unique and valuable models for Tigard. Community Partners for Affordable Housing
(CPAH) has met several times with the CCAC, and is now planning a 50-unit project within the
Urban Renewal District. The Commission is interested in developing policies and goals for
downtown housing,and will continue this mission into the upcoming year.
What has turned out to be one of the most challenging issues for the CCAC is the Leland
Development Strategy recommendation that the City should strengthen the organizational and
leadership capacity in Downtown Tigard. The CCAC has been tasked to evaluate this
recommendation,and makes its own follow-up recommendations to Council. The Commission has
been studying and discussing this issue since May and has produced several well-researched
documents comparing how organizations operate,their missions and effectiveness in conjunction
with the urban renewal process. While no final conclusions or recommendations have been made,
the Commission will finalize its recommendations and provide for the public's involvement in the
early part of 2009.
2008 Tigard City Council Goals
January 4th the City Council met to set its goals for the coming year. These goals represent
those items that the Council feels deserve special attention in the months ahead. The City
will accomplish much more than what is listed here, but we identify these to be of particular
importance to our residents.
1. Pursue opportunities to reduce traffic congestion in Tigard.
• Pursue immediate low-cost projects to improve traffic flow.
• Explore light rail on 99W.
• Promote an access control study of 99W.
• Support the I-5/99W connector project.
• Continue state and regional advocacy for transportation improvements in Tigard.
2. Complete the update and begin the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Implement the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan.
• Prioritize and begin implementing tasks identified in the development strategy for
downtown.
4. Promote and honor good citizenship in Tigard.
• Recognize good citizenship by individuals and groups.
• Build youth involvement programs.
• Support the neighborhood program.
5. Explore the possibility of placing a parks and greenspaces bond on the ballot in
2010.
6. Make a decision on Tigard's long-range water source(s).
Mir
The City of Portland is known notionally for its many attractive neighbor- The following are not eligible for the
hoods, anchored by vital business hubs. As part of its continuing commit Storefront Improvement Program:
ment to community vitality,Portland has developed strategies to rebuild lackluster
National franchises/for-profit
business districts and enhance surrounding neighborhoods. One of several
•�°
corporations with multiple Iota-
incentive programs to help smooth the way for new and growing business is the - ■���
Storefront Improvement Program, administered by the Portland Development tions outside of Portland, unless :o::,,
Commission (PDC). the corporation is headquar-
IV
The Storefront Improvement Program is a major component of the city's revitaliza- tered in Portland;
tion efforts, providing cash grants and technical assistance to business and Buildings in excess of 80,000 square feet,
property owners in eligible neighborhoods. Recipients can use the support for a except those in the three downtown URAs;
variety of improvements, ranging from repainting to purchase of new windows
Government offices and agencies;
and awnings.
The Storefront Improvement Program has a notable track record. In neighbor- Businesses that exclude minors,except
hoods across the city,the program has: those in the three downtown URAs;
Helped new and established businesses attract customers; Properties primarily in residential use.
Leveraged private investment from current owners and inspired
improvements to neighboring buildings; WE WORK WITH YOU
TO SMOOTH THE WAY
Enhanced the appearance and charm of commercial areas while
building safer, more attractive, more stable neighborhoods; ' PDC staff work closely with prospective
-' t clients throughout the process,from applica-
Reestablished pride in some of Portland's oldest and r tion to design to commitment of funds and
best-loved neighborhoods.
final reimbursement.
HOW DOES THE STOREFRONT Please note that you must have a
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WORK?
formal Commitment oJFunds bejore
The Storefront Improvement Program is supported by a variety of public funding improvement work can proceed.
sources and,as a result,is focused in designated target areas throughout the city.
The program is a convenient, direct way for local businesses and commercial
property owners in these target areas to receive help with exterior renovations.
THE PROGRAM: — -
The grant recipient is required to provide 50 percent matching funds; )
6
Awards grants up to$20,000 to a property owner or business owner; To find out more,contact PDC at 503-823-3200, w.r
Provides,where available,free design assistance from an architect to help or visit www.pdc.us/storefront. _
with design work and regulatory compliance. We can tell you if your busi-
ness is eligible for the pro-
The program is easy to apply for,with a minimum of red tape.The availability of an gram, and how to apply for
architect to determine design concepts and suggest specifications for lighting and assistance under the Storefront
awnings is a tremendous benefit in selected areas. Participants find that the design
assistance helps move their projects along quickly and efficiently,and is particularly Improvement Program.
helpful with respect to the city's design review process.
/Worsting ni Pon/iWd'r h'W�W�r
PDC -
-c
After-Oregon C(mvcnlion Center URA
n.
TY
VYVCAi
r
Inti 14AL f V VT
Ik
I �y
00,000
PORTLAND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Investing in Portland's Future
222 NW Fifth Avenue
Portland,OR 97209 PDC
tel 503.823.3200•fax:503.823.3368
www.pdc.us PORTLAND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
February 2007-2767