Loading...
03/11/2009 - Packet 1� ■ City of Tigard City Ccntcr Advisory Commission — Agenda MEETNG DATE: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 —6:30 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. Check-in......................................................................................................................................6:40— 6:55 3. Review / Approve Minutes .....................................................................................................6:55 — 7:00 4. Main St. Project Overview.......................................................................................................7:00—7:20 (Kim McMillan) 5. CCAC Goals / Agenda Setting ..............................................................................................7:20— 7:50 (Alice Ellis Gaut) 6. Update/discussion on Current Status of Plaza Project ......................................................7:50— 8:05 (Phil Nachbar) 7. Downtown Organization Leadership —Action Plan............................................................8:05— 8:35 (Alexander Craghead / Subcommittee) 8. CCAC By-Laws..........................................................................................................................8:35 — 8:45 (Alice Ellis Gaut) 9. Other Business...........................................................................................................................8:45— 9:00 (Call for Agenda items) 10. Adjourn ......................................................................................................................................9:00 P.M. CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA— March 11, 2009 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page I oft City Center Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes Date of Meeting: March 11, 2009 Location: Red Rock Creek Conference Room Called to order by: Chair Alice Ellis Gaut Time Started: 6:30 p.m. Time Ended: 9:00 p.m. Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barkley; Chair Alice Ellis Gaut; Ralph Hughes; Kevin Kutcher; Peter Louw; Thomas Murphy; Elise Shearer; Martha Wong; Vice Chair Alexander Craghead (alternate); Linli Pao (alternate) Commissioners Absent: Others Present: Mike Marr, Councilor Sydney Sherwood Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Community Development Director; Kim McMillan, Engineering Manager; Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner;Jerree Lewis, Executive Assistant AGENDA ITEM #1: Welcome and Introductions Important Discussion and/or Comments: Introductions were made. Chair Ellis Gaut announced that Phil Nachbar is no longer with the City. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #2: Check In Important Discussion and/or Comments: Commissioners Pao and Wong reported on an Urban Living Institute seminar that they recently attended (Exhibit A). Commissioner Murphy advised that the Community Partners for Affordable Housing application was submitted to the state on February 27`h. The state won't announce their decision on this funding round until May. Chair Ellis Gaut offered her gratitude to staff for producing a map of the urban renewal district. She also expressed her gratitude to Phil Nachbar for his service to the CCAC. CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11, 2009 Page 1 of 8 Commissioner Murphy noted that the City Council unanimously approved the zone change for the CPAH project on Hunziker. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #3: Review/Approve Minutes Important Discussion and/or Comments: Motion by Commissioner Murphy to adopt the minutes of February 11, 2009 as written. Commissioner Shearer pointed out 2 mistakes on page 4. The word `spurned' should be changed to `spur on'. Commissioner Murphy amended his motion to include the corrections. Commissioner Kutcher seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Kutcher, to approve the minutes from the CCAC February 16`" retreat. The motion passed by a vote of 7-0. Commissioner Shearer abstained. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #4: Main Street Project Overview Important Discussion and/or Comment: Engineering Manager Kim McMillan updated the Commissioners on the Main Street project. Currently,we're in the middle of the prospectus and the request for proposals (RFP). ODOT will be managing the money for the project. The prospectus outlines the project; the RFP is for soliciting proposals from consultants. Kim McMillan talked about public outreach for the project. We want to talk to property owners and business owners early. She advised that the City will mail out postcards, followed by phone calls to set up informational meetings. She would also like to pair up staff and CCAC Commissioners to talk to business and property owners on Main Street. There will be another public relations piece for the construction phase. It was advised that the fagade improvement program isn't tied to the Main Street project. We're working on design guidelines and standards for the Downtown that we would like to have in place before doing fagade grants. Ron Bunch reported that Council approved the store front improvement program based on developing a demonstration project, essentially getting designers to work with specific businesses. Now could be a good time to coordinate this with the streetscape improvement program. CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11,2009 Page 2 of 8 Kim McMillan advised that ODOT has a federal grant for the Main Street project. Their role will be to oversee those funds. With regard to the facade improvement program, Ron Bunch advised that Council discussed engaging an architect or designer to work with property owners to develop a demonstration program. They would work with a property owner to design a high quality design project in the Downtown. Chair Ellis Gaut reported that there had been a consensus for forming a committee to include Commissioners Shearer, Commissioner Wong, Councilor Henderson, and Councilor Wilson. She asked if there had been a decision to convene the committee. Ron Bunch answered no, but we need to first go through the budget process to see what we have to work with. Ron Bunch said there may be 2 separate projects involved — a larger project that the City would contribute a certain amount of money to, and a second, smaller project that the City would participate in total. We will need to review the Council minutes for specific details. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): It was noted that some Commissioners do not have copies of the Downtown Streetscape Plan. Staff will provide copies. Staff will also provide copies of the Council/CCAC joint meeting minutes. AGENDA ITEM #5: CCAC Goals/Agenda Setting Important Discussion and/or Comments: These items were discussed at the retreat. Chair Ellis Gaut advised that the CCAC will begin using a yearly agenda calendar that shows ongoing/recurring items and time specific items over the course of a calendar year, as well as current projects that the CCAC is involved with. This calendar will help the CCAC budget the time needed for meetings. We will call for agenda item suggestions at the end of the meeting. Commissioners can call the Chair or Vice Chair if they think of items later. It was recommended to go back 3-6 months and look for things that were tabled or there wasn't time to talk about. Chair Ellis Gaut noted that we could also consider having a consent-type agenda for items that require action but don't require a lot of discussion. Those things could be discussed in a package at the beginning of the meeting. Items could always be removed from the consent agenda and put on the regular agenda for further discussion if needed. For substantial updates that don't call for discussion in the room, we'll try to have them distributed in advance of the packets. If the items are large, complex, or will generate questions, there will be extra time to read the material and get back with questions. Commissioner Craghead envisions receiving this information half way between monthly CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11,2009 Page 3 of 8 meetings, so instead of having a meeting every 2 weeks, there will be a virtual paper update meeting in that mid-point. The Commissioners reviewed the draft goals that were discussed at the retreat (Exhibit B). Ron Bunch said there's an economic aspect that should be considered with this. We need tax increment funds to do projects and to leverage businesses in the Downtown. Enhancing the growth of tax increment revenues is important, and associated with that is doing redevelopment projects and working with business owners, property owners, and developers. These could be key goals for the CCAC. Commissioners had the following comments regarding the draft goals: • Organizational leadership is not mentioned —there will be some planning for that. • We might want to add another item under C to refine the organizational leadership recommendation and present to Council. • Should we add circulation, land use and design guidelines, and other things to the list of goals? • Do we want to have general, aspirational headings and then target specific projects? • Would it guide us better to look at a list of things that we feel are important to accomplish and choose the most pressing ones? • It would make me feel more comfortable to have a list of core things we need to be looking at. It gives a better measurement. • Part of the reason for the retreat was to look at how we work together. The draft goals break down a couple of ways: A & B are how we do it; C is what we do. The retreat emphasized more on how we do it. It might be useful to separate those two. • At the retreat, the process piece felt more like a mission statement rather than a goal; C feels like what we're going to do, more like goals. • It came out in the retreat that we want to improve our process, but we also have to deal with the reality that there are projects going on that we need to be involved with. We can conscientiously allocate our time for both. We need to pick our priorities and CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11,2009 Page 4 of 8 then chip away at them. • Maybe this year, we could focus on process goals. We would still have a work plan and a task list. Then next year, we could incorporate the work plan goals as well. • I see the top half of the list as being something that we can refer to. We could check at every meeting to see if we're using our process like we said we wanted to. If not, we can fix it. If yes, then we can go on to the work items. It's good to have something that shows what we want our process to look like. • Almost everything under B is currently being implemented. It's inevitable that we won't get to a certain percentage of the goals. • For items under D, we could add "Implement key urban renewal projects and processes," and add the main things we know will be on our calendar this year under that item (organizational issue, circulation, etc.). • When we get to the annual report,we will be able to go back and see what we have accomplished. There are certain things in A that are not goals because they'll be ongoing, but we can develop a method for each time we look at an issue to see if it relates back to the vision stated —in what way is it different, is it a good thing that changes occurred, were they necessary, etc. • It might work more fluidly if we had Streetscape under C and list increased transparency and making sure the vision matches as tactics under that project, as opposed to having a separate, all-encompassing goal. That could always be a tactical application under any project that we're working on. • Ron Bunch listed current projects in the Downtown. He noted that it would be helpful for staff to have them listed and then translate them into agenda topics. • I view A as a statement of values, B is process, C and beyond are goals (things that are tangible or an implementation). • If we had a mission statement, would that clear up a lot of the discussion on values, processes, and tangible goals on this document? • Since we're talking about measurements of what we've been able to fulfill throughout the year, during the last Council meeting, Mayor Dirksen pointed out things that CCAC Meeting Minutes for March ll,2009 Page 5 of 8 Council wanted us to be involved with, to be actively engaged in tasking. That list could contribute to something that's tangibly measurable. • The charge from Council is, in effect, an operating mission statement. This is at least a baseline for what we're here for. It's worth keeping it on the list of things that we check off when we're looking at projects —is this part of the charge? • The Mayor asked us to finish the code and the design standards, get the Main Street design rolling with business owner input, and make sure that the design standards and the code are coordinated with the zoning. These could go on the list under C. • Since a lot of the values will carry on for many years, maybe we shouldn't say they are 2009 goals. Specific goals could be more detailed and clarified. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Kutcher, seconded by Commissioner Wong, to accept this as a starting point of values, process, and goals. With all of the suggestions offered, Commissioner Craghead asked if there were any volunteers willing to draft these into something more amenable. Commissioner Kutcher noted that the only missing piece is a list of specific projects. Commissioner Murphy said to keep in mind that the language of the motion was as a starting place. Commissioner Kutcher volunteered to draft the goals if someone gives him the specific, big projects. It was suggested that the follow up for this be what the Commissioners view as the big projects; what do we want to tackle as far as tangible goals for 2009. The goals can be re-drafted very simply to say these are our values, this is our internal process, etc. Staff will work with Commissioner Kutcher to help with the wording and the project list. Mike Marr said the Commissioners might want to include a review of previously accepted timelines that the Commission has already looked at and then decide whether to continue with them, change them, delete them, adjust them, etc. The Commission might want to review some of the 1 year and 3 year plan items. The motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM #6: Update/Discussion on Current Status of Plaza Project Important Discussion and/or Comments: Ron Bunch brought the Commission up to date on the budget process. He advised that the City could not balance their revenues with what was proposed in the Urban Renewal operating budget, and Oregon budget law requires balanced budgets. The budget that was previously presented to the CCAC is affected by CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11,2009 Page 6 of 8 what's happening in the economy, and unless the City begins to do some serious things, general fund revenues are at risk. As a result, we cannot use the general fund for things associated with property acquisition, option agreements, and real estate services. Council will decide whether and when to go out for a parks bond. If successful, there may be future funding available for purchase of the property and all of the other associated costs. The plaza is an important project, but it is now on hold pending acquisition of a funding source. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #7: Downtown Organization Leadership —Action Plan Important Discussion and/or Comments: It was suggested discussing agenda items 7 and 8 together. The Commissioners reviewed Exhibits C and D. It was noted that a committee would be able to work more efficiently than all of the Commissioners together trying to wordsmith a document. The bylaws committee will look over the current bylaws and make recommendations. It may not be a long term commitment for the committee members. The Commissioners will then look at the committee's recommendations, make changes if needed, and then forward the recommendations to the CCDA for approval. The stakeholder outreach committee will be developing the preliminary recommendation that was made to Council for organizational leadership into a final recommendation, which will be part of a public process. As a component of that, committee members will also be available to staff as a resource for outreach. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by Commissioner Shearer, to form the stakeholder outreach committee and the bylaws review and revision committee. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioners Craghead, Wong, Louw, and Barkley volunteered to serve on the stakeholder outreach committee. Commissioners Murphy and Shearer and Chair Ellis Gaut volunteered to serve on the bylaws review and revision committee. AGENDA ITEM #8: CCAC Bylaws Important Discussion and/or Comments: Included in Agenda Item #7. CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11,2009 Page 7 of 8 Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #9: Other Business (Call for Agenda Items) Important Discussion and/or Comments: The following items were suggested as future agenda topics: • Downtown circulation plan, including timelines and when and how the CCAC would be involved. • Update on Downtown guidelines (for May's agenda). There should be a finalized draft by then. After CCAC endorsement, the public hearing process will begin. • Revisit the goals. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): If the finalized Downtown guidelines draft is available before the May meeting, staff will send it out in advance to the Commissioners for their review. AGENDA ITEM #10: Adjournment Important Discussion and/or Comments: The next meeting will be held April 8t' at the Library Community Room. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Commissioner Murphy proposed that the Commission communicate to Phil Nachbar their thanks for all his work and extend best wishes for his future endeavors. The Commissioners will send a card to him. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. r wis, CC C S cretary ATTEST: hair Alice Ellis Gaut CCAC Meeting Minutes for March 11, 2009 Page 8 of 8 'e�) 14 URBAN LIVING INSTITUTE Follow the Money: Stimulating Better Communities 2 Mar 09 Speakers: Maureen McAvey, ULI Senior Resident Fellow for Urban Development Rex Burkholder, Metro District 5 Councilor CCAC Attendees: Linli Pao & Martha Wong FRAMEWORK • Land use as a connector of infrastructure, housing and sustainability. • Urban Land Institute (ULI) has worked on infrastructure for the past three years and is calling it an emergingcrisis in the U.S. o Not funded at the level we need it to be funded(Globally) o Big Issue: Who should pay? INFRASTRUCTURE • Tied to global economic competitiveness • We need to "Ante Up or Fall Behind" • Cost of Living o Housing+Transportation (married issues) ■ New emerging models ■ Running at around 50% of a household budget • Guiding Principles o Build a vision for the community o Invest strategically o Fix and maintain what we have first o Reduce Driving(ties into Climate Change) o Couple land use with water availability. o Break down government "silos" o Pay up (e.g. pension funds are not fully funded) o Keep Score (set up a system of benchmarks and guidelines to be able to see how well we're achieving what we set out to achieve.) • Obama's Stimulus Package o $92 billion for infrastructure total o Oregon's share is expected to be $409.6 million o $8 billion for regional high-speed rail. Oregon/Washington could get a share for developing high-speed rail from Eugene through to Seattle. o Flexibility for multi-modal surface transportation o Economic impact: Use it or lose it o Maintain the local effort o Create jobs now o Administration has established that maintaining environmental criteria is equally important. o Bush administration says local governments should set the agenda. Obama may/may not set a national agenda for infrastructure. A ENERGY • $25 B for renewable energy development • $25 B for energy efficiency development o State level o Residential • $11 B to modernize electrical grid • $5B alternative vehicles FUNDING • Re-authorize the Highway Trust Fund—expected Fall `09 o Proposed funding for 5 years -total $545B • Major overhaul and consolidation of government programs • May be set by local agendas or new Administration will set the agenda • Fund gateway cities (ports, central transportation centers, etc.)to increase US global competitiveness • Funding options o More funding to Metro areas,not to States o Goal is to reduce carbon footprint o Changing the gas tax ■ $0.40/gallon on avg. in U.S. ■ $4.00-$5.00/gallon on avg. in Europe ■ Use European example of Euro Infrastructure Bank • Loans out $5013/year • Loans at 50% of at $50M or more project cost • Stringent underwriting and collects loan fees • Are professional bankers, so typically not politically motivated • 50 year loans for major projects o Smart charges o Change pricing mechanisms ■ Toll roads ■ Pay to use special lanes (CA HOV carpool permit, etc.) ■ Congestion pricing DENSITY • Changes driving infrastructure changes & real estate impacts o Compact and creative land use o 75% of households have no children ■ Could have urban living preferences o 251/0 of trips are commuter trips to work. o 75%of trips are other daily and social activities • Moving toward a more compact, mixed-use, closer-in communities. (Portland has the biggest share of housing market in the region: 33%of new permits are within City limits.) o As density doubles, daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) decreases 15-30% R o Compact land use decreases VMT by 10-20%relative to sprawl • Density should be an appropriate level o The U.S. is adding 3 million people/year o Future development trend—"Bull's eye Concept", clustering development along transit routes o Most residential areas want to be at least"transit ready" if not "transit now." • Local issues: mix use/transit ready/shared parking/flexible zoning/community education ODOT'S ROLE IN INFRASTRUCTURE • Measures success by how many cars are going through an intersection. • For people that make less than the median, transportation costs take up a larger% of the budget. • Breakdown of stimulus money o 10% goes to the state o 80% goes to ODOT (used for rural roads and areas outside of the metro) o 10% smaller cities in the state. KEY GOALS & ISSUES FOR STIMULUS FUNDS • Metropolitan mobility o Top metropolitan areas generate 60% of the wealth in our country. o Federal money isn't going to the metros, it's going to ODOT. • Some projects are beyond local and state scale. They will need Fed help. o E.g. Columbia River Crossing • Interstate Commerce • Rail Project Strategies • Maintain Existing Equipment • Climate Change • Funding o If we reauthorize the transportation bill, we'd have less. The federal gas tax hasn't increased since 1993 and also went to the deficit. • Federal Guidance is needed on long-term goals on how to make it all work together. • Have a way to measure the success of outcomes to be achieved. • 2040 Plan: update plan and infrastructure cost; identify financing availability and goals • Density: identify data for policies; community involvement QUESTIONS/COMMENTS • High speed train: Washington State has invested in rail, OR has not. OR needs to develop plan to take advantage of stimulus funding, instead of just relying on WDOT's plans. • A comprehensive list of transportation projects that will be submitted for stimulus funding. The majority are road maintenance projects throughout the State, with a smaller amount for the Portland metropolitan area. w • The trend is toward transit-oriented developments and may increase housing costs in the development area. Solutions are: keep a percentage for affordable housing through government intervention. • Current trend of increasing housing in the City contrasts with trend to move offices and jobs out to more affordable suburban areas. Ms. McAvey responded that some types of business, such as software development, are moving back to the city for amenities and available social activities. By moving to cities, employers can pay employees less because they don't have to drive and can use existing publication transportation for their commute. • The City of Gresham was cited as an example where transit oriented development helped to revitalize the downtown area. Years ago, 70%of residents shopped outside of Gresham. Residents are now staying within the city for their shopping and social needs. • Industrial sites usually need 25-30 acres for efficient development and may not fit into dense metropolitan areas. To keep job opportunities within the metropolitan area, it will be good to look at creative ways to fit industries that don't require large areas in or adjacent to metropolitan areas. • There is nothing for multi-use paths or trail corridors in the authorization of the HTF. • ODOT will spend all of the stimulus money in 2009, even thought they had the option to defer the use of 50%of it from 2010. The money is focused on speed and deferred maintenance will likely be at the top of what gets funded first. City Center Advisory Commission Draft 2009 Goals A.) Better connect actions to original citizen visions. • Increase transparency • Address original visions in oncoming and ongoing project processes (e.g. Main Street, Burnham, Circulation Plan, Park plans) B.) Improve CCAC processes. • Develop new member orientation aids • More efficiently use meeting time • Improve agenda setting procedures • Consider the use of more purpose-centered committees • Develop an annual calendar C.) Have a greater awareness of livability, quality-of-life, and business impacts resulting from CCAC work. • Address business retention and support • Explore urban renewal end points • Conduct stakeholder outreach D.) Additional goals...? CCAC Retreat Minutes for February 16, 2009 1 City of Tigard City Center Advisory Commission Charge Statement: Stakeholder Outreach Committee Need. The City recognizes the need for a greater level of outreach to the businesses,property owners, and residents of the urban renewal district ("downtown stakeholders").This need was recognized and captured by the City Center Advisory Commission's (CCAC's)Preliminary Recommendation to the City of Tigard on Organizational Leadership and Capacity in Downtown Tigard,dated January 14,2009. The Preliminary Recommendation outlined specific actions that the City should undertake in the future to achieve better outreach to downtown stakeholders.It also contained an action plan outlining how those recommended specific actions would be refined into a Final Recommendation to the City of Tigard on Organizational Leadership and Capacity in Downtown Tigard,to be presented to the City Center Development Agency(CCDA) through a public process. In addition,the City is about to embark on a number of construction projects in the urban renewal district, including the reconstruction of S.W.Burnham Street (construction scheduled to begin in 2009) and the reconstruction of the southern portion of S.W.Main Street into a green street design (design phase begins 2009, construction 2010).To successfully implement these projects,it will be necessary to reach out to directly affected stakeholders. Purpose.The purpose of the Stakeholder Outreach Committee of the CCAC will be to refine the Preliminary Recommendation into a final recommendation, and to act as an outreach committee to assist the in the successful implementation of various urban renewal projects in the downtown Tigard area. Specific Charge.The committee will be charges with the following specific goals: • Develop and implement a public process method to present the Preliminary Recommendation to downtown stakeholders with the intention of capturing their input and ideas. • Use input captured by the previous public process,along with other research that the committee deems pertinent,to refine the Preliminary Recommendation into a Draft Final Recommendation. • Present the Draft Final Recommendation to the downtown stakeholders for review before submitting it to the CCAC for modification,approval,or denial. • Work with staff as a resource for designing and implementing outreach to downtown stakeholders in support of the Burnham Street and Main Street projects,as well as other projects as deemed necessary by the CCAC. Composition.Three to four commissioners. Meeting Location & Frequency.TDB by committee;at least monthly. Duration. Until dismissed. Staff Contact/Support.Sean Farrelly ■ City of Tigard City Center Advisory Commission Charge Statement: Bylaws Committee Need. The City Center Advisory Commission's(CCAC's) bylaws have been in place for approximately two years, and during that time they have been tested against experience. A number of minor oversights have been identified during that time, including issues of qualifications,composition,and the like. Purpose.The purpose of the Bylaws Committee of the CCAC will be to examine the existing CCAC Bylaws and draft recommended changes that improve their clarity and utility. Specific Charge.The committee will be charged with examining the CCAC Bylaws as they relate to the following: • The consequences of a commissioner ceasing to qualify for their compositional requirements during their term. • The raising of alternates to full status when a vacancy occurs on the CCAC. • The Charge and Duties section of the bylaws for accuracy and clarity. • Any other errors,omissions, or oversights throughout the bylaws. • The committee will make recommendations for changes in any of these areas if deemed necessary. These recommended changes will then be presented to the entire CCAC,which will in turn modify, approve,or deny them for further recommendation to the City Center Development Agency (CCDA). The CCDA will have the authority to modify,approve,or deny the recommended bylaw changes for adoption. Composition.Three commissioners. Meeting Location& Frequency.TDB by committee. Duration. Until charge is filled. Staff Contact/Support.The committee will work independently of staff, but will be free to consult with them if deemed necessary. City Center Advisory Commission Draft 2009 Goals A.) Better connect actions to original citizen visions. • Increase transparency • Address original visions in oncoming and ongoing project processes (e.g. Main Street, Burnham, Circulation Plan, Park plans) B.) Improve CCAC processes. • Develop new member orientation aids • More efficiently use meeting time • Improve agenda setting procedures • Consider the use of more purpose-centered committees • Develop an annual calendar C.) Have a greater awareness of livability, quality-of-life, and business impacts resulting from CCAC work. • Address business retention and support • Explore urban renewal end points • Conduct stakeholder outreach D.) Additional goals. . .? `NJ Y✓ Aly- yy it c� CCAC Retreat Minutes for February 16, 2009 1 �t �'�D a n y7■� _ ► f�- 1__� i � ��{ �,„ - h'�, _ T.. LE is Urban Renewal District ' �o kTa;.>.��► Tigard Area Tax Lots -IMF f 4LST 1'-r°^�� 111WAA- i z s; , ♦ r l� ,7 diu S� ...� 10 VNI tom, - 01 .. 140 , �► ' ` ' 1 _—Amt 40 •s , All Sli *J �' -*zt QQG `• �' ��' - � ,f a t�'t � a-� '�' �•/ �% �� r�• `''���' �`�!'cJr"�'�pJ :� � "�_ �aY, ��� ��� �,1,""'� *191 40 p 't+ � .'���•y^y�'n+�`LnC'P"� �� C a ?��\ �_, '9�j ' So ` ilk �11*4 JT 49 r , � NL 'eL All ISO Air, 9 vi OR VO p m k 1 III �l , +" -10ffSk — t # •"x �'' . &PLU SO_ 71 � .