The URL can be used to link to this page

11/10/2010 - Packet q = City of Tigard City Center Advisory Commission — Agenda MEETING DATE: Wednesday, November 10, 2010— 6:30-8:40 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 1. Welcome and Introductions ....................................................................................................6:30— 6:35 2. Review / Approve October Minutes.....................................................................................6:35 — 6:40 3. Main Street Green Street Project ..........................................................................................6:40— 7:40 Review Green Street requirements and concept design plans to present at Open House #2 (Kim McMillan and consultant team) 4. Review Draft 2010 CCAC Annual Report............................................................................7:40 — 8:05 Review, comment and finalise draft report to be submitted to the CCDA by December 1 (Chair Craghead and Vice Chair Murphy) 5. Redevelopment and Incentives Matrix..................................................................................8:05 — 8:15 Review and comment on draft matrix (Sean Farrelly) 6. Albany and Milwaukie Field Trip Report..............................................................................8:15 — 8:25 Report back from field trip to Albany Ironworks development(Brownfield) and North Main Village in Milwaukie. (Elise Shearer, Tom Murphy, Ralph Hughes and Sean Farrelly) 7. CCAC Executive Session*.......................................................................................................8:25 — 8:30 (Sean Farrelly) Information on potential property purchase 8. Election Debrief........................................................................................................................8:30— 8:35 9. Other Business...........................................................................................................................8:35-8:40 10. Adjourn.......................................................................................................................................8:40 p.m. *EXECUTIVE SESSION:The Tigard City Center Advisory Commission will go into Executive Session to discuss real property transaction negotiations under ORS 192.660(2) (e).All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session.Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed.No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision.Executive Sessions are closed to the public. CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA— November 10, 2010 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 oft Upcoming meetings of note: 11/18, 6:00-7:00 PM,Main St. Green Street Parking Discussion- Tigard Chamber (12345 SW Main Street) 11/18, 7:00-8:30 PM, Main St. Green Street Open House #2-Tigard Chamber (12345 SW Main Street) 12/8: Regular CCAC Meeting, 6:30-8:30,Tigard Town Hall 12/9, 6:00-7:30,Main St. Green Street Parking Discussion- Red Rock Creek Conference Room CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA— November 10, 2010 City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 oft City Center Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes . . , Date of Meeting: November 10, 2010 Location: Tigard City Hall, Town Hall Called to order by: Chair Alexander Craghead Time Started: 6:30 p.m. Time Ended: 9:05 p.m. Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barkley; Chair Alexander Craghead; Alice Ellis Gaut; Ralph Hughes; Peter Louxv; Vice Chair Thomas \lurphv; Elise Shearer; Martha `Fong; Linli Pao (alternate) Commissioners Absent: Kevin Kutcher, Philip Thornburg (alternate) Others Present: Gary Alfson, project manager with Harper Houf Peterson Righellis Staff Present: Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager; Kim Nlcl\liUan, Engineering Nlanager;Jerree Lewis, Executive Assistant AGENDA ITEM #1: Welcome and Introductions Important Discussion and/or Comments: Introductions were not necessary. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): AGENDA ITEM #2: _approve Minutes Important Discussion and/or Comments: Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): NNiotion by Commissioner Barklev, seconded by Vice Chair Murphy, to approve the October 13, 2010 minutes. The motion passed by a 7-0 vote. Commissioner Wong abstained. AGENDA ITEM #3: \lain Street Green Street Project Important Discussion and/or Comments: Gary Alfson, project manager with Harper Houf Peterson Righellis, gave a PowerPoint presentation on the alternative design layout concept plans for the \Iain Street Green Street project (Exhibit A). He referred to the requirements on the green street funding application and what we will do to qualify for those funds (shown on pages 2 and 3 of Exhibit A). Green street elements will replace up to 10,000 square feet of impervious area. The CCAC Meeting Minutes for November 10,2010 Page 1 of 6 project is 1400' long from Hwy. 99W to the railroad tracks. If you subtract a couple of hundred feet at the railroad track end and 300-400' at the Hwy. 99W end, the impervious surface removal area would need to be 10'wide for the remaining 1000' of roadway. It was advised that staff came up with the 10,000 square foot number for the application. Kim McMillan said we could explore how they came up with that number. Chair Craghead pointed out that the 10,000 square feet could include both the natural landscaping areas and pervious pavement surfaces. Gary Alfson advised that another part of the application is to create a stormwater filter environment. Kim McMillan said the median by the railroad tracks might not be able to be used as a storm filter treatment area, but she is hoping to get some landscaping in those areas so there would be some pervious area there. Gary Alfson noted that to put in a treatment area where the medians are would require rebuilding the whole section of the street to put in drains. Kim and Gary will talk to Metro to see if our plan will meet their goals. The application is very subjective and we will do our best to try to meet the intent of the application. The consultants recently completed a design workshop to build an overall project. They also talked to the State and revised information for them on the roundabout at the south end of the project. The State couldn't come up with any reason why we can't build it. Their big concern is that we not impact traffic on Hwy. 99W. Kim advised that we have talked to the property owners who will be directly impacted by the roundabout. One of the property owners is not in favor of the roundabout. Commissioner Barkley expressed her concerns about the roundabout, saying more businesses will be impacted by it when traffic backs up. Gary said the modeling done on the roundabout concluded that the street should function the same as it does today. The design workshop determined there is no feasible way to accommodate bike lanes on Main Street. With a 20 mph speed limit on Main Street,we could have shared bike/vehicle lanes. Each side of the green street section will include widened sidewalks, a 4' planter strip, a 7' parallel parking lane, and a 12' travel lane. For angled parking, the City code requires a 16 1/2'parking lane with a 2 1/2'bumper overhang. If we want to maintain the angled parking, the only thing we could do is widen the sidewalk 2 '/2' on that side. There would not be any room for landscaping. It was noted that if we go to all parallel parking,it will eliminate 17-20 parking spaces on Main Street; however shared parking lots could make up the difference. Gary reviewed the details of the curbs and the driveway approaches. The curbs will be wide enough for people to step on as they get out of a car. One advantage of widening the sidewalk is that pedestrians will have a flat surface as they walk across the driveway aprons. The wider sidewalk will mean that we won't have to re-grade behind the driveway for the apron ramp. The optimum driveway approach plan has a bulb out for the ramp, so the full width of the sidewalk is flat. The bulbouts also pull the street parking further back from the driveways and gives the driver exiting the driveway a better view of traffic. Having the recommended bulbouts at every driveway will CCAC Meeting Minutes for November 10,2010 Page 2 of 6 eliminate 3 parking spaces overall. It would cost a little more to have the bulbouts, but it would create a more intimate downtown environment. It was suggested that we consider markings on the street to help segregate bikes from cars at places where there could be a higher incident of accidents (like the bike boxes in Portland). Kim noted that we had talked about having someone from the Bicycle Alliance look at our plans to see if they have any ideas for improving safety. Curbs will extend into the street at crosswalks, plus the crosswalks will be raised in some locations to slow traffic. Gary advised that we have 77 parking stalls now. The intermediate green street plan (no driveway extensions) will allow for 60 stalls; the optimum plan will have 57 stalls. The intermediate plan has 12' sidewalks and 7,000 square feet of landscaping; the optimum plan has 12' sidewalks with 8,600 square feet of landscaping. Gary went over the public involvement schedule. There will be a parking discussion group meeting on November 18th to discuss parking management strategies. The second open house to solicit input on the design alternatives will also be held on the 18th. The next CCAC meeting will be on January 12th to review the preferred alternative. Gary advised that the parallel parking stalls would be 20' and every other stall would have a 3'gap. He stressed that this is a concept plan, so things may change a little as we get into the actual design phase. Once we decide on the preferred alternative,we'll do 30%plans and have a better feel for exact numbers of landscaped areas,what we can do for permeable sidewalks, and start fine tuning the plan. He advised that he will give a presentation at the open house. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): AGENDA ITEM #4: Review Draft 2010 CCAC Annual Report Important Discussion and/or Comment: Chair Craghead advised that the annual report (Exhibit B) is due to the CCDA on December 1st. There is a typo in the second to last paragraph on page 3. The word "ever" should be "every." Sean noted that the CCAC will present the report to the CCDA. Last year, the CCAC annual goals were also presented at the same time. If the CCAC wants to continue that tradition, the meeting with the CCDA would be pushed out to late February. Sean brought up the annual retreat which has traditionally been held on Martin Luther King,Jr. Day in January. Chair Craghead noted that the retreat is primarily for setting goals. The Commissioners will discuss retreat planning next month. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Louw, seconded by Commissioner Shearer, to adopt the report with the noted exception. The motion passed CCAC Meeting Minutes for November 10,2010 Page 3 of 6 unanimously. The Commissioners decided to go ahead and send the report to the CCDA by December lit, and then discuss it at the joint meeting in February. AGENDA ITEM #5: Redevelopment and Incentives Matrix Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean reviewed some potential incentives for private development that would meet the goals of the Downtown Improvement Plan (Exhibit C). For residential uses, we want a high quality mixed-use development, and these incentives could be used. He advised that the column on "Effect on Attracting Development" uses the matrix that Johnson Reid had worked on. Vice Chair Murphy noted that the format of the matrix is pretty self-explanatory. He asked about Policy#6 - the past use in Tigard of a public/private partnership for infrastructure (Burnham, Main, and the public plaza). Sean advised that it's not a traditional public/private partnership where the 2 parties meet and agree on what each party will do. The fact that the City rebuilt Burnham and improved the frontage of the street will theoretically improve the value of those properties and businesses. The Commissioners don't think this is really an example of a public/private partnership. Having the public plaza on the list was also questioned since it hasn't been built yet. Sean said the examples are things that we want to see as well. He could also have added the possibility of the Main Street back of the building parking layout which would be more of a traditional partnership for working kith property owners. It was noted that the store front improvement program could be considered a public/private partnership. For Policy #6,Vice Chair Murphy suggested that we change the first column to say any kind of public/private partnership, and leave off infrastructure. The last column should be changed to contemplated use in Tigard. It was thought that most of the incentives in the matrix might not particularly- motivate a developer to come and do something, versus a developer who's already here. Under Policy #4, land assembly refers to assembling land and then selling it at market rate. Land assembly under Policy #7 is selling the land at lower than market rate. The assembly part is physically buying contiguous properties to make bigger plots for development. It could then be sold for the real cost or less than the real market cost. Commissioner Louw noted that under Policy#5, Property Tax Abatements, if land is developed and we only abate the portion of the improvements, there wouldn't be any cost to the City. The property tax would stay the same,but the improvements aren't taxed or the taxes are abated for a certain number of years. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): It was suggested to distinguish between two types of land assembly: selling at market or below market rate. AGENDA ITEM #6: Albany and Milwaukie Field Trip Report CCAC Meeting Minutes for November 10,2010 Page 4 of 6 Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean Farrelly and Commissioner Shearer reported on the Albany field trip to Albany (Exhibits D and E). The trip was sponsored by the Brownfields Forum. The Forum partnered with the owner for this development in Albany's downtown urban renewal district. The development is 12 market rate rental apartments, 7 LEED certified townhouses, and 15,000 square feet of commercial use about a block from the river in what had been an industrial area. The developer received a grant from CARA (an organization formed by the City of Albany). Sean noted that the grant money originated from the State. He advised that brownfield money is available, so it could be beneficial if we worked with someone who owns a brownfield or if the City purchases a brownfield. Sean, Vice Chair Murphy, and Commissioner Hughes toured the North Main Village development in btilwaukie. It's a mixed use development with 64 affordable apartments, 33 ownership townhouses, 9500 square feet of retail space, community plaza, and 100 parking spaces. Incentives for the project included vertical housing tax abatements, city-funded offsite improvements, sidewalk road improvements,water and sewer extensions, downtown ornamental lighting, utility undergrounding, and Metro TOD (Transit Oriented Development) funding. The project had 4 false starts, so this is something we might also expect with projects in our Downtown. It was noted that all of the residential units were sold and occupied, but only about 50% of the retail space was occupied after 2 years. Commissioner Murphy wonders if the rent for the retail space in this development is higher than surrounding buildings. He noted that in Hillsdale, the competition isn't the Pearl District or Downtown Portland, it's the older buildings in the Hillsdale area that have cheaper rent. ,Nlilwaukie worked to clean up an adjacent park which is now an asset to the development. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #7: CCAC Executive Session* 'EIECUTR'E SESSION:The Tigard City Center Advisory Commission will go into Executive Session to discuss real property transaction negotiations under ORS 192.660(2) (e)..9 discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session.Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions,as provided by ORS 192.660(4),but must not disclose any information discussed.No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision.Executive Sessions are closed to the public. Important Discussion and/or Comments: The CCAC went into executive session to discuss potential property purchases. The regular meeting reconvened at 8:57 p.m. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #8: Election Debrief CCAC Meeting Minutes for November 10,2010 Page 5 of 6 Important Discussion and/or Comments: It was advised that the parks bond passed which means there will be $1.7 million earmarked for parks in the Downtown. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #9: Other Business Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean advised that a private medical marijuana club will be leasing the space next to the Tigard Bicycle Shop in Downtown. The Police Chief is aware of it and is looking into the legality of it. The property owner has advised that the lease is a provisional lease for 4 months, which means it will be evaluated after 4 months. Sean also advised that City Council passed a code of conduct for boards and committees. The CCAC Commissioners will receive a letter from the Mayor with a form that will need to be signed and returned to the City. Commissioner Pao noted that Friends of Trees is having their crew leadership training this weekend. They need crews to do tree planting. Sean noted that Underwater Works has signed a letter of agreement to do facade improvements. Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None AGENDA ITEM #10: Adjournment Important Discussion and/or Comments: Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The meeting adjourned at 9:05 f Je e Lewis, CCAC S cretary ATTEST: Ch Alexander Craghead CCAC Meeting Minutes for November 10,2010 Page 6 of 6 City of Main Street Green Street v,%w bprd-mgw/f=m:rm Alternative Design Layout Concept Pians City of Tigard Main Street Green Street ,� www,fgud-ocgov/mainsreer STREET EXISTING TREES UGH TING m EXISTING m EXISTING BUILDING I BUILDING I I r 0 I ANGLED PARALLEL SIDEWALK PARKING VEHICLE LANES PARKING SIDEWALK HarpEXISTING SECTION Ilepeterson Righellis Inc. City ojTigard Main Street Green Street m�.n�rd-orgo./m,�arrer l PAO- 13 ' 9' MAN 5jM_r �i� `TrlAX? City ojrigard Main Street Green Street Brief physical description of main project features: The project provides engineering and construction for full comprehensive street redesign to retrofit the 1.400 lineal feet of the southern half of Main Street in downtown Tigard to full green street standards. This will be done concent resign cieveloced through the Tigard Streetscape It includes wirfenirp of s-,-' as well as reconstruction and reconfiguration of portions of the existing street. c --" " -- - re.The work is the first phase of a proposed two-phase project aimed at ncc-rrorat:ng, recently developed Streetscape design standards for Main Street cc.t; ,:, with gre^n s?reet components. Main "green" features include redirection of stormwater r;rn ofl =rem a oir,ed system to nfiltration and detention devices for treatment prior to discharge, of r..e:r;'o_:s sura-n 'c rhe maximum extent feasible. new street lighting, and planting Limited right-of-way acquisition primarily at intersections will be required. The finished product will im- prove vehicle circulation and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the street. The Phase 1 streetscape, drainage. stormwater treatments. will be designed to accommodate future Phase II improvements. The funding requested is sufficient to fund the entire Phase 1 scope. If the project cannot be funded at the level requested. the scope can be reduced by subdividing Phase 1 into two segments with the segment from the rail corridor southwest to Fanno Creek (approximately 900 lineal feet)as the high priority for funding. Cin n/Tigard Main Street Green Street www.4ga-d-or govfmait>strret Describe any Removal of Impervious Surface Areas: The addition of Green Streets a?ements will result in the replacement of up to 10.000 square feet of imper- vious surface by pervious area. This net reduction in impervious area will be achieved by the narrowing of the street width combined with the addition of pervious sidewalk area. Describe the use of infiltration and/or detention devices: Tigard's Main Street crosses over Fanno Creek. The City historically did not install detention devices in areas (such as the Main Street area) located close to the creek c ,lc. s lira occn; i- s E o •:/e :.c:i-s a:-,7i- such as storrnwater filters. sand filters. separators and catch basin inserts. The devic- es include in-street as well as a potential combination of in-street and off-street improvements. Stormwater overflow will go into the normal drainf,ow. QW ofTiWd Main Street Green Street *,m dgud-or.gorfm2m_,zr t EXISTING EXISTING BUILDING NEW LIGHTING BUILDING \, STREET STREET a TREES TREES m v G \ i � I r f i � 1 1 SIDEWALK ANDSCAPE PARALLEL PARALLEL LANDSCAPE SIDEWALK SIDEWALK EXTENSION PLANTER PARKING SHARED VEHICLEAIKE LANES PARKING PLANTER EXTENSION SIDEWALK � GREEN STREET SECTION Rig in1— Righellis Inc. 7 D c;n of Tigard Main Street Green Street mv.dgard-or qr„�/nninscrei yrL�s,,lK.K � I171�ii,�C..{L PAP'- PAI MNN 57 7- 6?6r/ 4 ON,of Tigard Main Street Green Street m,u.tr¢a rd-n r.�m�/mainstree: 'i ' •r Al f A. T� Y= + 77 r, i City ofTigad Main Street Green Street �� ww.ugud�ocguv/maittsvret I� I City of Tigard Main Street Green Street /\ %vw.ftw d-m gw/m2+nmtr � 9 �i A"Y&D PACP/A 3% 7, z r g firer smer�ck I'AW4A* City of Tigard Main Street Green Street v".t3Wd-m.gWffmirtarra FIGURE 1L 7611 OFF-S' PREET SURFACE PARAAG MATRIX Rec ;vited Sraee and.AYc Dime-micix in Feet COMPACT STANDARD A B C D E - G B C D E F G 7.50 I 15.5 13.0 10.61 44.0 0 5 1 5 13. 12 48,0 2.0 7.75 15.5 12.0 10.96 43.0 0 .0 1 5 12. 12 47 2 2.0 450 7.75 15.5 11.0 10.96 420 0 5 1 5 11 13. 46.0 2.0 8.00 15.5 11.0 1132 420 0 .0 1 5 I1. 14.1 46.0 2.0 7.50 17.0 1&0 8.62 4&0 5 1 0 18.0 9.8 56.9 2S 7.75 17.0 16.0 9.01 46.0 .0 1 0 16-� 10. 54.0 25 60° 7.75 17.0 15.0 9.01 54.0 5 5 1 0 I5. ll. 53.0 25 8.00 17.0 14.0 920 44.0 5 IVC 1 0 14. 11. 52.0 25 7.50 17.5 25.5 7.73 60. 5 5 1 2= 8_ 64:0 25 7.75 17.5 23.0 7.99 SL 5 .0 1 23. 93 62.0 2.5 75* 7.75 175 220 7.99 57. 5 3 15 22. 9. 61.0 25 8.00 17.5 21.0 825 56. 5 .0 15 21. 103 60.0 25 7.50 165 2&0 750 61.0 .0 5 1 5 28. 8.5 65.0 3.0 7.75 165 26.0 7.75 60.0 .0 .0 1 26. 9. 63.0 3.0 90° 7.75 165 25.0 7.75 59.0 .0 S I 25. 9.5 62.0 3.0 8.00 165 24.0 8.00 5&0 .0 C I 5 24. iC. 61.0 3.0 Stall width dimemio m may be dismbmad as follow;.30%stz4m d qmm 5 ;co/mptia spaces.All compact spaces shell be lebeled as such A A PwidngAW)e a B stag Wath ei C S ^pch i;q brtperar�e- st8;� P o tall DD Aisle Width Betw=Stall Um(5) 1 ` E_tab Wath?onkel d Aisle c F MMLdeWidth(no brmperowrhmW G Bjp CKvhz% c city0pi m Main Street Green Street tvt„w.ngua.orgov/tml�tttxt -V-40A - .��iU(E�AlEDVi�T6 4jp cep PAW L O ciNofrgard Main Street Green Street www.tgand-w"/ummirret Tpomy AmAw-as, PA4- � L Citi of Tigard Main Street Green Street �.� M ,' j L Zt' PAgr- !d ! ' 1 City ofligard Main Street Green Street ' anir.tiy�-[rd-org[n/maincrre TIGARD MAIM STREET GREM STREET 4-Nov-10 INTER EXISTING MEDIATE OPTIMUM LANDSCAPING AREA 0 7000 sf 8600 sf SIDEWALK WIDTH 8'WIDE 12a WIDE 12a WIDE PARKING COUNT SOUTH SIDE 27 34 33 NORTH SIDE 50 26 24 TOTAL 77 60 57 City of Tigard Main Street Green Street �� a�kTctlgzrd-ocga/mars:ett MiNaw j- Tltslts for CowdngliDn CCAC Meetings Open Houses taAh Pttbllr Mdelmltlg CCAC a1:7/14 t p Purpose:Review ProIM a o N.Act Scope and Public Initiation involvement Schedule Parking CCAC 92:g/31 Main Street 0usiness i OH rl:8 /19 wl Arnlrsis Purpose:Review and Property Owner Meetings Purpose:Share proleR discuss Main Street Parkin P S �o g Purpose: urvey business information;Solicit snout on Maivsrs needs;share mformabon nwnm•needs and about Protect goals Concerns CCAC r3:9/9 Tigard Main Street Improvements p Perp—walking tour of Main Street.Review Public Involvement Schedule g Business and Open..— Revised 11/10/10 aeemmkies nPut;l Centdy key issues for De.Nopmmt development of anematrves CCAC as:10/13 Purpose:Review Parking 0 o Study Preferred Parking Discussion Group gkernative CCAC K:I1/10 Meeting pl:11/I9 OHA2:Il/Ig E Selection Purpose:Resxw Design Purpose:Disci:ss Mann St. Purpose-.Sohot input on ce n Aher""t—to present at Caping management Design nitemaoves Concept Plan OH 4 strategies Development Parking Discussion Group o Meeting a2:12/9 E C Purpose:Discuss Main St. parking management Preliminary vrateges Plan Parking Discussion Group =M DeveloPrineriM CCAC 116:1/22 Meeting e3:1/6 and G Prnpose:Review Preferred Meeting a4:1/20 n Afternat- Purpose:Discuss Main St. Parking management strate les 2 "s Mvanced Pbn 01103:Tenbtive o Development Purpose:Present Preferred AHemanve f 1 City ofligam Main Street Green Street wcw,ugard�r gov/ma�ncs:r ILIR r OPTIMUM PLAN ww.. - GREEN STREET CONCEPT City of'FlWd Main Street Green Street ux�s.ngud-ocgos/ma;nstreet INTERMEDIATE PLAN ;ung GREEN STREET CONCEPT �~ ~ City of Tigw M[a in Street � EXISTING EXISTING BUILDING NEW LIGHTING BUILDING STREET STREET TREES TREES c w f I F I SIDEWALK -ANDSCAPE PARALLEL PARALLEL LANDSCAPE SIDEWALK SIDEWALK EXTENSION PLANTER PARKING SHARED VEHICLE/BIKE LANES PARKING PLANTER EXTENSION SIDEWALK Harper GREEN S TREE T SECTION Righ Peterson ighellis Inc. Ps�n. s C* f Nad Main Street ' STREET EXISTING TREES LIGHTING 1p EXISTING EXISTING BUILDING BUILDING I I ANGLED PARALLEL SIDEWALK PARKING VEHICLE LANES PARKING SIDEWALK EXISTING SECTION Harper Houf Peterson Righellis Inc. TIGARD MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT SCHEDULE Revised 11/10/10 CCAC#1: 7/14 >, G Purpose: Review Project NProject Scope and Public Initiation Involvement Schedule Parking CCAC#2: 8/11 Main Street Business& OH#1: 8/19 3 c Analysis Purpose: Review and Property Owner Meetings Purpose: Share project to o discuss Main Street Parking Purpose: Survey business information;Solicit input on Q N Analysis needs;share information community needs and about project goals concerns CCAC#3: 9/8 Purpose: Walking tour of E Main Street.Review CL N Business and Open House vi Alternatives input;Identify key issues for Development development of alternatives CCAC#4: 10/13 Purpose: Review Parking l0ow Study N O Preferred Parking Discussion Group a`► Alternative CCAC#5: 11/10 Meeting#1: 11/18 OH#2: 11/18 E 0Selection Purpose: Review Design Purpose: Discuss Main St. Purpose: Solicit input on cN Alternatives to present at parking management Design Alternatives Z Concept Plan OH#2 strategies Development Parking Discussion Group c Meeting#2: 12/9 c Purpose: Discuss Main St. N parking management Preliminary strategies Plan Parking Discussion Group Development CCAC#6: 1/12 Meeting#3: 1/6 and M o Purpose: Review Preferred Meeting#4: 1/20 ra N Alternative Purpose: Discuss Main St. parking management strategies 3 Advanced Plan OH#3: Tentative N Development Purpose: Present Preferred «�, LL Alternative Harper Houf Peterson •� Righellis Inc. ENGINEERS• PLANNERS r LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS•SURVEYORS AGENDA Project Name: Main Street Tigard, ODOT Key #15600 Date of Meeting: 1111012010 Location CCAC Time of Meeting: 6:30 PM Meeting# CCAC Meeting #4 Purpose of - Review Concept Design Alternative Layouts Attendance Requested Name Name .._......._......_................................................................................................................................_.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Kim McMillan, COT .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................:................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Sean Farrelly, COT ................,................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Gary Alfson, HHPR AgendaMeeting Existing Section Review Project Funding Requirements — Green Street Treatment and Pedestrian Enhancements Parking Study Finalized — Utilization of On and Off Street Parking Turnaround/Roundabout ODOT Review Proposed Section — Sidewalk and Green Street Components Green Street Treatment Photo Examples Angled Parking Section City Code Parking Dimensions Driveway and Crosswalk Configurations Summary Table — Landscaping and Parking Public Involvement Schedule — Preferred Concept Plan Jan 12, 30% Plan Feb. Optimum and Intermediate Concept Plans Page 1 of 1 0 o ., m 0 i i �fl�I(�vAt-f� �i9'lZt'� - - l6a a �� AZ � r � ti r AA,&�r� PAP-K-1Aoc7 vi W Go � w `JN11.33N1 I--I:-1-IH0 3NOHd iON 3NOHd ATA OL ow3W )woad �_]of -cul silloq'R[N odooEd NoileoiNnwwoo uosaalad jilog dH - aadir,H� CCAC 2010_annual Report 2010 Annual Report of the City Center Advisory Commission to the City Center Development Agency December 1, 2010 In February,2010,the CCAC presented to the City Center Development Agency its goals for the year 2010.A copy of those goals is attached to this report as Attachment A. The agenda for the CCAC for the balance of 2010 was largely devoted to developing and implementing those goals.This report is organized around that framework. Unless otherwise noted,all dates occurred within calendar year 2010. Goal No. 1— Project Infrastructure Main Street/Green Street. Burnham Street completion. Pacific Highway/Greenberg/Hall. Plaza site. Lower Fanno Creek. Transit Center redevelopment. Capital construction projects have taken up a significant amount of the CCAC's attention during 2010. Beginning in July, the CCAC provided (and continues to provide) citizen oversight and input for the Main Street/Green Street project,working with staff and consultants to shape matters pertaining to parking and street design.This process will continue into 2011. The CCAC also monitored the progress of the Burnham Street project and the Pacific Highway/Greenberg/Hall/Main improvements.These projects may continue into early 2011,and the CCAC will continue to provide oversight. Work on the re-meander in lower Fanno Creek Park was largely put off for the year due to budget constraints. Some limited work was undertaken near City Hall,but the bulk of the project has been postponed. Members of the CCAC were active in providing input to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board as the latter body shaped a parks bond measure for the November,2010 ballot. The CCAC successfully advocated for 10% of this $17 million bond ($1.7 million) to be dedicated to the downtown area. (This bond measure passed on November 2,2010.) This money is specifically dedicated to parks land acquisitions,however,and will not fund the re- meander project in lower Fanno Creek Park. Examination of the Transit Center redevelopment determined that the idea was not currently feasible. Difficulties surrounding the location of the plaza remain unresolved. 1 CCAC 2010 Annual Report Goal No. 2—Development Explore incentives including developer outreach, financial incentives,and land assembly/direct development options. The CCAC was highly active in advocating for development opportunities within downtown during 2010.The commission prompted staff to investigate multiple possible property acquisitions. While no specific property was purchased for development by the CCDA or City of Tigard during 2010, the agency is actively investigating the potential . Staff prepared a number of site development studies during the year.These studies, conducted with the assistance of real estate and development consultants,were utilized as a tool for engaging downtown property owners in discussions about the future of their properties. On Hunziker and Hall, the Knoll development of Community Partners for Affordable Housing continues to progress. This facility,with approximately 50 units of elder-focused low-income housing,is anticipated to open in early 2011 and will be the first significant new structure in the downtown redevelopment area. CCAC members also attended numerous developer events,including events sponsored by the International Council of Shopping Centers, the Urban Land Institute,and the Rail—Volution conference. Goal No. 3—Fagade Improvement Program Implementation of Phase 1 (approved businesses). Continue to promote,expand,refine program. Response to this program has been exceptional,with 11 applications as of November,2010. The first recipient of the Fagade Improvement Program, the Tigard Liquor Store,was completed in July. The resulting structure has been very well received and served as a fine example of the program's potential. In addition to this location,the City approved funding of two other matching grants during 2010. Four other businesses have received architectural design assistance and are considering future projects. This program will continue into 2011. Goal No.4—Circulation Plan Review for final adoption. One of the biggest achievements of the CCAC for the year was the completion of the Circulation Plan for the downtown.The commission provided commentary and analysis of the draft plan produced by the city's consulting team.The resulting plan was streamlined for cost-effectiveness and ranked. This plan was endorsed by the CCAC in September,2010. In addition,the CCAC has advocated for the inclusion of specific elements of this plan as part of the City's CIP process. 2 CCAC 2010 Annual Report Goal No. 5—Branding/Marketing of Downtown Determine role of CCAC in the branding and marketing of downtown. Encourage development of brand identity for downtown. Liaise with City Event Coordinator on event strategies. The CCAC provided oversight and input on gateway designs to be used at main points of entry throughout downtown. The commission also discussed the need for clarifying the city's role in marketing issues. Plans to develop an event strategy were set aside due to budget cuts eliminating the city's Events Coordinator position. Goal No. 6—Communication Liaise with other boards, committees, Council, staff. The CCAC has strengthened its relationships with other portions of the City. Commissioners regularly attended meetings of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee.The commission also conducted a joint meeting with the City Council/CCDA in February to discuss the CCAC's 2009 Annual Report. Several commissioners have attended City Council meetings,and the commission chair has attended executive sessions of the City Council pertaining to downtown issues. Long-Term Goals Improve internal CCAC processes. Increase awareness of impact of CCAC's work on the community. The CCAC continues to maintain its improved internal processes.The commission has made its retreat an annual event and a part of another of its internal improvements,the establishment of an annual goal setting process. The commission's executive committee, consisting of the chair and vice-chair,meet monthly with staff to set meeting agendas and discuss process matters. CCAC goals are reviewed ever quarter. A remaining goal on internal processes is the development of a regular calendar to assist in the production of agendas and the timeliness of completing routine responsibilities. Activities surrounding CCAC projects have received significant press during 2010, especially the Burnham Street project and the Facade Improvement Program. In addition, CCAC members have engaged the public directly at numerous open house events over the course of the year. 3 CCAC 2010 annual Report The Future The CCAC will continue its goal-setting process in early 2011. Projects certain to carry over include the Main Street Green Street project, the Fagade Improvement Program, and the planned improvements to lower Fanno Creek Park. In addition,the year 2011 will mark the fifth year of the urban renewal district in Tigard. 2011, then,will prove a good time to pause and reflect upon the program's successes and remaining challenges,and consider the future direction of downtown policies and projects. The CCAC looks forward to further progress in the year to come. On behalf of the CCAC, Alexander B. Craghead Thomas J. Murphy Chair Vice-Chair 4 I&A Policy Tools and Incentives to Attract Mixed Use and Compact Residential Development to Downtown Policy Comments Effect on Attracting Cost Past Use in Tigard? Development 1. Development Code Increase in allowed Weak to moderate.Won't Small- requires change to Yes (Downtown Code) Revisions density,height.Decrease create a market by itself code in required parking. 2. Streamlined permit Streamline permitting Moderate: "Time is money" Small-requires change to Yes process and decision making to developer, however won't internal process. create a market by itself However,budget cutbacks can reduce effectiveness. 3. Fee Subsidies Reduce permit fees and Moderate to strong.Direct Moderate to high: loss in Yes, for low income System Development effect on the cost of government revenue housing Charges (SDC's) development 4. Land Assembly Acquisition from willing Strong: increases Moderate Not by City sellers of contiguous marketability of Downtown parcels to create larger property for redevelopment. developable tracts 5. Property Tax Abatements Tax reduction or Moderate to strong. Increases Moderate: Increment is Yes, for non-profit abatement for residential net operating income or forgone,however there development and/or mixed use achievable rents/prices. is long term gain in development that meets value. community goals G. Public/Private Street improvements, Weak to moderate. Won't Moderate to high Yes- for example Partnership parking,parks,plazas are create a market by itself Burnham, Main,public for Infrastructure built,benefitting private plaza develo ment 7. Direct Urban Renewal Subsidy for land or low Strong: direct intervention to High. Direct No Subsidy for Development interest loans for fill feasibility gaps or to participation in financing developments that meet ensure that project includes development.Loans are community goals publically desired features. assumed to be repaid, "Second position debt"can but are typically low leverage additional loan interest and may not amounts from private lenders. reflect the risk of a project. Adapled from Tigard Transit Cenler Deyelopmenl Opporlunily Sludy,Figure 4.2, Qohnson Reid) ALBANY FIELD TRIP Notes from Elise Shearer City of Albany—formed organization CARA to improve 991 acres with TIF money In vestments so far of Public to Private $$ is$7.9 million to 66million—ratio of 1:85 Ironworks Project started in Spring of 2005 by Developer David Reece (engineer) *He received a 1031 grant from CARA of$275,000 before seeking financing through a local bank. 2005—he began the Excavation/Level I study He then proceeded to a Level II Cleanup where contaminated soil was removed to a landfill, followed by Lead contamination cleanup and then TCE cleanup continues. If he did it again, he would spend more $$ @ Level II cleanup and negotiate the price of the property instead. March 2007 - he received a DEQ/NFA letter after a 3-4 month wait. Summer 2008—building was complete. He spent$6 million in total development costs with only $100,000 in total cleanup costs *CARA partnership of$275,000 was very important to this project developer. Currently his office space is at 65%occupancy which is the break-even point for him. Studio apartments were at market rate of$850 per month. Townhouses sold at$300,000 each. EPA grants (year-long application) of up to $200,000 available to municipal or non-profit developers, not private developers. Private developers have access to funding sources at the federal, state and local levels (if available) Gx� � 11/30/2010 Albany Field Trip Brownfields Forum, 9/21/10 r d� L 1 11/30/2010 ul F ` Albany Field Trip Brownfields Forum , 9/21/10 .mss I ` I I �5 oill... 9 � - i 1 f /:t j 00 wdp 1 1 Vol I logo Q its ow 1 I �s a- � _ s • � � � 'tom►. - 71 r 1,x:1 _ r ,�� •' - MjJi� � '� •rte �� .�Y., hx A All ! t" / 1 r r 4 CCAC 2010 Annual Report 2010 Annual Report of the City Center Advisory Commission to the City Center Development Agency December 1, 2010 In February, 2010, the CCAC presented to the City Center Development Agency its goals for the year 2010. A copy of those goals is attached to this report as Attachment A. The agenda for the CCAC for the balance of 2010 was largely devoted to developing and implementing those goals. This report is organized around that framework. Unless otherwise noted, all dates occurred within calendar year 2010. Goal No. 1— Project Infrastructure Main Street/Green Street. Burnham Street completion. Pacific Highway/Greenberg/Hall. Plaza site. Lower Fanno Creek. Transit Center redevelopment. Capital construction projects have taken up a significant amount of the CCAC's attention during 2010. Beginning in July, the CCAC provided (and continues to provide) citizen oversight and input for the Main Street/Green Street project,working with staff and consultants to shape matters pertaining to parking and street design. This process will continue into 2011. The CCAC also monitored the progress of the Burnham Street project and the Pacific Highway/Greenberg/Hall/Main improvements. These projects may continue into early 2011, and the CCAC will continue to provide oversight. Work on the re-meander in lower Fanno Creek Park was largely put off for the year due to budget constraints. Some limited work was undertaken near City Hall,but the bulk of the project has been postponed. Members of the CCAC were active in providing input to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board as the latter body shaped a parks bond measure for the November, 2010 ballot. The CCAC successfully advocated for 10% of this $17 million bond ($1.7 million) to be dedicated to the downtown area. (This bond measure passed on November 2, 2010.) This money is specifically dedicated to parks land acquisitions,however, and will not fund the re- meander project in lower Fanno Creek Park. Examination of the Transit Center redevelopment determined that the idea was not currently feasible. Difficulties surrounding the location of the plaza remain unresolved. 1 CCAC 2010 Annual Report Goal No. 2—Development Explore incentives including developer outreach, financial incentives, and land assembly/direct development options. The CCAC was highly active in advocating for development opportunities within downtown during 2010. The commission prompted staff to investigate multiple possible property acquisitions. While no specific property was purchased for development by the CCDA or City of Tigard during 2010, the agency is actively investigating the potential . Staff prepared a number of site development studies during the year. These studies, conducted with the assistance of real estate and development consultants,were utilized as a tool for engaging downtown property owners in discussions about the future of their properties. On Hunziker and Hall, the Knoll development of Community Partners for Affordable Housing continues to progress. This facility,with approximately 50 units of elder-focused low-income housing,is anticipated to open in early 2011 and will be the first significant new structure in the downtown redevelopment area. CCAC members also attended numerous developer events,including events sponsored by the International Council of Shopping Centers, the Urban Land Institute, and the Rail—Volution conference. Goal No. 3—Facade Improvement Program Implementation of Phase 1 (approved businesses). Continue to promote, expand,refine program. Response to this program has been exceptional,with 11 applications as of November, 2010. The first recipient of the Facade Improvement Program, the Tigard Liquor Store,was completed in July. The resulting structure has been very well received and served as a fine example of the program's potential. In addition to this location, the City approved funding of two other matching grants during 2010. Four other businesses have received architectural design assistance and are considering future projects. This program will continue into 2011. Goal No. 4—Circulation Plan Review for final adoption. One of the biggest achievements of the CCAC for the year was the completion of the Circulation Plan for the downtown. The commission provided commentary and analysis of the draft plan produced by the city's consulting team. The resulting plan was streamlined for cost-effectiveness and ranked. This plan was endorsed by the CCAC in September, 2010. In addition, the CCAC has advocated for the inclusion of specific elements of this plan as part of the City's CIP process. 2 CCAC 2010 Annual Report Goal No. 5—Branding/Marketing of Downtown Determine role of CCAC in the branding and marketing of downtown. Encourage development of brand identity for downtown. Liaise with City Event Coordinator on event strategies. The CCAC provided oversight and input on gateway designs to be used at main points of entry throughout downtown. The commission also discussed the need for clarifying the city's role in marketing issues. Plans to develop an event strategy were set aside due to budget cuts eliminating the city's Events Coordinator position. Goal No. 6—Communication Liaise with other boards, committees, Council, staff. The CCAC has strengthened its relationships with other portions of the City. Commissioners regularly attended meetings of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee. The commission also conducted a joint meeting with the City Council/CODA in February to discuss the CCAC's 2009 Annual Report. Several commissioners have attended City Council meetings, and the commission chair has attended executive sessions of the City Council pertaining to downtown issues. Long-Term Goals Improve internal CCAC processes. Increase awareness of impact of CCAC's work on the community. The CCAC continues to maintain its improved internal processes. The commission has made its retreat an annual event and a part of another of its internal improvements, the establishment of an annual goal setting process. The commission's executive committee, consisting of the chair and vice-chair, meet monthly with staff to set meeting agendas and discuss process matters. CCAC goals are reviewed ever quarter.A remaining goal on internal processes is the development of a regular calendar to assist in the production of agendas and the timeliness of completing routine responsibilities. Activities surrounding CCAC projects have received significant press during 2010, especially the Burnham Street project and the Fagade Improvement Program. In addition, CCAC members have engaged the public directly at numerous open house events over the course of the year. 3 CCAC 2010 Annual Report The Future The CCAC will continue its goal-setting process in early 2011. Projects certain to carry over include the Main Street Green Street project, the Fagade Improvement Program, and the planned improvements to lower Fanno Creek Park. In addition, the year 2011 will mark the fifth year of the urban renewal district in Tigard. 2011, then,will prove a good time to pause and reflect upon the program's successes and remaining challenges, and consider the future direction of downtown policies and projects. The CCAC looks forward to further progress in the year to come. On behalf of the CCAC, Alexander B. Craghead Thomas J. Murphy Chair Vice-Chair 4 Policy Tools and Incentives to Attract Mixed Use and Compact Residential Development to Downtown Policy Comments Effect on Attracting Cost Past Use in Tigard? Development 1.Development Code Increase in allowed Weak to moderate.Won't Small-requires change to Yes (Downtown Code) Revisions density,height. Decrease create a market by itself code in require parking. 2. Streamlined permit Streamline permitting Moderate: "Time is money" Small-requires change to Yes process and decision making to developer, however won't internal process. create a market by itself However,budget cutbacks can reduce effectiveness. 3. Fee Subsidies Reduce permit fees and Moderate to strong.Direct Moderate to high:loss in Yes,for low income System Development effect on the cost of government revenue housing Charges (SDC's) development 4. Land Assembly Acquisition from willing Strong:increases Moderate Not by City sellers of contiguous marketability of Downtown parcels to create larger property for redevelopment. developable tracts 5.Property Tax Abatements Tax reduction or Moderate to strong. Increases Moderate: Increment is Yes, for non-profit abatement for residential net operating income or forgone,however there development and/or mixed use achievable rents/prices. is long term gain in development that meets value. community goals 6. Public/Private Street improvements, Weak to moderate.Won't Moderate to high Yes-for example Partnership parking,parks,plazas are increase feasibility by itself Burnham,Main,public for Infrastructure built,benefitting private plaza develo ment 7.Direct Urban Renewal Subsidy for land or low Strong: direct intervention to High.Direct No Subsidy for Development interest loans for fill feasibility gaps or to participation in financing developments that meet ensure that project includes development. Loans are community goals publically desired features. assumed to be repaid, "Second position debt" can but are typically low leverage additional loan interest and may not amounts from private lenders. reflect the risk of a project. Adapted from Tigard Transit Center Development Opportunity Study,Figure 4.2, O'ohnson Reid Completeness Review for Boards, Commissions and Committee Records CITY OF TIGARD City Center Advisory Commission Name of Board, Commission or Committee November 10, 2010 Date of Meeting I have verified that to the best of my knowledge, these documents are a complete copy of the official record. I was not the original administrator for this meeting. :Z:3 Print Name Signature Date