10/13/2010 - Packet City of Tigard
r
r .
City Center Advisory Commission ❑ Agenda
MEETING DATE: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 — 6:30-8:30 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 September Minutes..................................................................................6:35 — 6:40
3. Main Street Green Street Project ........................................................................................... 6:40—7:15
Parking study re-cap and discussion of recommendations
Qudith Gray and members of the consultant team)
4. Formation of Parking Task Force...........................................................................................7:15 —7:25
Information on goals of task force and request for Iwo CC 4C commissioners to serve
Qudith Gray and Sean Farrelly)
5. Redevelopment, Incentives, and Public Private Partnerships.............................................7:25 — 8:10
Pozverpointpresentation on redevelopment issues, developer incentives, and examples ofpartnersh ps from the region.
(Sean Farrelly and Kim Knox, Shiels Oblet,Johnsen)
6. Albany and Milwaukie Field Trip Report............................................................................... 8:10 — 8:20
Re
ort 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. Other Business............................................................................................................................. 8:20 — 8:30
8. Adjourn.........................................................................................................................................8:30 p.m.
Upcoming meetings of note:
10/12, CCDA Executive Session
11/10, Regular CCAC meeting
CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA— October 13, 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
V City Center Advisory Commission
Meeting Minutes
1 D Date of f Meeting: October 13, 2010
Location: 'Tigard Cin- Hall, Town Hall I
Called to order bv: Chair Alexander C;raghead I
Time Started: 6:30 p.m.
Time Ended: 0:03 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barklec; Chair .klexander Craghead; _ fice I'llis Gaut; Ralph
Hughes; Peter Louw; Vice Chair Thomas Nlurphv; Elise Shearer; Linh Pao (alternate); Philip
"1"hornburg (alternate)
Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Kutcher and Wong
Others Present: Alan Snook, consultant with DKS :associates; Kim Knox, consultant NXIth Shiels
Obletz 1ohnscn
Staff Present: Scan harrelh-, Redevelopment Project Manager;J udith Gray, Senior"Transportation
Planner;Jerree Lewis, Executive _Assistant
AGENDA ITEM #1: Welcome and Introductions
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Introductions were not necessary-.
Action Items (Follwv-Up or Votes):
AGENDA ITEM #2: _approve Minutes
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Commissioner Pao asked about the key findings in
the SIN-man document (Exhibit A of the September minutes). She asked if the public is getting
CC AC documents at the same time the Commissioners do. Sean Farrelly answered that anything
going out in the CC_1C packet is posted to the CCAC webpage. POR'erPoints haven't been posted
in real time; they are usually attached to the minutes the following month. We're trying to have the
PowerPoints accessible for the public before then.
Commissioner Pao asked what we're doing to address the issues that are mentioned in the Slyman
report. Are we responding to the things people have asked about? Sean noted that the report
compiles people's comments; it's informing us while we're doing this project. Information gained
from the business meetings and the open house has caused us to consider how we'll be looking at
CCAC Meeting;Minutes for October 3,2010 Page 1 of 8
the parking situation on \Iain Street (we're going to form a Downtown parking group that will have
business owner and CCAC representation).
Commissioner Pao wonders if we have a plan for responding to people. N'ice Chair 'Murphy
referred to the introduction in the Sl-man report which states, "This outreach comprised the first
phase of public involvement for the Tigard Main Street Green Street Project which was conducted
prior to the start of the design phase." This is a good start. Hoxv do we make sure that maximum
advantage is taken of the information that was gleaned% Sean believes the next phase «ill include
the open houses and the parking group. As the project continues, there xvill be a need for other
ways to engage people. t-ice Chair Murphy would like to knot- how mare phases there are for the
project, what they are, what's the approximate timetable, and if there's a role for the CCAC.
It-,vas also clarified that at. the September meeting, no decision was trade v.-ith regard to the
wording for the gateway signs.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): .Motion by Vice Chair Murphy, seconded by Commissioner
Louw, to adopt the minutes as \x-ritten. The motion passed by a 6-0 vote Commissioner Ellis Gaut
abstained.
AGENDA ITEM#3: Main Street Green Street Project
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Alan Snook from DKS .associates discussed the
Downtown Tigard parking analysis with the Commissioners (Exlubit A). fie gave a quick overview
of what was discussed earlier for the existing conditions and then went over some parking
management strategies. He noted that the alternatives haven't been fully developed yet for this
project.
The peak occupancy- for parking in the Downtown v,-as mid-day on Thursday. They broke down
the data between off-street parking and on-street parking, as well as north and south of the tracks.
The on-street parking had a higher utilization rate; and parking on the south side of the tracks was
more heavily utilized than the north side. There is a good turnover rate for the stalls that are being
used. Most people are staying bet-,veen an hour and an hour and 155 minutes.
N1r. Snook went over some possibilities for achieving desired outcomes for parking in the
Downtown (details are listed in Exhibit A):
• clarifying the system
• improving compliance
• maximizing capacity of the existing system
• optimizing future parking
One option for code modifications could be to have developers par a fee in lieu rather than
building their own parking. The City could then use the money- to help build other facilities, e.g.,
CCAC:Meeting'Minutes for October 3,2010 Page_')of 8
instead of building 2 or 3 different lots, the money could be pooled to build 1 lot in a centralized
location.
I:
Commissioner Lowy had a suggestion for the questionnaire. He secs that there arc ? types of
businesses Do\vntoxrn —one has parking that they own and pay for; the other is dependent on
public parking. They need to be handled differently. The ones with private parking are fine— they
have plena• of spaces. We won't get the same kinds of comments from those businesses that hay c
their own parking as we trill from those «-110 utilize public parking. 'Those who need public parking
for their customers and their emplovccs are the ones who will be impacted. Business owners who
have private parking may not agree with using tax dollars to provide for parking for those
businesses that do not have their own parking. There should be enough incentives in place to make
shared parking work equitabIN.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Commissioner; Barkley and Louw gill serve on the task
force if their schedules allow. If one of them cannot serve on the task force, Commissioner Shearer
will be the back-up.
AGENDA ITERS #5: Redevelopment, Incentives, and Public Private Partnerships
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean advised that him Knox, a real estate consultant
with Shiels Oblctz Johnsen, ryas asked to come to the CCAC meeting to talk about her experience
with projects around the region. Some of these were urban renewal projects that involved public
incentives.
Kim advised that the purpose of her presentation is to further the CC_1C's knowledge of the
development process and to discuss some of the options for public;Iprivate development
partnerships. Her PowerPoint presentation is attached as Exhibit B.
Kim remarked that Tigard has done a lot in the last 5 years with planning for urban renewal. Not
only do we have good plans, we can actually build things that fit in and support those plans. With
regard to development risk, from a developer's prospective, they should look at the following:
• Political environment—does the public leadership have the ability to withstand the "heat" of
developing over the course of a project, which could take several years to complete
• Communis consensus —how is the communisgoing to react to a specific proposal on a
specific sites
• Building design approvals —this could be a huge test of the development code. Codes are
generally- written for a broad set of circumstances. Is it going to be a process that's flexible
enough for the project%
• Site—there are different relationships a developer can have with whoever owns the site.
Also, even- site has its own set of strengths and weaknesses. Do they balance out and is
there a path to overcome the weaknesses and take advantage of the strengths?
• Lenders—«."ill they take a chance on Tigard% It may be the first time for some lenders doing
a private/public project. The developer vyill need to convince lenders to make a loan on the
project.
CC.1C \Meeting Minutes for October 3,3010 Page -4 of 8
him listed some relevant projects in the area:
• North Main Villagr in Milwaukie —97 units (a nus of rental units for low income people and
33 for-sale units;; and 95l►4_i square feet of retail space. Kim noted that the developer for this
project -,vas adamant about having angled parking along one side to provide as much parking
as possible for the retail part the development. She suggested that the Tigard Downtown
parking study might want to look at potential new businesses in the communin-, in addition
to the current businesses.
• .lrbor Vista Condominiums in the Goose Holk>w area—a joint development project built
on a piece of surplus property that was acquired as part of a light rail project.
• Holh-wood l.ibran- in the Hollywood neighborhood—on a site that Multnomah County
owned. Its a mixed use development«6th a libran-.
• Belmont Dain- in SI Portland —on a bus corridor that was entirely developer-led. The
developer had the site and then went out to public agencies to find funding.
Elements of a successful mixed use project include a combination of a good site, manageable risk,
financial feasibility and incentives, an experienced team; and a good deal. Kim noted the things that
developers need to consider for each of these elements (as shown in F'.xhibit B).
With regard to incentives, you need to know what the pro forma and market conditions are before
going through the process. You also need to make reasonable program assumptions for what
you're asking for, and understand where the project kits on the bell curve of projects and if there's
enough market support for it. Once these things are known, then you can go to the public and tell
them if there's still a gap. It would be an informed decision about what you think the public should
be spending on the project. Incentives need to be tied to an understanding of the market and the
performance of the site.
Kim believes the things that really- help a community to start attracting developers are:
• providing available sites
• having political support for the long haul of a project
• having a clear consensus of the community and establishing the goal posts up front
• if the building design approvals can be nudged or negotiated
• knowing.chat the market is. Form follows parking—if we're changing our code to have no
required minimum parking, there -%vill still be a minimum amount of parking that a lender
-,till require a developer to have for them to feel comfortable that people will actually buy or
rent units. .k1so, if the market isn't favorable at the time, you can resize the project or wait
until later to do it.
• having an experienced team
Questions from Commissioners:
• Are there any suggestions for wars to pair existing land holders with developers in terms of
khat the Cin-'s role would bet ;-I getieral publii itilbi7natioti session about amilable sileii-ould be a
double-edged nvord. Det-elopers are lookiirg�or arwilable niter, 177/1 111 'waid to be the otiJ'OireS rvho knuty.
CCAC:Meeting Minute, for October 3,3010 Page 5 of 8
sop'/11-Cli'alion of prYlJ oll ownei-s it a lnln to dor l/wviakl/n dereloper.r airan,of ibha.l'i ill tow/1 and uJelber
or not Illej'illi'good det'elr)pnit,nl purtnel.i(nlalUe.rotneolleFlit'cliouJd lle lbe rlereioptmnt pYu'Ji1:vy. IJ tt�c'
market it coming back der'eloper.r,will slarl talking to lnikr.
• him noted that having information available about our rental vacancy rate and if there's a
need for more rental units is a good idea. It might get the developers' attention and then
they could decide what they need to know about a community- and start to do their own
research. Real estate information can become stale quickly. but if you have a list of
developable sites and property- owners who are interested in talking to developers, that list
might be useful.
• Is the word infill a good or bad word to use when promoting a piece of properry,, Kim think.c
Me word inti ii i.t ler; comfortable 16rdovelopers wbo understand the d)•nai.?mW o0bat lbnrcl The c onvnunil)
needs to tnlderrtaltrl lhin,g , such as parkitiS demand bein dependent upon prof, iiritls in Ilse I olb/ltown,
more people sh/ppittg in the:toies. and more people u-bo nla)'be 1l rin6gparkil s.��paces. ,'Is all ei'ononli"
derelopment tool', Thep need to understand the economic'iltlpaas of 1.000 lvore people tll'ul�ill Dolt'lnolbli.
• him advised that she uses the phrase "brain damage" to describe how much effort can go
into a project. For example, there are fi different types of buildings at the North Main
Village project. The affordable housing apartment project had 9 layers of public money
involved with it. Dealing with all the requirements of so many public agencies is a lot of
work. In addition, the developer had to deal with a new type of construction for flats over
the garages and getting adjustments for setbacks; plus, the Cin- of Milvaukie had to clean up
an adjacent park in anticipation of the project.
• For projects that are going to "die 9 times along the wad-," Commissioner Hughes asked
what the right time would be to start the process. V"hat continues to bring developers back
to re-start a project? Kiel adlised that there are dijferrnt kinds of models. The kind.rhes%leen mart!)'
int oiled with are oiler where 1l.1e pir%clic sector bas 7ight-.fi1ed itr fmtrl-end laadirigof the pmlect, so they Ire
read} when the developer onnler in. Tlie soolrer).ori can get a delvloper to .?tart spelydirJg mono)'on a project,
the sooner the) '//be committed to the prnjecd.
• What do you see as necessary for Tigard to delve into or stud- before we become an obvious
hidden secret% We have to plan it before they come, but we also have to have the form.
V"hat can we do as the City to make ourselves more attractive; The hard parr about timing.for
Me.'I orlh.Hain I rll age p/rljeed was the market. The)-were poised to do the second pmtect and their the
market weir)alba). There'?sonlethiiig about `•repluability the leadership pmi-ided b)'the public se,-In r,.,nd
the inrestnient.+heed to be done in such a na)'that the)'can be done maul with less el?nrl. Kiel alro thinks it
llel'di 10 l'Onle «1117 a holt Itl07t dep1l7 in li/1dL'rrtandln,g holy retail works. That eap.,'1dire nla)'or nl.)'1101 be
to the eoivvitnll)-jel. Businesses In ll th
p,be in Downt wn now because the)"can a#iml to be. T be} mcl) not
be able to a(Jnril to pq)'the m/1t regirirrd ol'a neu'blitlding. �)'t/tg.riare Jit9111 tnlpr�71'en1e11J.;with.rOltle
business derelopmenl work.is one thing that could slam building the capacity of the retail community. Kim
thinks its agood thing for the public.rector to inresi in land and make it available. The public age/Ic7'/leeilr
to understand its role in tbal process.
• Is there a momentum issue or momentum timing? For example, Burnham Street is a
momentum building project. We have 2 corners that«-ill be completed and we «till have a
wall before the green street. Is there something that should be happening in 2011 that
would position 'Tigard for that% There's away to do.rove focused co/zfdenlial deleloper inteniewr.
CCAC aleedng:Minutes for October 3,2010 Page 6 of 8
1 ou pan show teem.ioirre site..-in the Downtown and;k7el solve feedback about hon,.Pr aavay lbe) »ztybt be for
dereiopiq a proje,t. 1 oii<<an keep the relalionshipi,gala and alro laivi ati then Will)the Daiwntoiv/i.
• For the llihyaukie project. ho-,r far into the light rail development were you before you
started actually building the development- I1ghl rail wa n l et'en belly lai;i ed above lrhen lbe C.ily'of
,�lilwcrrlkic'piir�{used,`i, property. IJ u':i a lrnalit.Sofelvul in their douirtou�ii. The_)pun a ed it to inrest
in lbeir downtown;it pre.rded 4,ahl rail dismssion.r.
• Have you run across mixed-use developments that have had a problem getting started
because of their location near light rail and people not wanting to lire next to it? \'ot ieu;t;.
Ki ;::a.i been more ini ih'ed will)light rail from the ]B'''edside line on. The upurbr/enl dereloperi in That arra
scnv;iii i niii'ar a .'abie, baa he belieres it's more raluable to be a block awa) firth/ ligbl rail rather than
i7;l+t n.-�7 to it. I here��rr:rn the belie%thd1,�17/iiiill fIUOY rt'.ildc'lllteJ/1f/Illi neerl+a l.�it o)�eparifioit from tiir�
kind of"b1q)-sln et. Tlul'i whi there'.;ground floor retail or ground floor o#il-e use in a lot of mated-lase
p/rrje�ts: .She believes the thin that was most rletiianentul arou/rd light rail was when people thorrsht/,,/) rail
would support llle retail on ils own. It'a n'tail itse was onil Aiq light rail and did not bale a lot of"ado or
pedestrian truffi,-going by, it didn't do well.
•
Are there good developer teams out there that might be interested in what,,we're doing% Sean
knoiui lhelll because he kaon ivho.f buillproje.is around lbe area. The deieloperi are known;thq-'re the
people lhal.Weliv bar on their sample proje,-1s li.il. Sean Mated that eve re been ti7'ilig to find tbose developers
b} loin; Derelopnient Upporlunh)y Studies.
him distributed information sheets on the .Arbor Vista Condominiums, the County Librarn• Nlixed
Use Buildings, and the Belmont Dairy (Exhibit C).
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes):
AGENDA ITEM #6: :Albany and \lihvaukie Field Trip Report
Important Discussion and/or Comments:
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): This agenda item gill be discussed at a future meeting.
AGENDA ITEM #7: Executive Session
Important Discussion and/or Comments: The Commissioners went into Executive Session at
8:33 p.m. to discuss confidential real estate opportunities in the Downtown. The regular meeting
reconvened at 8:54 p.m.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes):
AGENDA ITEM #8: Other Business
CCAC Meeting Minutes for October 3,2010 Page 7 of 8
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Scan advised the Commissioners that applications
for upcoming C(-.\C openings are due October 2911,. :Martha Wotig has indicated she will not be
reapplying for a position. Depending on the upcoming elections, we may have another opening.
Scan noted that the annual report will be due soon. Chair Craghead advised that last year, the draft
report was emailed to the Commissioners early so they could review it before the November
meeting. It was then approved at the regular meeting.
It was advised that elections for the CC_lC Chair and Vice Chair-vvill be coming up in lanuan.
Commissioners should think about-,x-ho, they would like to nominate.
Commissioner Shearer announced that_John Gorlonvulu, one of the St. _lnthony's parishioners, has
recently been appointed as one of President Obama's economic advisors.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The draft of the annual report will be emailed to the
Commissioners for their review prior to the November meeting.
AGENDA ITEM #9: Adjournment
Important Discussion and/or Comments:
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m.
\-- crree-I
} .ewJs, CC kC Secretary
ATTEST-
Chair.Alexander Craghead
CCAC Fleeting Minutes for October 3,2010 Page 8 of 8
DOWNTOWN TIGARD
PARKING ANALYSIS
CCAC PRESENTATION
OCTOBER 13, 2010
PRESENTED BY
ALAN SNOOK,AICP
OKS Associates
Parking Management Strategies
AGENDA
Overview of Existing Conditions 10 minutes
Parking Management Strategies 15 minutes
Next Steps 5 minutes
viai �► .
vv�
r � r� � � ♦ �������!' ,�k � 1
P O N O.
Utilization' S. -
Off-street Parking
.jINY III A',
had&'
SAIUMAr
On street higher
17c
utilization
3
O
South of tracks has
i° higher utilization
Time of Day
North 42% 35%
On-street Parking
South 70% 52%
f nday:
SAturda,
Park-and-ride
w
at... about 45% utilized
ltt;♦
).o
Time of Day
Block Face A Block Face C O lom6 Block Face E
loa — _._._._..._.._._, lom6 O Block Face G
yo.6
60% 8011.
10% 1801Y.
501/. - _...__--- ._. b0°.'•
0'6 ---- - - - - - _ - 4s0!, s0°:
4 _---_�-�-t-�. ---- --
_ 401,i30% 4C6
10%
4011,
act
F' 7
P '
Block Face B O Block Face D Block Face F Block Face H O
1 oma .—._.._----.�— 1°o''a 100%
80%
60% 60%70% t 60% eov,
50% 50% °0% — W/.40% 40%FE -
- - - -- -
ami 201/6 - A 10%0% 40-6 40%
201/6 20%
10%
- -.. —
IM 10 zo%
0%
Saturday
Average duration of stay 1 hr– 13 min 1 hr–5 min 1 hr–5 min
Turnover Rate 7.46 8.44 8.26
Number of Violators 23 18 17
%of Violators 10% 6.4% £4.1
0 =Total number of violators over the day
CLARITY of SYSTEM
?ARALCEt
mK(H6
Make the system easier to understand 0WLY
fm-
04M.w
Walkable environment/Pedestrian scale DAYS
P TC1041 Y �IICU
Connectivity that makes sense 1
r10Y� 10AM 4P*
4� UL 9W5
"Defined" roadway
Clear signage ,_ �� r� Parkii!o
Striping
CD
Information _
O _
maw
` - 0 M L I A N C F
CC„„,•
' The �orkmq'..
Educationel
Downtown Merchants
Signage Invite You to Explore. . .
Enforcement
Shops, Boutiques, Eateries
Designated parking ,
Employee
Parking
ing
HR ..
PARKING
9-.00AM .._
5.00 PM -
r
MON-PR 1
BEYOND ibis POINT
On Srreer Parkin; "D
f i Regulations
Using/designating currently
underutilized areas
Shared parking use
Promote alternative modes
r
4 `
t
y / f
J
► �� ,1
D. OPTIMIZE FUTURE PARKIN
Code modifications
Fee-in-lieu of
Shared accessory parking
Create Public off-street Parking - 17
Parking pricing _ - - -
44
I f
j a
NEXT STEPS
Evaluate street design alternatives
Identify parking impacts
Develop mitigation strategies
Identify preferred alternative
Tigard
Joint Development
Presentation
Prepared by:
Shiels Obletz Johnsen
for
Tigard City Center Advisory Commission
October 13, 2010
Tigard JointDevelopment
Presentation
Purpose :
Further CCAC knowledge of development
process
Review some options for public- private
development partnerships
♦gyp T
Development Partnerships
► I . Tigard Development Framework
► II . Development Risk
► III . Relevant Projects
► IV. Successful Development
► V. Managing Development Risk
I . Tigard Development Framework
Plans and Policies
■ Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (2005)
■ City Center Urban Renewal Plan (2005)
■ Tigard Downtown Streetscape Plan (2oo6)
■ Development Strategy for Downtown Tigard (2007)
■ Fanno Creek Park and Plaza Master Plan (2oo8)
■ Tigard Downtown Future Vision (Zoog)
■ Downtown Code Update (2010)
■ Downtown Tigard Parking Analysis (2010)
. Capital Improvement Plan (201-0 - 203-5)
qy
x,
I . Tigard Development Framework
Public Projects and Programs
■ Urban Renewal voter approval
■ Burnham Street Improvements
J
■ Main Street Green Street Project
■ Facade Improvement Program
■ 99 W/Hall/Greenburg Intersection Improvements
II . Development Risk
■ Political Environment
■ Community Consensus
■ Building Design Approvals
■ Site
■ Lenders
Y _ e
III . Relevant Projects
North Main Village
fits _
� e i
� OhA- ,
T •,f
`...
.n .
III . Relevant Projects
ArborVista Condominiumsout
J� Y
1�
M . Relevant Projects
Hollywood L •
r
� 6
�3�
Relevant Projects
Belmont D . � � .
K
IV. Successful Development
Element of Successful Mixed Use Development
Projects
■ Good Site(s)
■ Manageable Risk
■ Financial Feasibility/Incentives
■ Experienced Team
■ Good Deal
IV. Successful Development
Good Sites
■ Size
■ Scale
■ Access
■ Orientation to allow active,
pedestrian-oriented ground floor
_ s3
IV. Successful Development
Managing Risks
■ Adopted development policies and plans —
recently vetted with the public
■ Development code assessment
■ Clear site-specific development goals
■ Community representation in process
IV. Successful Development
Financial Feasibility/Incentives
■ Proforma matches market conditions
■ Program assumptions are reasonable
■ Market support
■ Public financial sources
t
'ti
IV. Successful Development
Development Team Members
■ Developer
■ Arch itect/Desig n Team
■ Lender
■ Contractor
■ Building Lease/Sales
■ Building Management
TM's'.'>°�• � ,
IV. Successful development
Good Deal
■ Building Program/Scale/Terms
■ Public Return on Investment
■ Agreements
• Letter of Intent
• Pre-Development Agreement
• Development Agreement
V. Managing pDevel ® resent Risk
■ Site availability
■ Political support for the long haul
■ Community consensus
■ Building design approvals
■ The Market
■ The Team
..t
tln
Nrw d.And-
Questions? t w dwalkt
NewK.vd Use
, .. .—Upland Park
- r
Rc
Nrw Ion m g
'•1
l urk Ar.nvAndar-
yis
Y
�;. nlffpNliw Panl
N�Yv Kron dwnlY•. -"Fnlranta iaeture
Pqa rYuc t
Awn
lower rk
WMIAnd ! Mt..
1.r.tWnu•mrr r Arra i. Not'
Naw YoardWlJk:
Pq»rniN
'VfMh.fiI AiliyNAxr A— _
\..grlotated 9rMga
,Upgr Adfr -flew Bodge
Cntunca
11'Nag.o ITud
O.b—Puma
I♦ r
n
ti
T
Upgrade
New Brtdg Ent,.Ace
Nrw HnardwAlk
tt 1
G X• L
CondominiumsATboT Vista
The Arbor Vista Condominiums are provided a second mortgage that
- r 27 for-sale units located adjacent made the unit more affordable
to the Jefferson Street tJIAX rhan it would otherwise be.Each
station in Portland's Goose Hollow homeowner purchasing below-
_'; _ neighborhood 'he project is located market units received a 10-year
i on a very constrained urban infill sire. property tax abatement on the
w^ich includes two mature historic improved value of the home
trees.and is immediately adjacent The project also broke new ground
to the Kamm House.which is on tie F' j g "end
National Register of Historic Places. in applying FTA's joint development
policy TnMet was able to provide a
TnMet.tt-e City of Portland Planning discount on the value of the property
Bureau and the Goose Hollow by demonstrating mat the fares that
Foothills League neighborhood would be generated by the new
A association formed a partnership development would provide a return
to guide development on three to the transit system
1►, r '�, 1 parcels owned by TritMet at ligt,t rail
stations the partnership created Neighborhood issues
a local development committee. The Goose Hollow local development
Location and Transit Access which hired consultants provide committee guided the project through
project management.design,market the neighborhood association g
SW Howards Way.one block evaluation and legal assistance_
southwest of the Goose Hollow/ This team then established the before selecting the developer,thus
Jefferson St.MAX Station development goals for the site. minimizing political conflict with the
neighborhood.The owner of an
At a Glance Innovative Housing.Inc.was adjacent historic building appealed
selected as the developer through a to the State Office of Historic
Site Area: 18.000 sq ft competitive bid process.TriMet was Preservation.TI-.e appeal was denied.
Total Housing Units:2 7 responsible for getting Federal Transit but it caused delays at the outset of
Administration(FTA)approval for the the project.
Density:66 units!acte joint development.
Parking Ratio: 1.05 spaces:unit The project is designed to Lessons learned
Housing Types and Sizes:une accommodate development goals The mixed-income requirements
rv,o-and thrPe-hedre,Dm units at 760 established by the committee. were not a disincentive for market-
r)2.235�q ft including: rate buyers.The project appealed
Timeline • maintaining views to and from to four distinct market tiers,rather
than a more typical two tiers,thus
November 1995:Site development adjacent properties complicating build-out of the interior
suaregy adopted • preserving historic trees finishes With so many unit plans
January 1996:Station Community • respecting the adjacent historic and sizes in such a small project,the
Plan adopted building buyer?expectation levels about unir
amenities and interior finishes varied
June 1996:RFP announced Demonstration value widely.This dynamic complicated
June 1997:[development agreement The Arbor Vista Condominiums were marketing.
signed affordable to first-time home buyers
June 1998:Building occupied at median income without public
subsidy.Approximately two-thirds
November 1998:All closings of the units were sold at market
complete rate,while the other one-third were
reserved for a special financing
program in which Innovative Housing
Chapter Piree • Transit Oriented Deve!opmerts 3-3 ,.'-i�"jl,y Ra b?--}.50..E.p?ty n
Douglas L.Ot>tetz.
Sockeye Hollywood.LLC
a 503-242-(Y,84
Loren Waxman,Sellwv000 Lofts.LLC
Mixed-Use Buildings503-223-9861,sellwoocilcfts.corr
muttcoia c•,^
The project also had to overcome private developer would receive an
Location and Transit Access concerns about Larking. unfair benefit.
Hollywood Library/ Today.a 13.000-square-foot librar v A 4.375-square-foot library opened
Bookmark Apartments occupies the ground floor of a four- as the anchor tenant,n a mixed-use
4040 NE Tillamook Street.two story mixed-use building-The ground building completed in 2002.T�,,e
blocks east of Line 75.two blocks floor also has a small retail space building includes additional retail
north of Line 12 occupied by a locaTy owned coffee space and 16 condominium units.
Sellwood-Moreland Library/ shop and a lobby for the Bookmark Residential sales prices ranged
Library Lofts Apartments The 47 residential units between$225.000 and 5850.000.
7860 SE 13th Avenue.Line 70 occupy the building's three upper Se!iwood Lofts.LLC,will continue
floors.Nineteen of the apartments to own the ground floor The library
are restricted to households at or lease is for 30 years with a 10-year
below 60%of the area median renewal option.
In 1996 Multnomah County voters income.The development includes
approved a$29 million general 37 parking spaces Lessons learned
obligation bond measure to fund Multnomah County funds and owns Public entities with space needs
the repair and renovation of library the library.Sockeye Hollywood LLC, can play a critical role in mixed-use
buildings Two projects in particular an affiliate of the Portland firm Shiels projects.Ground-floor commercial
demonstrate how public facilities can Ob!etz Johnsen Inc.,financed and space is often the most speculative
anchor neighborhoods and establish owns the housing and retail space. aspect of a mixed-use building.The
new development models. participation of a credit-worthy entity
Hollywood Library/ Sell wood-Moreland such as a county government with
Bookmark Apartments Library/Library Lofts a long-term space need can make
p all the difference.Libraries provide
The neighborhood plan for Sellwood-
Hol,ywcod is a neighborhwd Moreland m SE Portland called a particularly attractive combination
with housing,it's difficult to imagine
commercial district in NE Portland g g
for housing and locally oriented neighbor.However,rental
that has struggled to maintain its businesses and service on SE a better nei g
vitality as big-box retail and multiplex g p 131h Avenue,a commercial street housing construction costs were
theaters have made the survival of higher than typical in order to create a
the local grocery store and historic becoming dominated by antique civic quality"building.
movie house difficult.The City of shops with a regional draw.A
Portland worked with businesses brownfields factory site on SE 13th At times,the challenges of negotiating
and residents of the surroundingAvenue emerged as a possible library with private developers and taking
neighborhoods to create a plan to site.Although the original library bond on neighborhood opposition to
revitalize Hollywood.The prospect of budget was based on the expansion new development seemed beyond
a new library became an important of the library at its old location,the the mission of the library program.
piece of the plan opportunity to address multiple Without the leadership of elected
public goals caused county officia,s to officials and progressive developers.
County officials and a local consider a new building. the projects might have reverted to
development team worked closely stand-alone library projects Once
with the city planners and citizens As the development proposal began complete.both buildings have been
to take shape.the developer and extremely well-received b the
to create zoning and development eh' Y
county officials had to address neighborhood and the market--
standards for the library site that concerns about clean-up of the site.a a n the wayfor additional mixed-
for dewould maximize the opportunity former plating factory,as well as the use and higher-density development
for development while respecting size and design of the developmenC. g ty p
the site's proximity to smaller Some citizens were also concerned envisioned by local land use plans.
commercial and residential structures. that because of the budget.the
Requirements such as a setback for library would lease rather than own
upper stories and a strong pedestrian its space.They believed the library
orientation helped shape the project. might be less permanent or that the
Cnopier Tt,:ee • Trensit Oriented Dcn e'cpments 3-9 _ 3.. . So_ .,._.k P'.1---
,
Carte i�'actV
Bt pont Dai,a.,'•oi LLC
Belmont DaiTy
503-X47-GORa
ca ter2sc�x x.cc n
SQ%Yf'iX f07f
want.support transit usage and A third phase c;f the Belmont Dairy
r' offer viable commercial space The prolect.:vhich .;,fl renovate another
popular specialty grocery store and vacant warehouse into creative
lively restaurant cry the ground flrx�r !ive'work spaces. s currently in the
brought new life and much-needed ,_ .—ing stages.
services to the neighborhood
Financing
The 30 row houses construct,_-I
in Phase 2 are another model fr Phase 1 As the first major
high-quality infill development- reaevelopment of its type.the prolect
-- -- The project features pedestrian- encountered numerous barriers to
oriented streetscapes characterized traditional financing.The project
Location and Transit Access by front porches.bay windows and also had added costs and perceived
3340 SE Belmont Street !andscaped garden spaces.with risk associated with preserving and
One 15-Belmont garages tucked away in private refitting an existing building.providing
alleys The scale and design of the structured parking and achieving
At a Glance prolect respect the character of the higher densities Land improvement
old,single-family neighborhood costs for the project were$400.000.
Building Area: that surrounds it. The row house construction costs were$14 million.
Phase 1 sq ft project was completed in 1999 and Project financing came frorr a variety
Pease 2 69,nG,000 sr h demonstrates that vrith thoughtful of sources: -
Total Housing Units: and inspired design.higher
Phase ] 66 moderate-rate rental densities can be achieved without ' Bank of America construction loan
apartments(Section 42).19 market- compromising livability. • Network for Oregon Affordable
rate rental loftsHousing loan
In the words of one local banker,
Phase 2 30 owner-occupied row this model of urban redevelopment ' City of Portland Livable City
houses represents'land uses for the Housing Council loan
Parlong: 21 st century that promote the • City of Portland Community
Phase 1 102 spaces shared preservation of history,urban density. Development Block Grant loan
affordability and utilization of existing between residents and Zupan's ty g Slate Department of Environmental
customers infrastructure that provides easy Quality CMAC)grant
access to public transit.bicycle and
Phase 2 32 spaces • FNMA tax credit investment
pedestrian corridors-"
Total Commercial Space: • City of Portland Multifamily Housing
76.000 sq.ft The project is located w+chin an Tax Cred•t Bonds
established residential neighborhood
and fronts on a commercial Phase 2:This$6 million projectwas
The Belmont Dairy established a new neighborhood main street.After financed by US Bank.More than 33
standard for inner-city redevelopment sitting vacant for five years and percent of the units were pre-sold.
in Portland The first phase of the attracting squatters and graffiti.the
project reused part of a 70-year-old Belmont Dairy is now the cornerstone
former dairy building and added five and impetus for the revitalization
stories of apartments over a parking of ti-e Sunnyside Neighborhood
podium.The project recycled major and Belmont Business District The
building elements and incorporated projects have been recognized
Portland General Electric's(PGE) regionally and nationally as model
Earth Smart"building standards infill and mixed-use developments
throughout the development process. and have received various awards
When this phase was completed in including the Governor's Livability
1996 it demonstrated that projects Award.BEST Innovation Award and
of this type enhance neighborhood an Ahwanee Award.
vitality,provide housing people
Chopte.Three • 7:onst-Onented Developments 3 4 Cr L_ ,5;: rr D-
a Completeness Review
s for Boards, Commissions
and Committee Records
CITY OF TIGARD
City Center advisory Commission
Name of Board, Commission or Committee
October 13, 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.
AA Le. (�ar re,
Print Name
2,
LL, ', ---m �C21a:as
Signature
�
Date