Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/2009 - Packet City of Tigard - Planning Commission Agenda TIGARD MEETING DATE: April 6, 2009, 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard—Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m. 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:05 p.m. 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:10 p.m. 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2008-00011 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Tigard Transportation Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Incorporate Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan Recommendations REQUEST: The City is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to: 1. Update the Tigard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan; 2. Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings; 3.Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation to include language recommended by the 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee; and 4. Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A of Goal 12.2 to reflect recommended 5 lanes for Highway 99W. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: The proposal is a Comprehensive Plan text amendment it is not applicable to a specific property or group of properties. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Chapters Goal 1: Citizen Involvement; Goal 2: Land Use Planning; Goal 6: Environmental Quality; Goal 12: Transportation; Oregon Transportation Plan; Oregon Highway Plan; Regional Transportation Plan; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 11, and 12; and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12 (Transportation Planning Rule). 5.2 PUBLIC HEARING (Continued from 2-23-09) 8:10 p.m. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2008-00005 - SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT REQUIREMENTS - PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA—APRIL 6, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 2 REQUEST: To remove section 18.775.070.B.5 of the Sensitive Lands Permit requirements which reads "5. The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood;". Removal of this section would allow pathways to be installed in areas which would benefit the public's access to and educational appreciation of ecological areas. Removal of this requirement does not affect the protection of sensitive habitats or floodplain requirements. LOCATION: Citywide. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: All City Comprehensive Plan Designations. ZONE: All City Zoning Districts. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; [Goal 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 5 Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces; Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Hazards; and Goal 8 Recreational Needs]; any federal [FEMA] or state statutes or regulations found applicable; any applicable METRO regulations; [Metro Code Sections 3.07.300, Urban Growth Management Functional Plan; and Title 3, Water Quality and Flood Management]; any applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies; [Goal 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 7, Hazards; Goal 8, Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space]; and any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances [TDC 18.130, 18.380, 18.390 and 18.775]. 6. Urban Forestry Master Plan Update 9:10 p.m. 7. OTHER BUSINESS 9:45 p.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT 9:50 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA—APRIL 6, 2009 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 2 of 2 • , COMMUNITY SPAPE S R 8605 SE lake Roal,Perllaad,OH 07222•PO Bao 22100 Parllaaa 08 01269.2109 • Phase:503.084-0300 Fax:503-020-3433 ' ill PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: E-mail: lelals @sammaewspepers.shm AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION I G A R D State of Oregon, County of Washington, SS I, Charlotte Allsop, being the first duly sworn, The following will be considered by the Tigard-Planning depose and say that I am the Accounting Commission on Monday April 6. 2009 at 7:00 PM at the g Tigard Civic Center-Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Manager of The Times (serving Tigard, Oregon. Tualatin & Sherwood), a newspaper of Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public general circulation, published at Beaverton, hearing on this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of in the aforesaid county and state, as defined procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or by ORS 193.010 and 193.020, that the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060.E. The Planning Commission's review is for the purpose of making City of Tigard a recommendation to the City Council on the request. The Council will'then hold a public hearing on the request prior to Notice of Public Hearing/CPA2008-00011 making a decision. TT11268 Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division(Staff contact: Darren Wyss)at 13125 SW A copy of which is hereto annexed, was Hall Blvd.,Tigard,Oregon 97223 or by calling 503-639-4171. published in the entire issue of said newspaper for COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 1 (CPA)2008-00011 week in the following issue: LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: March 12, 2009 Tigard Transportation Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Incorporate Tigard 99W Improvement Choc( i,04-k C(1,t4,\2 and Management Plan Recommendations Charlotte Allsop (Accounting Manag r) REQUEST: The City is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to: 1. Update the Tigard Transportation System Subscribed and sworn to before me this Plan to include recommended changes found in the Tigard 99W March 12, 2009. Improvement and Management Plan; 2. Incorporate the Tigard — 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the A Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings;3.Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive A• - Plan Goal 12:Transportation to include language recommended NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OR. 4 by the 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee; and 4. Amend My commission expires —the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A of Goal 12.2 to reflect recommended 5 lanes for Highway 99W. LOCATION: Acct#10093001 Citywide. ZONE: The proposal is a Comprehensive Plan Attn: Doreen Laughlin text amendment it is not applicable to a specific property or City of Tigard group of properties. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; 13125 SW Hall Blvd Comprehensive Plan Chapters Goal 1: Citizen Involvement; Tigard, OR 97223 Goal 2: Land Use Planning; Goal 6: Environmental Quality; Goal 12: Transportation; Oregon Transportation Plan; Oregon Size: 2 x 8 Highway Plan;Regional Transportation Plan;Statewide Planning Amount Due: $133.60* Goals 1,2, 11,and 12;and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12 'Please remit to address above. (Transportation Planning Rule). Publish 03/12/2009. TT11268 • PLEASE SIGN IN HERE _ ■ Tigard Planning Commission TIGARD Agenda Item # Si I Page I of Date of Hearing Li I(o(o°� Case Number(s) C P A Z OO$ —coo 11 Case Name 1...e._ s� -k�vt .)� -e-— ),-,0C\.I,J �a(rN Location C` ��►�e� If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City,State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City,State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City, State, Zip: " City of Tigard N Y g TIGARD Memorandum To: Tigard Planning Commission From: Darren Wyss, Senior Planner T Re: CPA2008-00011Public Hearing Date: March 30, 2009 At its April 6, 2009 meeting, the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider CPA2008-00011. The Commission previously held a workshop on March 2, 2009 to discuss the proposed amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Tigard Comprehensive Plan, which originate from the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan. The purpose of this memo is to 1. Address three language changes the Commission requested at the workshop;2. Address comments received after the workshop from ODOT and Beaverton;and 3. Provide a summary recommendation and potential motion for the Commission. Planning Commission Requested change #1 Part 3 of the proposed amendment will update the list of recommended action measures (a total of 10 additions) found in Section 1 of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Transportation Chapter.The proposed amendment language was recommended by the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan Citizen Advisory Committee.The requested changes were limited to two of the recommended action measures and are as follows: 27. The City shall adopt Alternative B as contained in the Tigard 99W Plan as part of its Transportation System Plan and prioritize its recommendations. Subsequently, the City shall, in conjunction with other agencies,jurisdictions, and stakeholders, develop action plans to implement the alternative's specific project recommendations. Action plans to implement Alternative B shall include design and engineering strategies, funding measures, and stakeholder and citizen engagement. Reasonable time frames shall be associated with the action plans. Commission reasoning—to clarify what/where Alternative B is. 33. Highway 99W Action Plans shall seek to enhance the economic vitality of the corridor through transportation,aesthetic land use, and other improvements. In addition,staff resources shall be eetrmitted used to coordinate business development and retention activities, and aid in communication among the business community and city government. MEMO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 1 OF 4 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Commission reasoning— throughout the update of the Tigard Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission and City Council tried to avoid language that committed City staff or resources to programs or projects as the Comp Plan is policy focused. This requested change was to maintain consistency with the rest of the Comp Plan language. Requested change #2 The Commission requested that any reference to the 5-lanes of Highway 99W as through lanes be removed. Staff has removed the reference throughout the proposed amendments. Most references were associated with the asterisk language in Part 1 of the proposed amendment. Part 4 of the proposed amendment also made reference to through lanes and this has been removed. Commission reasoning— the reference to a 5-lane Highway 99W would include the middle, or turn, lane which is not truly a "through"lane. Removing this language eliminates the possibility for confusion. Requested change #3 The Commission debated whether the addition of the language in proposed amendments 8, 9, 23, and 24 was appropriate. The proposed amendments would add two pedestrian activated signal crossings to the Other Potential Projects list. The Commission was concerned about the impact to traffic flow from adding additional traffic signals to the Highway 99W corridor. The Commission discussed various other solutions that could make the two particular intersections more pedestrian- friendly and asked staff to look into the feasibility of these projects and alternative language that would be more flexible. Staff comment - The recommended pedestrian activated signal crossings were included to improve pedestrian connections at the two most feasible locations along the corridor at this point in time. The Regional Transportation Plan calls for full street connections no more than 530 feet apart to provide accessibility and connectivity for all modes of travel. Figure 1 below is taken from the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan and shows pedestrian crossing locations along Highway 99W. Figure 1:Exi.rtin Crossings coif Hwy 99W and Potential New Cmssing Lour;ions 1,400 1, 50 1, 800 1,000 1,63D 720 430 1,000 1,D00 2,680 I �0 630 1,0 0 1,040 650 1,70 1,3130 I I ( `+Access Availamy i2 J m i > Z in E v S 6 a 2) m c • N t ^ ~ co � N 2 c.9 -ODOT Interchange Access Area X -No New Access * -Potential New Access MEMO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 2 OF 4 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS ODOT staff also submitted comments (see Staff Report Exhibit D) that recommended the pedestrian activated signal crossings may not be the most feasible pedestrian treatment at the proposed locations. ODOT staff believes the projects are important pedestrian connections, but recommends changing the proposed amendment language (see below) to provide project flexibility. M Pedestrian Highway 99W at SW 71st Avenue Activated Signalized Crossing Enhancements* M Pedestrian Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue Activated Signalized-Crossing Enhancements* *Requires approval from State Traffic Engineer The Planning Commission may wish to consider using ODOT's recommended language change (also included in Exhibit A) or use a number of other alternatives in lieu of removing the project language completely: • Pedestrian Crossing Amenities • Pedestrian-specific Crossing • Pedestrian Crossing Infrastructure • Crosswalk • Pedestrian Crossing Project ODOT Comments (Staff Report Exhibit D) ODOT pointed out instances where an additional lane may be needed between intersections, essentially creating a sixth lane for short distances. Such a circumstance would not meet the asterisk language of"auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity" and recommended further clarification to retain flexibility. Staff comment- In a case where an auxiliary lane may need to be continuous between two intersections, to provide flexibility the Commission may wish to consider including the word function to the asterisk language below TSP figures to read: 'Highway 99117 may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capaciy, function,turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traf fic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalited intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection." MEMO 10 TI FE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 11GARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 3 OF 4 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS City of Beaverton Comments (Staff Report Exhibit C) Recommended the deleted turn lanes in proposed amendment 21 (Table 8-8 changes) should be maintained in the TSP improvements to assure the 5-lane section would handle future needs of the region. Staff comment- maintaining the flexibility within the TSP to use auxiliary turn lanes at intersections is a benefit to the community and the function of Highway 99W. After review, the Engineering Division agrees with the Beaverton comments. Circumstances have changed,mainly the design of the Hall and Greenburg intersection improvement projects, since the Tigard 99W Plan was completed. Many of the intersection improvements slated to be removed from the TSP list may need to be constructed to ensure the Hall and Greenburg improvements function at their full potential. The Engineering Division identified the projects that were originally recommended for removal,but should remain in the TSP to provide flexibility (see list below). The language in Exhibit A was adjusted accordingly.The projects will again be reevaluated during the complete update of the TSP this year. Main/Greenburg/ORE 99W Southbound Left turn lane Hall/ORE 99W Southbound right turn lane Northbound left turn lane Westbound right turn overlap ORE 217 NB Ramps/ Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7lanes ORE 99W 2"d northbound left turn lane ORE 217 SB Ramps/ 2nd northbound left turn lane ORE 99W Dartmouth/ORE 99W Retain eastbound right turn lane when ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes 68th/ORE 99W Northbound left turn lane Southbound left turn lane Change to protected left turn phasing north/south Summary Recommendation The Commission's requested changes have been incorporated into the Staff Report Exhibit A, as well as ODOT and Beaverton comments.Therefore,if the Commission finds the proposed amendment complies with the applicable review criteria and agrees with the language adjustments made to the proposed amendment since the March 2,2009 workshop, staff recommends the Planning Commission motions to: Find CPA2008-00011 complies with the applicable review criteria; and Recommends the City Council adopt the amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Tigard Comprehensive Plan as found in Exhibit A. MEMO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 200 8-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 4 OF 4 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT'S Agenda Item: '5. 1 I Iearing Date: April 6,2009 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION !PI CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: TIGARD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS TO INCORPORATE TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS FILE NO.: Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA) CPA2008-00011 APPLICANT: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 Contact: Darren Wyss OWNER: N/A PROPOSAL: The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to: 1. Update the Tigard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes identified in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W/Improvement and Management Plan; 2. Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings; 3. Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigani 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee;and 4. Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A (under Goal 12.2) to reflect recommended 5 lanes for Highway 99W through Tigard. LOCATION: Citywide (City of Tigard) ZONING DESIGNATION: All City zoning districts COMP PLAN: All City comprehensive plan designations APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Chapters Goal 1: Citizen Involvement; Goal 2: Land Use Planning; Goal 6: Environmental Quality; Goal 12: Transportation; Oregon Transportation Plan; Oregon Highway Plan; Regional Transportation Plan; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 11,and 12;and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12. STAFF REPORT I'O TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 1 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission finds this request to meet the necessary approval criteria. Therefore,staff recommends that the Planning Commission RECOMMENDS to the Tigard City Council that it amend the Tigard Transportation System Plan and the Tigard Comprehensive Plan as determined through the public hearing process. SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History Traffic congestion consistently ranked as the number one issue with Tigard citizens in three community surveys performed during the past three years. Citizens specifically identified congestion on Highway 99W as a major problem,and expressed great concern about its adverse effect on access to the Tigard Downtown area and the region as a whole.This highway carries 50,000 vehicles per day,half of which is regional through traffic. As a result, the highway is overwhelmed by the existing traffic volumes. At peak travel hours,cut-through traffic uses the City of Tigard's street system to avoid the Highway 99W traffic congestion. This often causes safety and livability issues in residential neighborhoods. In recognition of the citizen concerns regarding the heavy traffic congestion on Highway 99W, the Tigard City Council established a goal in 2005 to improve the Highway 99W corridor, and continued that goal into 2006. To develop solutions to the traffic congestion on the highway, the City applied for and received a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM)grant to develop the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan(Tigard 99W Plan). Through a planning and public involvement process, conducted with ODOT,TriMet,Metro, Washington County, and other regional partners, the project developed concept- level recommendations for transportation improvements and recommended additional interventions to meet future needs in the corridor. Development of the Tigard 99W Plan included detailed analysis of transportation needs, opportunities, and comparative evaluation of concept plan alternatives. The primary focus of the Tigard 99W Plan is identifying projects aimed at alleviating traffic congestion and improving traffic circulation within the highway corridor from Durham Road to the Interstate 5. It builds on previous studies and was developed through a planning process of four key steps: • Establish inventory of existing conditions • Analyze needs, opportunities and constraints • Develop alternative improvement concepts • Compare and evaluate alternative concepts Three alternatives were evaluated to assess the impact each would have on the transportation deficiencies in the corridor.Alternative A evaluated widening Highway 99W to seven lanes from Greenburg Rd. to Interstate 5 and Alternative C evaluated widening to seven lanes for the entire length through Tigard. Both were rejected for cost,right-of-way impacts,urban design, and quality of life concerns. The preferred alternative (Alternative B) was an access management strategy. Alternative B proposes all transportation modes be enhanced though a series of projects over the long term, including medians, access management,intersection improvements,bike, pedestrian, and transit improvements, and other off-highway improvements. The development of the Tigard 99W Plan included both public involvement and interagency coordination.A project specific Tigard citizen advisory committee (CAC) and technical advisory committee (TAC) were appointed to review and comment on the plan as it developed. In STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 2 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS addition, three open houses and citizen stakeholder interviews were held. Both the CAC and TAC recommended that Alternative B be the preferred option. The CAC also submitted certain policy-related recommendations pertaining to the future improvement and management of Highway 99W. The proposed amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) originate from the recommendations found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Plan and are intended to implement Alternative B. The CAC,TAC,and ODOT staff all recommended the City implement the suggested modifications found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Plan. The proposed amendments to the Tigard Comprehensive Plan include incorporating the CAC policy-related recommendations and rewording Goal 12.2,Policy 6.A to be consistent with the TSP. The Tigard City Council held a work session on the Tigard 99W Plan on November 20, 2007. Council discussed the recommendations and directed staff to prepare the Tigard TSP and Comprehensive Plan amendments necessary to implement the Tigard 99W Plan and bring them before the Tigard Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held a Study Session on this topic on March 2, 2009. Proposal Description The City is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to: 1. Update the Tigard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plarr, 2. Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings; 3. Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigard 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee;and 4. Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A (under Goal 12.2) to reflect recommended 5 lanes for Highway 99W. The proposed text amendments are represented as bold italics for proposed new language and stye through for proposed deleted language. Proposed graphic changes are called out and described. Part 1: Update the Tigard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan; The proposed changes are specific strikethrough and figure changes to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and are found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan. The proposed amendments reflect improvements associated with Alternative B in the Tigard 99W Plan. Many of the changes are in tables or reference illustration changes and are listed below.There are 27 proposed modifications (each amendment can be found as a separate page in Exhibit A). In summary they are: • Proposed Amendment 1 updates the Pedestrian Action Plan List along ORE 99W to include a sidewalk project scope and cost. • Proposed Amendment 2 updates the Bicycle Master Plan description of bicycle lanes south of Gaarde/McDonald to Durham Road to note that these facilities are existing, not planned. • Proposed Amendment 3 updates the Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. • Proposed Amendment 4, 5, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 26 advises that both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 200 8-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 3 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS • Proposed Amendment 6 and 20 add intersection improvements to Durham Road and SW Canterbury Lane. • Proposed Amendment 7 updates potential pedestrian projects along ORE 99W to increase project scope. • Proposed Amendments 8 and 9 add pedestrian activated signalized crossings. • Proposed Amendment 11 updates a Park and Ride location. • Proposed Amendment 10 updates plan to include existing bike lanes just north of SW Greenburg Road. • Proposed Amendment 12 updates potential transit projects to implement transit queue bypass lanes along ORE 99W at several locations. • Proposed amendments 14, 15 and 16 identify access management measures for highway 99W. • Proposed Amendment 21 updates the table to include specific projects and add project intersections. • Proposed Amendment 22, 23 and 24 updates the Pedestrian Action Plan project list funding and implementation ranking. • Proposed Amendment 25 updates the Bicycle Action Plan funding and implementation ranking. • Proposed Amendment 27 updates the City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements table to include specific projects and add projects at the several intersections. Part 2: Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings. The Transportation Planning Rule, OAR 660 Division 12,requires local jurisdictions to prepare and adopt local transportation system plans that serve as the transportation element for their comprehensive plans (OAR 660-012-0015(4)). Since the City of Tigard proposes to amend the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) based on recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan, the background information needs to be adopted by reference as findings to amend the TSP. No specific text changes are needed. Part 3: Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12:Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigard 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee. The City proposes to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan based on recommended policy-related language developed by the project's citizen advisory committee. The following 10 statements will be added to the recommended action measures found under Section 1 of the Transportation chapter. The numbering will start as indicated: • 24. Prior to implementation ofprojects associated with the Highway 99W Corridor Plan, especially those requiring additional right-of-way or affecting property access, there shall be established protocols whereby affected property owners or businesses are made aware ofpending improvements. Those that might be affected shall be informed and asked to be involved in the project development process as early as possible. 25. The City of Tigard shall state a position that alignment of the proposed I-5/Hwy 99W Connector be established as one which reduces through traffic and freight movement on Highway 99W to the greatest extent possible;and that the City shall support this position STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-IX011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 4 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS and otherwise participate in the project as an active member of the 1-5/99W Connector Steering Committee. 26. As part of the transportation management,planning and design process, the livability benefits of future Highway 99Wimprovements shall be publicly discussed and evaluated. 27. The City shall adopt Alternative B as contained in the Tigard 99W Plan as part of its Transportation System Plan and prioritize its recommendations. Subsequently, the City shall, in conjunction with other agencies,jurisdictions, and stakeholders, develop action plans to implement the alternative's specific project recommendations. Action plans to implement Alternative B shall include design and engineering strategies,funding measures, and stakeholder and citizen engagement. Reasonable time frames shall be associated with the action plans. 28. Other transportation and land development projects within the vicinity ofHighway 99W shall be evaluated to determine potential negative or positive impacts on the facility. Negative impacts shall be avoided or mitigated. Furthermore,it is important that solutions to Highway 99W problems be evaluated to assess impacts on other streets, and that negative impacts in these circumstances are avoided or mitigated and positive impacts promoted. 29. A land use planning effort shall be a priority for future City/state efforts to recreate the Highway 99W corridor. In particular, coordinated land use and transportation planning is essential to promote transit as a viable transportation option. 30. The City should be imaginative and "think outside the box"with the purpose of creating a safe, attractive, transit oriented, and vibrant urban corridor along Highway 99W. When there are obvious benefits to specific physical improvements, the City should request design exceptions from ODOT. 31. In the near term, the City and ODOT shall develop an Access Management Plan for Highway 99W. Each property identified as needing access management treatment shall be treated as unique.A one-size fits all approach should not be used. The economic vitality of businesses is important. 32. Implementing improved transit service should be an ongoing priority with the long-term objective of light rail service along the Highway 99W corridor. 'flight rail is not possible within the reasonable future, then improved bus service/tubber tired vehicles shall serve as an alternative until it is. 33. Highway 99W Action Plans shall seek to enhance the economic vitality of the corridor through transportation, aesthetic land use, and other improvements. In addition, resources shall be used to coordinate business development and retention activities, and aid in communication among the business community and city government. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011'IIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 5 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Part 4:Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A of Goal 12.2 to reflect recommended five lanes for Highway 99W. The Tigard 99 iv Management and Improvement Plan recommends amendments to the Tigard TSP to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current TSP designation to widen Highway 99W to seven lanes. To maintain consistency with the proposed TSP amendments, the City proposes to amend Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A under Goal 12.2. Although the committees recommended a five-lane maximum, staff advises that some seven lane intersection configurations may be needed for function, ingress/egress spacing, and access management. The proposed amendment includes language necessary to provide that flexibility for construction of auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, turn lanes, or access management. Goal 12.2 Trafficways Policy 6. The City shall adopt the following transportation improvement strategy in order to accommodate planned land uses in the Tigard Triangle: A. Highway 99W should . • - - . •. :• • • - - - - .interseetions—retain a 5 lane section throughout the study area, except where necessary to accommodate adjacent development impacts, spot capacity improvements, and intersection improvements. (tool box). This improvement - - . .. .. -- - • - • -- • - - - • - =- • - - - - - - - - - . . . .• STAFF REPORT'1'0'I7IE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 6 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS SECTION IV. SUMMARY OF REPORT Applicable criteria,findings and conclusions • Tigard Community Development Code o Chapter 18.380 o Chapter 18.390 • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies o Goal 1: Citizen Involvement o Goal 2: Land Use Planning o Goal 6: Environmental Quality o Goal 12: Transportation • Regional Transportation Plan • Statewide Planning Goals o Goals 1,2, 11,and 12. • Oregon Transportation Plan • Oregon Highway Plan • OAR 660-12 (Transportation Planning Rule) City Department and outside agency comments SECTION V. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES. Chapter 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments Chapter 18.380.020 Legislative Amendments to the Title and Map A. Legislative amendments. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.309.060.G. Findings: The proposed amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and the Tigard Comprehensive Plan establish policy to be applied generally to Highway 99W within the Tigard city limits; and therefore, the application is being processed as a Type IV procedure, Legislative Amendment, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with TCDC Chapter 18.380.020. Chapter 18.390: Decision-Making Procedures Chapter 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures B.4 Type IV Procedure Defined. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision,or large-scale implementation of public policy. Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council. Findings: The proposed amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and the Tigard Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as detailed in Section 18.390.060.G. In accordance with this section, the amendments will initially be considered by the Planning Commission with City Council making the final decision. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with TCDC Chapter 18.390.020. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 7 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Chapter 18.390.060.G. Decision-making considerations. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3. Any applicable Metro regulations; 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Findings: As indicated pursuant to the findings and conclusions that address applicable Statewide Planning Goals, the Oregon Transportation Plan, the Oregon Highway Plan, the Regional Transportation Plan, and the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule, the amendment is consistent with this criterion. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings,the application complies with TCDC Chapter 18.390.060 Conclusion(s): Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable review criteria within the Tigard Community Development Code. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: Goal 1 Citizen Involvement Goal 1.1. Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. Policy 2. The City shall define and publicize an appropriate role for citizens in each phase of the land use planning process. Findings: The proposal has complied with all notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 18.390.060 of the Tigard Community Development Code. This staff report was also available seven days in advance of the hearing pursuant to Chapter 18.390.070.E.b of the Tigard Community Development Code. Additionally, a Public Involvement Program for the development of the Tigard 99W Plan was developed as part of the scope of work.The Program outlined the information,outreach methods, and involvement opportunities available to the citizens during the process. Information was distributed throughout the process via Cityscape articles, press releases, articles in the local paper, and three project open houses. Outreach methods also included stakeholder interviews and a survey sent to property owners and businesses located along Highway 99W. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, public notice of this Planning Commission public hearing was sent to the interested parties list and published in the March 12, 2009 issue of The Tigard Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.1,Policy 2. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 8 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Policy 3. The City shall establish special citizen advisory boards and committees to provide input to the City Council, Planning Commission, and City staff Findings: Through Resolution 06-65, the Tigard City Council established a citizen advisory committee (CAC) to review and provide input throughout the Tigard 99W Plan process. The CAC represented community perspective regarding the needs, opportunities, and constraints for improving Highway 99W as part of the City of Tigard. Ultimately, the CAC recommended that Council amend the City's TSP to include the recommendation found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan. The CAC also developed 10 recommendations pertaining to the future of Highway 99W. The recommendations are included in the amendment as additional recommended action measures to be adopted into the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.1, Policy 3. Policy 5. The opportunities for citizen involvement provided by the City shall be appropriate to the scale of the planning effort and shall involve a broad cross-section of the community. Findings: As outlined above, the community was given multiple venues to get information and get involved. This included a number of articles in the Cityscape newsletter that is delivered to every household in Tigard, opportunities to attend three project open houses, and participate in stakeholder interviews and surveys. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.1, Policy 5. Goal 1.2. Ensure all citizens have access to: A. opportunities to communicate directly to the City;and B. information on issues in an understandable form. Policy 1. The City shall ensure pertinent information is readily accessible to the community and presented in such a manner that even technical information is easy to understand. Findings: Information regarding the topics included in this Comprehensive Plan Amendment was available in multiple locations in an understandable format for the duration of the process. This included paper and electronic copies that were available in the permit center and on the City's website. Information was regularly sent to the project committee members, to the community volunteers, and to the City's website. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.2,Policy 1. Policy 2. The City shall utilize such communication methods as mailings,posters, newsletters, the internet, and any other available media to promote citizen involvement and continue to evaluate the effectiveness of methods used. Findings: As described above, project information was distributed throughout the process via Cityscape articles, press releases, articles in the local paper, and three project open houses. Outreach methods also included stakeholder interviews and a survey sent to property owners and businesses located along Highway 99W. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2(08-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 9 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.2, Policy 2. Policy 5. The City shall seek citizen participation and input through collaboration with community organizations,interest groups, and individuals in addition to City sponsored boards and committees. Findings:Through Resolution 06-65, the Tigard City Council established a citizen advisory committee (CAC) to review and provide input throughout the Tigard 99W Plan process. The CAC represented community perspective (business owners,Chamber of Commerce,neighborhood representatives, specific modal interests such as transit and bicycles) regarding the needs, opportunities, and constraints for improving Highway 99W as part of the City of Tigard. The City also established a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) specific to this project to provide input throughout the process. The TAC represented ODOT,Metro,TriMet,DLCD, King City,Washington County,Tualatin Fire Valley and Rescue,and the City of Tigard Planning and Engineering Divisions. In addition, three project open houses,stakeholder interviews, and a survey sent to property owners and businesses located along Highway 99W provided opportunities for citizen participation.This policy is satisfied. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 1.2, Policy 5. Goal 2:Land Use Planning Goal 2.1. Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan,implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use program. Policy 1. The City's land use program shall establish a clear policy direction, comply with state and regional requirements, and serve its citizens'own interests. Findings:The existing Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) and Tigard Comprehensive Plan have been found through the following analysis to be in compliance with state and regional requirements. The TSP has been prepared in accordance with the Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-12) and is consistent with the Regional Transportation System Plan. The Tigard 99W Plan was developed in recognition of citizen concerns regarding traffic congestion on Highway 99W and the need to resolve congestion and safety problems. A series of recommendations were made to establish the desired future direction of traffic management on 99W. The proposed amendments to the TSP and Comprehensive Plan will adopt the policy direction found in Alternative B of the Tigard 99W Plan. The Tigard 99W Plan and proposed amendments were developed in coordination with state and regional partners and will maintain compliance with their requirements. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 2.1, Policy 1. Policy 2. The City's land use regulations, related plans, and implementing actions shall be consistent with and implement its Comprehensive Plan. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 10 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Findings: The proposed amendments will continue to support the existing land uses future development potential in the City of Tigard by helping to provide a more efficient and safe transportation system. Furthermore, the following analysis has proven that the application is consistent with and implements the Tigard Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 2.1, Policy 2. Policy 3. The City shall coordinate the adoption, amendment, and implementation of its land use program with other potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. Findings: The City established a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) specific to the development of the Tigard 99W Plan to provide input throughout the process. The TAC represented ODOT, Metro, TriMet, DLCD, King City,Washington County,and Tualatin Fire Valley and Rescue.The City sent out request for comments on the proposed amendment to all potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. All were given 14 days to respond. Any comments that were received are addressed in Section VII: Outside Agency Comments of this Staff Report. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 2.1,Policy 3. Policy 20. The City shall periodically review and,if necessary, update its Comprehensive Plan and regulatory maps and implementing measures to ensure they are current and responsive to community needs,provide reliable information, and conform to applicable state law, administrative rules, and regional requirements. Findings: The Tigard 99W Plan was developed to evaluate alternatives that address citizen concerns regarding the heavy traffic congestion on Highway 99W. The primary intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure the Comprehensive Plan remains a viable tool for decision-makers and reflects current community conditions and values.Through the planning process, discoveries about changed conditions led to recommendations for updates to the TSP. Discoveries include the Highway 217 overpass and railroad right-of-way overpass will never be widened to 7 lanes. Analysis has also shown,and the City recognizes, that latent demand will eat up any capacity improvements. There is also a lack of funding for large scale capacity improvements. The City also recognizes the need for transit to support compact, efficient development along the Highway 99W corridor. By updating the TSP and Comprehensive Plan, the City will be relying on current information and remain in compliance with applicable laws,rules, regulations, plans, and programs. Findings of conformance to applicable state and regional requirements can be found in Section V of this Staff Report. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 2.1, Policy 20. Goal 6: Environmental Quality Goal 6.1. Reduce air pollution and improve air quality in the community and region. Policy 5. The City shall cooperate with other public agencies to minimize localized transportation impacts to air quality through intersection improvements, access management, intelligent transportation systems, etc. S'T'AFF REPORT TO TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 11 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Findings:The development of the Tigard 99W Plan was completed with input from regional partners. The intent of the proposed amendments are to implement the Tigard 99W Plan's Alternative B,which proposes all transportation modes be enhanced though a series of projects over the long term,including medians,access management,intersection improvements, parallel roadway connections, and other off- highway improvements.The proposed amendments also lay the ground work for efficiency of movement along the highway corridor and minimizing impacts to air quality through increasing the scope of pedestrian and bike projects and supporting transit improvements along the highway. The proposed amendments will make more efficient use of the Hwy 99W infrastructure. Conclusion; Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 6.1,Policy 5. Goal 12:Transportation Goal 12.1. Transportation System Policy 1. Plan, design, and construct transportation facilities in a manner which enhances the livability of Tigard by: A. Proper location and design of transportation facilities. B. Encouraging pedestrian accessibility by providing safe, secure and desirable pedestrian routes. Findings: The proposed amendments increase the scope for pedestrian and bike projects (proposed amendments 1,2, 3, 7, 8,and 9) and support transit improvements along the highway (proposed amendments 11 and 12).The proposed amendments will continue to enhance the livability of Tigard by addressing congestion issues through access management (proposed amendments 14, 15, and 16), intersection improvements (proposed amendments 6, 20,and 21),and alternative transportation improvements (proposed amendments 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16,20, and 21). The proposed amendments were formulated based upon evaluations and modeling to balance capacity, safety, funding priorities, and alternative transportation use. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12.1, Policy 1. Policy 2. Provide a balanced transportation system, incorporating all modes of transportation (including motor vehicle, bicycle,pedestrian, transit and other modes) by: C. Construction of bicycle lanes on all arterials and collectors within Tigard consistent with the bicycle master plan.All schools,parks,public facilities, and retail areas shall strive to have direct access to a bikeway. D. Construction of sidewalks on all streets in Tigard.All schools,parks,public facilities, and retail areas shall strive to have direct access to a bikeway. Findings: The proposed amendments increase the scope for pedestrian and bike projects (proposed amendments 1,2, 3,7, 8,and 9). The amendments call for bicycle lanes and sidewalks along the entire length of the Highway 99W corridor through Tigard. Sidewalk infill projects added to the TSP pedestrian component will help to ensure pedestrian safety along the corridor. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12.1,Policy 2. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 12 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Policy 7. Implement the Transportation System Plan (TSP)in a coordinated manner. By coordinating and cooperating with adjacent agencies (including Washington County, Beaverton, Tualatin, Lake Oswego, City of Portland, Tri-Met, Metro and ODOT) when necessary to develop transportation projects which benefit the region as a whole in addition to the City of Tigard. Findings: The City of Tigard has an adopted TSP that is consistent with OAR 660-12 (Transportation Planning Rule). The proposed amendments are derived from the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan. The development of the Tigard 99W Plan was funded by the ODOT Transportation and Growth Management Program and included participation from regional and state partners. Both ODOT and Metro support the proposed amendments to improve traffic conditions on Highway 99W. The intent of the proposed amendments are to implement the Tigard 99W Plan's Alternative B,which proposes all transportation modes be enhanced though a series of projects over the long term,including medians, access management,intersection improvements, parallel roadway connections, and other off- highway improvements. The proposed amendments also increase the scope for pedestrian and bike projects along the highway.The proposed amendments will make more efficient use of the Hwy 99W infrastructure and benefit the region and community,which is consistent with this policy. Additionally, the City sent out request for comments on the proposed amendment to all potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies. All were given 14 days to respond. Any comments that were received are addressed in Section VII: Outside Agency Comments of this Staff Report. This policy is satisfied. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12.1, Policy 7. Conclusion(s): Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed amendment satisfies the applicable policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO REGULATIONS: Regional Transportation System Plan Sets the policies, systems and actions to adequately serve walking, bicycling, driving, use of transit and national and international freight movement in this region consistent with federal and state requirements. Findings: According to the RTP, latent travel demand in the Highway 99W corridor is too great to be reasonably offset solely by capacity projects. While the RTP proposed new capacity on 99W between I-5 and Greenburg Road,anticipated to be seven lanes by 2025, no specific capacity projects are proposed south of Greenburg Road. However, due to latent demand, Highway 99W is not expected to meet the region's motor vehicle level of service policies during mid-day and peak demand periods in the future, and an alternative approach to managing and accommodating traffic in the corridor is needed. The RTP concluded that more emphasis on demand management, access management, local street connectivity and congestion management is needed to address congestion in the Highway 99W corridor. The proposed amendments adhere to the recommendations in the RTP for alternative approaches, other than capacity projects, to managing and accommodating traffic in the corridor. However, the proposed amendments will adjust the recommended width of the portion of the corridor between Greenburg Rd and Interstate 5 as five-lanes and an adjustment to the RTP will need to be made during its current update. The City must ensure the RTP reflects the City's plan for Highway 99W. ODOT and Metro STAFF REPORT TO'17-IL PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-(X)0t1 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT I'AGE 13 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PI.AN AMENDMENTS staff are aware of the needed change and Tigard staff will collaborate on ensuring the adjustment is made. The proposed amendments will implement the Tigard 99W Plan's recommended Alternative B ,which proposes all transportation modes be enhanced though a series of projects over the long term,including medians,access management,intersection improvements,parallel roadway connections, and other off- highway improvements. This alternative supports the RTP's conclusion of access and congestion management and general area planning. The proposed amendments are consistent with the RTP. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with the Regional Transportation System Plan. Conclusion(s): Based upon the analysis above,staff finds the proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable Metro regulations. APPLICABLE STATEWIDE LAND USE PLANNING GOALS Statewide Planning Goals Statewide Planning Goal 1—Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. Findings: A Public Involvement Program for the creation of the Tigard 99W Plan was developed as part of the scope of work. The Program outlined the information, outreach methods, and involvement opportunities available to the citizens during the process. Information was distributed throughout the process via Cityscape articles, press releases, articles in the local paper, and three project open houses. Outreach methods also included stakeholder interviews and a survey sent to property owners and businesses located along Highway 99W. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, public notice of this Planning Commission public hearing was sent to the interested parties list and published in the March 12, 2009 issue of The Tigard Times. Notice will be published again prior to the City Council public hearing. The notice invited public input and included the phone number of a contact person to answer questions. The notice also included the address of the City's webpage where the entire draft of the text changes could be viewed. The public hearings will be conducted pursuant to Oregon statutory requirements to ensure testimony pertaining to this matter is presented in a manner that allows it to be included as part of the evidentiary record. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Statewide Planning Goal 1. Statewide Planning Goal 2—Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. Findings: The proposed amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Comprehensive Plan are being processed as a Type IV procedure,which requires that it be consistent with any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations,Metro regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City implementing ordinances. Notice was provided to DLCD 45 days prior to the first STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 14 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS scheduled public hearing as required.All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Statewide Planning Goal 11-Public Facilities and Services The goal requires planning and development of a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for development. Required public facilities and services are to be provided at levels necessary and suitable for existing uses. Findings: The proposed amendments support the efficient arrangement of transportation facilities along Highway 99W. The Oregon Department of Transportation and Metro both were involved in the development of the Tigard 9911%Plan and support the proposed amendments. The proposed amendments are intended to enhance all transportation modes though a series of projects over the long term, including medians,access management, intersection improvements,parallel roadway connections, and other off-highway improvements.The proposed amendments will ensure transportation facilities are provided at levels along Highway 99W necessary and suitable for existing uses. Following amendment adoption, any necessary changes will be made to the Public Facilities Plan to reflect changes in any identified capital improvement projects. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Statewide Planning Goal 11. Statewide Planning Goal 12- Transportation: The goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system."It asks for communities to address the needs of the "transportation disadvantaged." Findings: The existing Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) has been prepared in accordance with the Statewide Planning Goals and requirements and will result in a less congested, safer,multi-modal, and more orderly transportation system.Tigard's TSP is consistent with the RTP and has been reviewed by ODOT,Metro and DLCD for consistency with Statewide Planning Goal 12. The proposed amendments refine the TSP to reflect existing conditions,increase project scope for pedestrian and bike projects,encourage access management,and enhance intersection safety to address congestion issues on Highway 99W. The Transportation Planning Rule, OAR.660 Division 12, requires local jurisdictions to prepare and adopt local transportation system plans that serve as the transportation element for their comprehensive plans (OAR 660-012-0015(4)). Since the City of Tigard proposes to amend the Tigard Transportation System Plan(TSP) based on recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan, the background information will be adopted by reference as findings to amend the TSP. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with Statewide Planning Goal 12. Conclusion(s): Based upon the analysis above, staff finds the proposed amendments are consistent with the Statewide Land Use Planning Goals. APPLICABLE STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION GUIDELINES STAFF REPORT TO TUE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 15 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT I'LAN AMENDMENTS Oregon Transportation Plan The goal is a safe, efficient and sustainable transportation system that enhances Oregon's quality oflife and economic vitality. Findings: The Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) is the state's long-range multimodal transportation plan for Oregon's airports,bicycle and pedestrian facilities,highways and roadways,pipelines,ports and waterway facilities,public transportation,and railroads. It is a comprehensive,25-year plan for the transportation system to provide economic efficiency,orderly economic development, safety and environmental quality. Required by Oregon and federal statutes, the OTP guides development and investment in the transportation system. The existing Tigard TSP has been prepared in accordance with the Statewide Planning Goals and other applicable Plans, statutes and regulations. Tigard's TSP has been found to be consistent with the RTP and has been reviewed by ODOT,Metro and DLCD for consistency with Statewide Planning Goal 12 and associated Plans such as the Oregon Transportation Plan. Since Highway 99W is a state-owned facility, the City of Tigard applied for and received a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant from the State of Oregon to develop solutions to the traffic congestion on Highway 99W.The result was the development of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan (Tigard 99W Plan). The proposed amendments implement the recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Plan. The proposed amendments will encourage alternative transportation modes and enhance the comprehensive transportation plan for the City by making more efficient use of the Hwy 99W infrastructure.The proposed amendments are anticipated to improve traffic flow,reduce traffic congestion,reduce traffic crash rates,and improve options for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit riders. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with the Oregon Transportation Plan. Oregon Highway Plan Defines policies and investment strategies for Oregon's state highway system for the next 20 years. It further refines the goals and policies of the Oregon Transportation Plan and is part of Oregon's Statewide Transportation Plan. Findings:The Oregon Highway Plan prioritizes major improvements to state-owned highways,including Highway 99W, to improve the efficiency of the system.The highest priority is to preserve the functionality of the existing highway system by means such as access management,local comprehensive plans, transportation demand management,improved traffic operations,and alternative modes of transportation.The second priority is to make minor improvements to existing highway facilities such as widening highway shoulders or adding auxiliary lanes, providing better access for alternative modes (e.g., bike lanes, sidewalks,and bus shelters), extending or connecting local streets, and making other off- system improvements. The third priority is to make major roadway improvements to existing highway facilities such as adding general purpose lanes and making alignment corrections to accommodate legal size vehicles.The lowest priority is to add new transportation facilities such as a new highway or bypass. The existing Tigard TSP has been prepared in accordance with the Statewide Planning Goals and other applicable Plans, statutes and regulations.Tigard's TSP has been found to be consistent with the RTP STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 16 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS and has been reviewed by ODOT,Metro and DLCD for consistency with Statewide Planning Goal 12 and associated Plans such as the Oregon Highway Plan. The proposed amendments implement the recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Plan. The proposed amendments will encourage alternative transportation modes and enhance the comprehensive transportation plan for the City by making more efficient use of the Hwy 99W infrastructure. Alternative B, the recommended alternative,proposes all transportation modes be enhanced though a series of projects over the long term,including medians, access management,intersection improvements,parallel roadway connections, and other off-highway improvements.This is consistent with the Oregon Highway Plan and the proposed amendments will promote the goals and highest priorities of the Oregon Highway Plan. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with the Oregon Highway Plan. Transportation Planning Rule: OAR 660-12 Intended to implement Statewide Planning Goal 12 by providing guidelines for local governments to demonstrate compliance with Goal 12 through their Transportation System Plans. Findings The Tigard TSP contains required elements listed as required in OAR 660-12-0020,OAR 66012-0025, 660-012-0030,660-012-0035, 660-012-0040, 660-012-0045, OAR 660-12-0050,and 660- 012-0060 complying with Statewide Planning Goal 12. The proposed amendments do not jeopardize this compliance. The proposed amendments refine the existing TSP projects and enhance its performance. Therefore, the proposed amendments are consistent with OAR 660-12. Conclusion: Based upon the above findings, the application complies with the Transportation Planning Rule. Conclusion(s): Based upon the analysis above, staff finds the proposed amendments are consistent with the Statewide Transportation Guidelines. S PAFI'REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011'11GARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 17 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF COMMENTS The City of Tigard's Engineering Division, Current Planning Division, and Long Range Planning Division were involved throughout the process, from Tigard 99W Plan development to the writing of findings. All comments have been incorporated into the Staff Report. Conclusion(s): Based on the input from various City divisions throughout the process, staff finds the proposed amendments do not interfere with the best interests of the City. SECTION VII. OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The following agencies/jurisdictions had an opportunity to review this proposal and did not respond: City of Durham City of King City City of Lake Oswego City of Portland City of Tualatin Washington County, Department of Land Use and Transportation Metro Land Use and Planning Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 1, District 2A Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District Tualatin Valley Water District Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue The following agencies/jurisdictions had an opportunity to review this proposal and had the following comments: Clean Water Services: Recommended the inclusion of any and all relevant provisions of the current intergovernmental agreement between the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services, and the relevant provisions of the current Design and Construction Standards (see Exhibit B). Findings: The proposed amendment does not reference issues relating to development, natural resources, vegetated corridors, erosion control, and preservation of wetlands or natural drainage ways. These issues, and specifically the Design and Construction Standards are not applicable. City of Beaverton: Recommended the deleted turn lanes in proposed amendment 21 (Table 8-8 changes) should be maintained in the TSP improvements to assure the 5-lane section would handle future needs of the region (see Exhibit C). Findings: Maintaining the flexibility within the TSP to use auxiliary turn lanes at intersections is a benefit to the community and the function of Highway 99W. Comments submitted by the City of Beaverton suggest intersection improvements included in Table 8-8 should be maintained and not removed as recommended by the Highway 99W Plan. The Engineering Division agrees with the Beaverton comments. Leaving the projects in the TSP will provide flexibility and the projects can be reevaluated during the complete update of the TSP this year. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 18 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 1: ODOT supports the proposed amendments. However there may be instances where an additional through lane is needed between intersections, which would not meet the "auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity". ODOT recommends further clarification to retain flexibility. ODOT also recommends proposed amendments 8 and 9 are reworded from "Pedestrian Activated Signalized Crossing" to "Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements"with an asterisk stating"requires approval from State Traffic Engineer" (see Exhibit D). Findings: Circumstances may exist where an auxiliary lane will be continuous between two intersections. City staff agrees with ODOT and have included the word function to cover this scenario. The asterisk language will now read: `Plighway 99IV may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capaciy, function,turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalised intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection." Pedestrian connectivity is also an important component of the Tigard 99W Plan. However,signalized crossings are not always feasible for Highway 99W. City staff agrees with ODOT,and the Planning Commission as expressed at its March 2,2009 workshop, that a signalized crossing may not be the best option as indicated in amendment 8 and 9 (TSP Table 5-2).The language has been re-worded for the Commission's consideration as recommended by ODOT: `Pedestrian Aetimoted-Signal Crossing Enhancements*" *Requires approval from State Traffic Engineer Conclusion(s): Based on responses, or no response, from outside agencies listed above, staff finds the proposed amendment, and the changes made based upon submitted comments, meets all requirements of these agencies and does not interfere with the best interests of the City. SECTION VIII. CONCLUSION Staff concludes that the proposed changes comply with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals, Statewide Transportation Guidelines, Metro regulations, the Tigard Comprehensive Plan,and applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Tigard City Council as determined through the public hearing process. ATTACHMENT; EXHIBIT A: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. EXHIBIT B: CLEAN WATER SERVICES COMMENTS EXHIBIT C: CITY OF BEAVERTON COMMENTS EXHIBIT D: OREGON DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, REGION 1 COMMENTS STAFF REPORT TO'Ii IF PLANNING COMMISSION CI'A 200E-(X/011 11GARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 19 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Alar" e" K ' March 30, 2009 PREPARED BY: Markus Me DA'Z'E Long Range Planning Intern 'AP/_.% :itl % A/ March 30, 2009 P OVED—Y: Ron i unch DATE Community Development Director STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA 2008-00011 TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT PAGE 20 OF 20 AND MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS Exhibit A CPA2008-00011 Proposed Amendments Part 1: Update the Tgard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan; The proposed changes are specific strikethrough and figure changes to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and are found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan.The proposed amendments reflect improvements associated with Alternative B in the Tigard 99W Plan. Many of the changes are in tables or reference illustration changes and are listed below. There are 27 proposed modifications (beginning on page 5 of this Exhibit, each amendment can be found as a separate page). In summary they are: • Proposed Amendment 1 updates the Pedestrian Action Plan List along ORE 99W to include a sidewalk project scope and cost. • Proposed Amendment 2 updates the Bicycle Master Plan description of bicycle lanes south of Gaarde/McDonald to Durham Road to note that these facilities are existing,not planned. • Proposed Amendment 3 updates the Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. • Proposed Amendment 4, 5, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 26 advises that both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. • Proposed Amendment 6 and 20 add intersection improvements to Durham Road and SW Canterbury Lane. • Proposed Amendment 7 updates potential pedestrian projects along ORE 99W to increase project scope. • Proposed Amendments 8 and 9 add pedestrian activated signalized crossings. • Proposed Amendment 11 updates a Park and Ride location. • Proposed Amendment 10 updates plan to include existing bike lanes just north of SW Greenburg Road. • Proposed Amendment 12 updates potential transit projects to implement transit queue bypass lanes along ORE 99W at several locations. • Proposed amendments 14, 15 and 16 identify access management measures for highway 99W. • Proposed Amendment 21 updates the table to include specific projects and add project intersections. • Proposed Amendment 22,23 and 24 updates the Pedestrian Action Plan project list funding and implementation ranking. • Proposed Amendment 25 updates the Bicycle Action Plan funding and implementation ranking. • Proposed Amendment 27 updates the City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements table to include specific projects and add projects at the several intersections. Part 2: Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings. The Transportation Planning Rule,OAR 660 Division 12, requires local jurisdictions to prepare and adopt local transportation system plans that serve as the transportation element for their STAFF REPORT TO'ME PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 1 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A comprehensive plans (OAR 660-012-0015(4)). Since the City of Tigard proposes to amend the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) based on recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan,the background information needs to be adopted by reference as findings to amend the TSP. No specific text changes are needed. Part 3: Update the recommended action measures for Tigani Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigard 99W/Plan Citizen Advisory Committee. The City proposes to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan based on recommended policy-related language developed by the project's citizen advisory committee. The following 10 statements will be added to the recommended action measures found under Section 1 of the Transportation chapter.The numbering will start as indicated: 24. Prior to implementation ofprojects associated with the Highway 99W Corridor Plan, especially those requiring additional right-of-way or affecting property access, there shall be established protocols whereby affected property owners or businesses are made aware ofpending improvements. Those that might be affected shall be informed and asked to be involved in the project development process as early as possible. 25. The City of Tigard shall state a position that alignment of the proposed I-5/Hwy 99W Connector be established as one which reduces through traffic and freight movement on Highway 99W to the greatest extent possible;and that the City shall support this position and otherwise participate in the project as an active member of the 1-5/99W Connector Steering Committee. 26. As part of the transportation management,planning and design process, the livability benefits of future Highway 99W improvements shall be publicly discussed and evaluated. 27. The City shall adopt Alternative B as contained in the Tigard 99W Plan as part of its Transportation System Plan and prioritize its recommendations. Subsequently, the City shall,in conjunction with other agencies,jurisdictions, and stakeholders, develop action plans to implement the alternative's specific project recommendations. Action plans to implement Alternative B shall include design and engineering strategies, funding measures, and stakeholder and citizen engagement. Reasonable time frames shall be associated with the action plans. 28. Other transportation and land development projects within the vicinity of Highway 99W shall be evaluated to determine potential negative or positive impacts on the facility. Negative impacts shall be avoided or mitigated. Furthermore, it is important that solutions to Highway 99Wproblems be evaluated to assess impacts on other streets, and that negative impacts in these circumstances are avoided or mitigated and positive impacts promoted. 29. A land use planning effort shall be a priority for future City/state efforts to recreate the Highway 99W corridor. In particular, coordinated land use and transportation planning is essential to promote transit as a viable transportation option. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 2 OF 31 CPA200 8-00011 Exhibit A 30. The City should be imaginative and "think outside the box"with the purpose of creating a safe, attractive, transit oriented, and vibrant urban corridor along Highway 99W. When there are obvious benefits to specific physical improvements, the City should request design exceptions from ODOT. 31. In the near term, the City and ODOT shall develop an Access Management Plan for Highway 99W. Each property identified as needing access management treatment shall be treated as unique.A one-size fits all approach should not be used. The economic vitality of businesses is important. 32. Implementing improved transit service should be an ongoing priority with the long- term objective oflight rail service along the Highway 99W corridor. Iflight rail is not possible within the reasonable future, then improved bus service/rubber tired vehicles shall serve as an alternative until it is. 33. Highway 99WAction Plans shall seek to enhance the economic vitality of the corridor through transportation, aesthetic land use, and other improvements. In addition, resources shall be used to coordinate business development and retention activities, and aid in communication among the business community and city government. Part 4:Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A of Goal 12.2 to reflect recommended five lanes for Highway 99W. The Tigard 99W Management and Improvement Plan recommends the Tigard TSP is amended to retain four/five lanes rather than the current TSP designation to widen Highway 99W to seven lanes. To maintain consistency with the proposed TSP amendments, the City proposes to amend Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A under Goal 12.2. Staff feels the language change is necessary to provide the flexibility for construction of auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, turn lanes, or access management. Furthermore, although the committees recommended a five-lane maximum, staff recommends that some seven lane intersection configurations may be needed for function, ingress/egress spacing, and access management. This would effectively generate four thru-lanes and up to two temporary/short duration/turn lanes for access management. Goal 12.2 Trafficways Policy 6. The City shall adopt the following transportation improvement strategy in order to accommodate planned land uses in the Tigard Triangle: A. Highway 99W should . : . -- .. :. , • - - - - . - inferseetiens-retain a 5 lane section throughout the study area, except where necessary to accommodate adjacent development impacts, spot capacity improvements, and intersection improvements. (tool box). This improvement should be constructed in the short term. In the event that widening Highway 99 to six 5 lanes plus auxiliary lanes through STAFF REPORT TO'I7-IE PLANNING COMMISSION EXIIIBITA PAGE 3 OP 31 CPA2(X)S-00011 Exhibit A deiind: The 27 proposed amendments from Part 1 are found individually beginning on the following page. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 4 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 1: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-15: Pedestrian Action Plan List— Update ORE 99W sidewalk project from "McDonald to South City Limits" to "Interstate 5 to South City Limits". Update cost from $500,000 to $800,000. Rank* Project From To Cost H North Dakota Street 121m Avenue Greenburg Road $230,000 H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard $200,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road $350,000 H Oak Street(RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80'"Avenue $500,000 H ORE 99W South City Limits $500000 Interstate 5 $800,000 M Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road $1,200,000 M Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road $300,000 M 12151 Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street $450,000 M Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72nd Avenue $250,000 M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements (RTP 6022) $6,000,000 Regional Center L Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62nd Avenue $1,000,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road $200,000 Subtotal $1-1 X800,000 $12,100,000 Sidewalks to be built with Street Improvements H Bonita Road West of 72nd Avenue 72nd Avenue $50,000 H W• alnut Street 135`"Avenue Tiedeman Avenue $570,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $620,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street $1,000,000 H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue $120,000 H Tigard Street 115th Street Main Street $350,000 H B• urnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $100,000 H F• onner Street walnut Street 121st Avenue $250,000 H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street $50,000 M 72nd Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road $1,200,000 M Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker South City Limits $670,000 Street M Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road $1,000,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road Scholls Ferry Road (E) $950,000 (W) L 7• 2nd Avenue Carman/Upper Durham Road $250,000 BoonesFry. Subtotal $7,180,000 Annual Sidewalk Program at $50,000 per year for 20 years $1,000,000 Action Plan Total $49,360,000 $19,660,000 STAFF RI•:PORT1011IF PLANNING COMMISSION I XI IIBIT A PAGE 5 OF 31 CPA2108-t04)1 I Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 2: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-15: Bicycle Master Plan. Update the description of bicycle lanes south of Gaarde/McDonald to Durham Road to note that these facilities are existing, not planned. DKS Associates A i (AI;I ‘ ) CIT .LC,A roec.e / t �If.1.t –L– .i. OREGON Vri .¢ i Transportation ill,,, 1 2_- -- •;`rt05-I- d Systems Plan ,,T. , 'tit r li ' IMISPill - *-. if! iJIIj 111 '::. ter_p_44,7. , .era.41 • 44k A r� N I .._•P tri 7r. . ..i , A/ - — s !► �-a„-.,.-w.., e 11g 'iEi!1h;ll 1 ` ta j,-;AV .11iltant 1.11ter. it jir , --, Or; i r../wirmi 411•11WAt4 I 1 ! _ \ —1 - *', wl u ----17 I- ,:1I12P: 1 r wakalk f Proposed I l;um4 ;� . `. Amendment Figure 6-2 ' f I3■ 5, yR'I BICYCLE MASTER PLAN a 1 s 11-- ,.n'` t I,'‘r-r is:; ,, ,' (Framework Option) -- ------------ STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 6 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 3: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-18: Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. Update ORE 99W bike lane improvement cost from $1,300,000 to $275,000. Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost RANK* Project From To Cost H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72"d Avenue $250,000 H Bonita Road 72"d Avenue West of 72"d Ave. $50,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $135,000 H Oak Street(RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 90`h Avenue $300,000 H 98th Avenue Murdock Stret Durham Road $275,000 H 92"d Avenue Durham Road Cook Park $270,000 H Tiedeman Avenue _ Greenburg Road Walnut Street $250,000 M 121" Avenue Walnut Street Gaarde Street $400,000 L Taylor's Ferry Road Washington Drive City Limits $500,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Rd $100,000 L O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard $275,000 L Frewing Street ORE 99W i O'Mara Street $150,000 Subtotal $2,955,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $600,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Locust Street $500,000 H Greenburg Road Hall Boulevard Cascade Avenue $300,000 H ORE 99W East City Limits South City Limits $4380,000 _ $275,000 M 72"d Avenue ORE 99W South City Limits $960,000 M Hall Boulevard Pfaffle Street Bonita Road $550,000 M Carman Drive I-5 Durham Road $200,000 M Walnut Street ORE 99W Barrows Road $1,400,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (W) Scholls Ferry Rd. (E) $900,000 L Bull Mountain Road 150`h Avenue Beef Bend Road $550,000 L Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Rd. $1,600,000 Subtotal $8',860,000 $7,835,000 Multi- Use Pathways H Hunziker Link to LO Linkage to Kruse Way Trail in Lake Oswego $500,000 M Fanno Creek Trail _ Tualatin River to City Hall, ORE 99W to Tigard $3,600,000 M Tualatin River Trail _ Adjacent to Cook Park from Powerlines to Fanno $2,600,000 M Tualatin River Crossing _ Near 108th Avenue $3,000,000 L Powerlines Corridor From Beaverton to Tualatin River Trail $2,500,000 Subtotal $12,200,000 Action Plan Total $240453-000 $22,990,000 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXI IIBIT A PAGE 7 OF 31 CPA2008-0001 I Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 4: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-25: Future Streets: Where ROW is Planned for More Than Two Lanes. Update figure to change Hwy 99W from 7 lane (red line) between Interstate 5 to Greenburg Road to 5 lane(yellow). DKS Associates /` Pt .� r l #��'-. ' ' cv.E f+ � CITY OP TTGARD f OREGON 1! h I • r 7 - . _ Transportation • ! Proposed + Systems Plan t _ Amendment --.7---r-., Legend rl Rmw1 g.„,Wy _,-,j p.IA rdl t .:. r.. I i M .4.r-r 3_,. -,,. 70,,'•-+3..' ' / lb _ 416,.Arli k NAP ' ArA, - 4 .• -,-•� ! :: 67. � ,111, 7.3.1114 II •--._.t _. v 1 ` te=a- -1 [ f__ 'y " •.. , ,y nY� - w �. n„• •.. y� ti t ,� 1:` lx r.7 fir.. �� I Lt F w.x .Nr nr 4 w..e..,`' -il �---( .Aw S\ + ` a+:c.wia_anMtw.,.�er.i.�,. r 74 f ..lour Nn.1•n 1,,.N.1 NI MN M1 I i/1 __� IYr � :_I .:Z ..e...rmenvl r.ny rxi^Mi...s n1 ' — II A --_ (;, 3---- ✓ -' _ J ; Z - R rrvw vrn•`r.Y.1. rl.., .y•,�,,.�,• 1..•r..., Li � 4 -_ I I ,,,, ,5.3.-, `a, Figure 8-11 1 1` _ r' Y ` JT� }� ' Future Streets Where ---. s, `' t� I.� Y: (( - ROW is Planned for fr". 1"' GI r, I .--,-- ti of■t,_. . ;F, 1 :'w " More Than Two Lanes] ***Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, functions turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. STAFF REPORT'1)TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 8 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 5: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-30: Street Improvement Plan (Figure). Update figure to remove 7 lane improvement along Hwy 99W from Interstate 5 to SW Greenburg Road. DKSAssociates *den W Shwas between 06266 ThdAV. It Wit. / I ...4.?!s Y_ _.._____ CITY OFTIGARD NOT TO SCALE 7A,1 AEM _RE Transportation Proposed Systems Plan Amendment 4 8 �J l 2 RI_. 6 sr r_ x Legend ffi �, - -W._R _ __- 1 ,1_sr_1- / L�©.Number of Lanes 0 FS _ _7. -FreeworWdeneg• ', 171 - �1 .Roadway o I/Mang s1-1- 'CVIrF peA II.._ 0 Q ,. I <rf i.E.__.4' �y_ Olt.Proposed Overasssn2 G 210 — __T'GArfO - 4!P� _ ^::w" r — - _ gpMOVenenl S •q -..� i S 0- _`I4, ® Ae55 fiMelCl - — � 4� µa � � ®Added Pe�sm Capacry s © ®Reserve Rip o4Way for 7 Lanes 0005' - .6/�, - -Carlo k0nmera SNOyMea I_ '99W 1 —i.. ...., _ ,_ aNatp ST I -- ''‘1 i"•: __BULL 'I 41°4/-74,N_ __--___ I F 1 ® ..._ I-.,...`RO__.—_—. — —, _ .. ® I AI( ck � OUR1µV RD o .` - . I S I 1 3 Ilef W _ 0 y r Rner A "'" ii.: �, Q 1_ Figure 8.19 4. STREET 5Isnnecta ;� WieenrnloWSev.& IMPROVEMENT PLAN _......... COM18f.'IR � +ry 0 51205a%en ORE217 d 1205 Widen to 4lanea south iv Wkonvak *Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. STAFF REPORT To THB PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 9 OF 31 CPA2008-0001 I Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 6: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-31: Intersection Improvement Locations. Update Figure 8-20 to include intersection improvements at: • [#37] ORE 99W/SW Durham Road • [#38] ORE 99W/SW Canterbury Lane DKSAssociates q ap.. CITY of 1 GARD rDa ,,ksCr W _,AO I Transportation f S i I Systems Plan © Y F. .: 2 © 2ee._ .-_i_ I el waned. ^err. .pE' © i. _ ..\ i. LocaomTArrMr 211 4' 60. 1. �. 4 4, I Ki__ 10r4f .,\\ �.e.14r _., Notr-Sahli M+r e�m+swWa�w Oe 7ole • .1, I: ti 9 r al aamekna aaxaMeunulp z.t 5 ,1'4. 61 11 1 . 14 r, are undertaken -.. f 1441 T — '' In ''%,,''' S 31 i .1 I 11'_1 •4_ I '�•3; , aox. s C 444 —. 38 t f. Li 4 4' g i I Proposed .0` R s.:ra r-..m Amendment ,35 36 00 A 'SW 77 ® ' Proposed ,' Figure 8-20 Amendment '/`` INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS STAFF REPORT TO 171E PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 10 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 7: TSP Chapter 5: Pedestrians Committee Recommendation: Page 5-9: Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects. Update ORE 99W project from "McDonald Street to South City Limits" to "Interstate 5 to South City Limits". Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects Rank* Project From To Action Plan Projects H Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62"d Avenue H Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue H 72"1 Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road H 72nd Avenue Carman/Upper Boones Ferry Durham Road H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72nd Avenue H Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits H Bonita Road West of 72nd Avenue 72nd Avenue H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard H ORE 99W Interstate 5 South City Limits H Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road H Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road H Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road H Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (West) Scholls Ferry Road (East) H Walnut Street 135`"Avenue Tiedeman Avenue H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W H 121st Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street H North Dakota Street 1215t Avenue Greenburg Road H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road H Tigard Street 115"'Avenue Main Street H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard H Fonner Street Walnut Street 121s'Avenue H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street H Oak Street (RTP Hall Boulevard 80`"Avenue 6019) STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 11 OF 31 CPA2008-000I 1 Exhibit A Proposed Amendments 8 and 9: TSP Chapter 5: Pedestrians Committee Recommendation: • Page 5-11: Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects. Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking. AND • Page 5-11: Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects. Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking. Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects Rank* Project From To Other Potential Projects M Mistletoe Drive Hillshire Drive Benchview Terrace M Benchview Terrace White Cedar Place Bull Mountain Road M 132"tl Avenue Walnut Street Benchview Terrace M Menlor Lane Barrows Road Sunrise Lane M Sunrise Lane Menlor Lane 150'"Avenue M 150`"Avenue Sunrise Lane Bull Mountain Road M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements Regional Center (RTP 6022) M Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Existing Sidewalk to North M Watkins Avenue Park Street Walnut Street M Off-Street Multi-Use Tualatin River Crossing at approximately 108'"Avenue Path M Off-Street Multi-Use 1-5/ORE 217 Kruse Way Bridge linkage to 72"d Avenue south of Path ORE 217 M Off-Street Multi-Use Powerline Corridor/Tualatin River/Fanno Creek/Greenway Park Path Loop M Pedestrian Highway 99W at SW 71st Avenue Activated Signalized--Crossing Enhancements* M Pedestrian Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue Activated Signalized-Crossing Enhancements* *Requires approval from State Traffic Engineer STAFF RI?PORT TO THE PLANNING COMMIISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 12 01:31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 10: TSP Chapter 6: Bicycles Committee Recommendation: Page 6-8: Figure 6-1 Bicycle Plan Alternative. Update figure to include existing bike lanes just north of SW Greenburg Road. DKSAssociates 4. T -4,,, ,i.T CITY OF II �' MMO III WALE ! c t f , Transportation s I'� ` r' " Systems Plan Al $ Legend a .*r. i.1;; .i . •Eariyrtua • ‘ _ t.. 4%112141M last* `;., r r —••asatM ® , d s ¢" � di. , .Pass � • 1 r a . �, �. *WamnwtrdU.dMy.m�. d „4 � � t r �, A .,..ie.... ' i■i 1 ! i � r 7 �... . a `" : i i Figure 6-1 4.44., BICYCLE PLAN 1 = 1,'/ ALTERNATIVE (Al AAwlaltiColkdon Option) STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXI IIBIT A PAGE 13 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 11: TSP Chapter 7: Transit Committee Recommendation: Page 7-1: Paragraph 4, Line 3 Update text to "... park and ride at ORE 99W/72nd "vcnuc 74th Avenue)." Chapter 7 4, Transit a=-'.'1 CITY Of TIGARD 01114014 This chapter summarizes existing and future transit needs in the City of Tigard. The following sections outline the criteria to be used to evaluate needs, provides a number of strategies for implementing a transit plan and recommends a transit plan for the City of Tigard. The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's TSP Task Force. This committee provided input regarding the transportation system in Tigard, specifically exploring transit needs. The methodology used to develop the transit plan combined citizen and staff input. NEEDS There are currently 12 fixed bus routes which provide service within the City of Tigard. These bus routes are summarized in Chapter 3 (Existing Conditions). There are four express routes providing service to Tigard residents (12E, 64X, 92X and 95X). Existing transit headways on bus routes in Tigard range from 10-15 minutes on Routes 12 and 92X to about 30 minutes on Routes 76 and 78 during peak commute periods. Metro's Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) identifies the following routes on its Public Transportation System Map (Figure 7-1)1: • ORE 217 HCT Corridor • Greenburg/Hall/Durham HCT Corridor • ORE 99W (East of ORE 217) HCT Corridor • Hall Boulevard (North of ORE 217) Frequent Bus • Hunziker Street Frequent Bus • ORE 99W (West of ORE 217) Primary Bus • Scholls Ferry Road (East of Murray) Primary Bus • 121s'/Walnut Street Primary Bus • 681h Parkway/Hampton Street Primary Bus • 72"d Avenue (South of Hampton) Primary Bus Based upon these designations, the City of Tigard designates all bus stops on HCT Corridors and Frequent Bus routes as Major Transit Stops. In addition, all park and ride sites and transit stations are designated major transit stops (Downtown Tigard, Washington Square, park and ride at ORE 99W/7-2nde74th Avenue). While Tri-Met bus ridership in Tigard increased by 35% from 1990 to 1994 and another 15% from 1994 to 1999 (comparing 12 routes), transit ridership represents 6 percent of Tigard PM peak hour trip making. 1 Public Transportation System Map, Metro,Version 4.0, December 1, 1997. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXI IIBIT A PAGE 1401'31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 12: TSP Chapter 7: Transit Committee Recommendation: Page 7-9: Table 7-2 Potential Transit Projects. Update table with following potential transit project(s). Table 7-2 Potential Transit Projects Rank Project Description 1 Provide Commuter Rail As part of the Beaverton to Wilsonville Commuter Station in Tigard Rail system provide a park and ride station in downtown Tigard. Support regional study of western extensions of commuter rail service (or comparable options). 2 Provide Transit Amenities at Provide shelters, information kiosks, etc key transit Major Transit Stops routes in Tigard with land use development. Focus on development of"SMART" bus stops. 3 Improve Pedestrian Construct sidewalks, crosswalks, etc. adjacent to Connections to Transit transit routes and facilities (i.e. park-and-ride lots, Facilities bus stops, etc.). Within '/4 mile of bus stops, focus on enhancing pedestrian access. Enhance Regional Center and Town Center pedestrian access to transit. 4 Decrease Headways Provide more frequent transit service during peak commute periods. 5 Establish Additional Transit Provide service along Durham Road and in the Routes western part of the City (i.e. Durham Road, Barrows Road, Murray/Walnut/Gaarde) . Time additional transit service to coordinate with major road extensions or street improvements. 6 Add a new Transit Center at Provide a new transit center with the development of the Murray/Scholls Town the Murray/Scholls Town Center. The Downtown Center Town Center and Washington Square Regional Center are the existing Transit Center locations. 7 Enhance transit Implement transit queue bypass lanes along ORE reliability along 99W at the following locations: regional facilities • SW Gaarde/SW McDonald Street • SW Walnut Street • SW Hall Boulevard(northbound) • SW Dartmouth Avenue (northbound) • SW 68th Avenue Work with TriMet to relocate transit stops along ORE 99W(where appropriate) to allow for far side stop operations at signalized intersections to reduce potential delay to transit operations. STAFF REPORT 10 TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 15 OF 31 CPA2(0)8-(10)11 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 13: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-21: Figure 8-11 Future Streets. Where ROW is Planned for More Than Two Lanes. Updated figure to change Hwy 99W from 7 lane (red line) between Interstate 5 to Greenburg Road to 5 lane (yellow line). DKS Associates A —,61,-!,_,. II I _. .rt;•Ella, CITY OF TIOARD V� ORfOON 1 Proposed .' Transportation e`l Amendment r Systems Plan Legend • X11'-A �� „wow J' .1, ,,� w Will,1� liar 1r .=of I I cwn.w+•.e.aa.4 ._ 40 ,,,wrici,-, 1 • i —I 4., - 444-,. — ~ •k, •Morelt rv.b sear r, o<I ;.h. �� `• lb , Mat.Ix wv.a'waa Mmra papery, f .s Ca..ov...Kw ir<-.<m•Nab Y IF M, " yu�._.� elO Mbar»rsi a:<. _re;+� 1 ' ms `11011+ 1 , an.r.n �. , Tw.ry r-asa..w.awt- �� •�� a.s acw..<a.<w+o.lr...r.v. J°I 1 firn IL ,,,t Ira.; cafe".lir c ip S .. Fegure a 11 t r Future Streets Where •$ I ■ ROW Is Planned for h l l ( 1 w r ' A More Than Two Lanes ***High way 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 16 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 14: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-34 and 8-35: Last Paragraph. Update text to "...MTh])recommends: 1) : e ' _ -; '; extensive intersection improvements —turning lanes;42)aggressive access management, including the development of an access management plan fir the corridorL33)improvements to ORE 217 and 1-5 noted above;61)off.system improvements such as freeway improvements and arteria/s such as Walnut extension;and )consideration of a western/Yamhill County commuter rail corridor:" 4. ORE 99W fails in the future without improvement. Of all the regional transportation issues in Tigard, ORE 99W is probably the closest to a"rubik's cube". Tigard depends heavily on ORE 99W as its primary arterial. There are no parallel routes to ORE 99W and its diagonal alignment and the physical features of Tigard make using ORE 99W essential for also any trip in Tigard. ORE 99W's statewide status and linkage to Yamhill County and the Oregon Coast have similar issues—the only route servicing northeast-southwest travel. The future demand for this corridor is well beyond its five lane capacity without system-wide improvements. Ten various alternatives to improving ORE 99W were investigated, ranging from the no improvement to radical capacity improvements. Table 8-5 summarizes the wide range of alternatives. Unfortunately, no one improvement results in desirable (better than level of service F) operation. The most significant finding was that no matter whether ORE 99W was widened southwest of Greenburg Road, the end result was failure. Added capacity on ORE 99W (tested by modeling seven lanes) resulted in significantly higher turning movements on/off ORE 99W and large through movements on ORE 99W. The end result was that not only would you have to widen to seven lanes but at nearly every intersection additional turning lanes were needed (double lefts, right turn) creating nearly a 10 lane cross section at intersection. And even after that the end result was level of service F conditions. Therefore the recommended approach combines several elements to produce a minimally acceptable operating condition. The TSP•recommends: 1) ., .. . ; • •. " ' , , . • _ P ; , ,, .. _ ,;, extensive intersection improvements— auxiliary turning and/or through lanes at key intersections on Highway 99W;-2)aggressive access management, including the development of an access management plan for the corridor;33)improvements to ORE 217 and 1-5 noted above;64) off-system improvements such as freeway improvements and arterials such as Walnut extension;and-75) consideration of a western/Yamhill County commuter rail corridor." STAFF REPOR9"TO'rim I'L VNNING COMMISSION IX,um.A PAGE 17 OF 31 CPA2(E8-110o11 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 15: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-37: Last Paragraph, first bullet. Update text to "ORE 99W s-e-ven-lane5 access management with auxiliary turn and/or through lanes at key intersections. " Tigard Triangle Area. This subarea is also subject of a recently adopted plan. The basic package of street improvements needed to mitigate level of service F conditions in this area include: • ORE 99W coven lanes access management with auxiliary turn and/or through lanes at key intersections. • Dartmouth Street five lanes • 72nd Avenue five lanes • Atlanta Street extended from Haines Street to 72nd Avenue • Backage roads to ORE 99W (providing access to business but not directly on ORE 99W) RI•:1'ORI'"I'0 I'I II?VI.:\NNING commisS10N 1:X1111311'A PAGI?134()1'31 (:PA2108-(0011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 16: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-38: Table, third item: Update text to `. • .- , .. . This option would limit the potential of the Tigard Triangle to sewe the projected land use in the future without localitied intersection improvements. These improvements could include additional approach turn and/or through lanes northbound and southbound on ORE 991V for short periods. There were no subarea alternatives s that precluded the need for 7 lanes between 15 and 217." Other options considered in this sub area included a Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing of ORE 217, an extension of Atlanta Street to Dartmouth Street and five lanes on ORE 99W. The following summarizes the findings of these options: Dartmouth Attracts less than 5,000 vehicles per day by itself; extend Walnut to link to Hunziker up with the overcrossing of ORE 217 and the volume increase to 8,000 ORE 217 per day. Implement complete ramp metering in the Tigard Triangle Overcrossi area (on ORE 217 and 1-5) and the volume increases to 13,000 ng vehicles per day. Most of the traffic benefits of the overcrossing are produced with the Hunziker to Hampton overcrossing and the Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing has limited additional benefit. Unfortunately, ORE 99W still requires mitigation with or without overcrossing; access to ORE 217 would not be allowed by ODOT due to substandard spacing resulting in unsafe operation at large expense. One option where this overcrossing may be desirable in the future would be where ramp metering is fully operational and improvements to ORE 217 include a High Occupancy Toll (HOT) or High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane alternative where direct connections to ORE 99W are desired. The Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing could provide access to the Tigard Triangle and ORE 99W area via drop in ramps. Therefore, a potential alignment should be preserved for future consideration (where the alignment would go through parking lots). However, the overcrossing is not part of the street improvement plan in the TSP. Atlanta While the Atlanta extension to 72"d is 10,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day Extension the segment to the south connecting to Dartmouth is well below that to level. Recent development has blocked an optimal alignment. Dartmouth Backage roads will be more effective in this setting. The TSP includes the Atlanta extension to 72nd and backage roads with redevelopment. Five lane Level of service F conditions result in Tigard Triangle without 7 lanes. This ORE 99W option would limit the potential of the Tigard Triangle to serve the projected land use in the future without localized intersection improvements. These improvements could include additional approach turn and/or through lanes northbound and southbound on ORE 99W for short periods. _ _ _ _ _ .. __ _ - precluded the need for 7 lanes between 15 and 217." STAFF RI TORT 10 THE PLANNING COMMISSION GXHIBII'A PAGI 19 OF 31 CPA2008-1X1011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 17: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-42: Table 8-6 Project Number 21. Add asterisk to project description that identifies that based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five- lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. Table 8-6 Proposed Metro and Planned CIP Projects Table 8-6 Project Project Name (Facility)'Project Location Project Description Estimated No. Project Cost South Washington County Transportation Projects (RTP Round 3-1999) 18 Bonita Road Hall Boulevard to Bangy Widen to four lanes $ 8,000,000 Improvements Road 19 Durham Road Upper Boones Ferry Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,500,000 Improvements to Hall Boulevard 20 Durham Road Hall Boulevard to 99W Widen to two lanes $ 5,000,000 Improvements westbound, 1 lane eastbound, turn lane, bikeways and sidewalks 21 99W Improvements 1-5 to Highway 217 Widen to —seven--la Capacity and/or safety improvements at key $ 9,000,000 intersections.*** 22 72nd Avenue 99W to Hunziker Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,000,000 Improvements 23 72nd Avenue Hunziker Road to Bonita Widen to five lanes $ 5,000,000 Improvements Road 24 72nd Avenue Bonita Road to Durham Widen to five lanes with $ 5,000,000 Improvements Road bikeways and sidewalks 25 Upper Boones Ferry 1-5 to Durham Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,000,000 Road 26 Dartmouth Street Dartmouth Road to Hunziker Three lane extension; new $ 28,000,000 Extension Road Highway 217 overcrossing 27 Dartmouth Street 72nd Avenue to 68th Widen to four lanes with turn $ 500,000 Improvements Avenue lanes 28 Walnut Street Walnut Street at Gaarde Intersection improvement $ 1,358,000- Improvements, Phase 2 Street 29 Highway 217/72nd Highway 217 and 72nd Complete interchange $ 15,000,000 Avenue Interchange Avenue reconstruction with additional Improvements ramps and overcrossings 30 Scholls Ferry Road At Hall Boulevard Add SB right turn lane from $ 500,000 Intersection SB Hall Boulevard Improvement *Based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7lanes. **Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function. turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where S TAFF REPORT TOME PLANNING COMMISSION EXf-IIBIT A I'AGI:20 OF 31 CPA2(X)8-0(X)11 Exhibit A traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. STAFF REPORT 10 THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 21 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 18: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-45: Table 8-7 Third Project Listed. Add asterisk to project description that identifies that based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five- lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. The recommended TSP motor vehicle improvements are summarized in Table 8-7 and Figure 8-19. Several spot improvements were also identified at various intersection in Tigard and they are summarized in Figure 8-20 and Table 8-8. Prioritization should occur in coordination with the CIP Figure 8-18 Street Improvement Plan process. All improvements on arterials and collectors shall include sidewalks, bike lanes and transit facilities. These improvement lists should be used as a starting point for inclusion in regional funding programs for streets. Table 8-7 Future Street Improvements All Pro'ects include sidewalks, bic cle lanes and transit accommodations as re.uired Location Description Funding Status* 1-5 Widen to 4 plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) between Not Funded ORE 217 and 1-205/Wilsonville Not in any plan Widen to 4 lanes(each direction) south to Wilsonville ORE 217 Widen to 3 lanes plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) Not Funded between US 26 and 72nd Avenue In RTP (as widening or HOV or HOT) New ORE 217/1-5 interchange between 72nd Avenue and Bangy Road Phase 1 Funded Phase II in RTP ORE 99W Widen to 7 lanes(total both directions) between 15 and In RTP Greenburg Road Capacity and/or safety Not Funded improvements at key intersections.* ** In prior plans x Based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7lanes. **Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, functions turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. SrAFF REPORT TO TI IF..PLANNING COMMISSION EXI-IIBIT A PAGE 22 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 19: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-47: Figure 8-19: 20 Year Street Improvement Plan. Update figure to remove seven lane widening project from Hwy 99W. DVS Associates , o a brs hews. A4 btaa:craw °' ; CITY OF TIGARD TJ 6AE : ' .., Proposed Transportation �` Amendment Systems Plan a r- . °, ■ 1 Legend ¢¢ 4g- z �2 i�a�Q I © NmWJWut 77FF VI+ q�y�W�!tNt.L_f,© • •.grynsi Cw,walry , \�y � 1 ,pr =VA ` _ Cgady IV r, Mir CS6 Prow.R01 J-µVW Para 'A ir%. .p. '14 ,., A .. Am 0 If V l : 41 C.;7. '. 7 '' " 0.' ,,.:1 i P _ a will NI? ( ' 4/ 14Z/ Q k4eT7 Figure 8-19 .t,;y 20 YEAR STREET `°�`�`.T. :n.,�n.a..rd1a,� IMPROVEMENT PLAN CC ntRj 1.7..n, enC LL stun Meant. *Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic.flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 23 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 20: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-48: Figure 8-20 Intersection Improvement Locations. Update figure to include projects at the following intersections: #37—ORE 99W/SW Durham Road #38 —ORE 99W/SW Canterbury Lane DKSAssociates 7 =J. a1sri CITY OF TIGARD ©„E+ Imo” --....i _ Transportation F Systems Plan 'r V © 2 © ©':, \fix.!__o �L _ I .` secoon avow. -� aaw,nrae< ---1 16 ®.5i5 5 4r e.w.e 28 —" _fi —� \ I 1S t {2T0 P `I -lWft1 _ . t-..: \ 14, is -_ Nuts-Sakry Se wa.Wass k'4 ... » .sane m per 144—me-u a i I . . uacwn ti 8 11L'�s< t '. xt < s 31 Se I I� 11 I IL-- � M , ( t. a _ 25— { <saio uo_st_ _ ___esu $ T°e-. J .- 38 eaeu © .. RD 0 1 ti 26 a -' Proposed I xl - '.36 u Amendment X35 po.- s I 21.. 1 1 ekty __ I 37 -- Q8i.MAVl 22 32 ,8 a, ig Proposed .'r P .• figure 8-20 Amendment w 't INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 24 OF 31 CPA200 13-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 21: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-49 through 8-51: Table 8-8 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements. Update table to include specific projects and add projects at the following intersections. Table 8-8 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements No. I Intersection Description 8 Main/ • Southbound Left turn lane Greenburg/O RE 99W • Add eastbound left turn pocket • Add westbound left turn pocket 11 Hall/ORE • Southbound right turn lane 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Westbound right turn overlap • Westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 12 ORE 217 NB • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ •:• '' •• -- - -•-- Ramps/ e- ORE 99W • 2nd northbound left turn lane 13 ORE 217 SB • 2nd northbound left turn lane Ramps/ ORE 99W 14 Dartmouth/ • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ •o• !' •• . .. ORE 99W • Add southbound through lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 15 72nd/ • Southbound right turn lane ORE 99W • Northbound right turn overlap • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south 16 68th/ .-2 ORE 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 25 ORE 99W/ • Westbound right turn lane McDonald/G • Retain eastbound right turn lane aarde • 2nd northbound left turn lane • 2nd Southbound left turn lane • 2nd through lane • Westbound through lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 30 Walnut/ ORE 99W • Change to protected left turn phasing on Walnut • Add westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 37 ORE 99W/ • Add westbound left turn lane Canterbury Lane 38 ORE 99W/ • Add northbound left turn lane Durham Road STAFF REPORT TO TI IL PLANNING COMMISSION EXI 1113I'I'A PAGE 25 OF 31 CPA2008-0001 1 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 22, 23 and 24: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 11-7: Page 11-7: Table 11-4 Pedestrian Action Plan Project List • Update ORE 99W project from "McDonald Street to South City Limits" to "Interstate 5 to South City Limits". Update cost from $500,000 to $800,000. • Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW 71st Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking and cost of$200,000. • Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking and cost of$200,000. Table 1 1-4 Pedestrian Action Plan Project List Rank* Project From To Cost H North Dakota Street 12151 Avenue Greenburg Road $230,000 H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard $200,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road $350,000 H Oak Street(RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80'"Avenue $500,000 H ORE 99W South City Limits $508,000 Interstate 5 $800,000 M Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road $1,200,000 M Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road $300,000 M 12151 Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street $450,000 M Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72"tl Avenue $250,000 M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements (RTP 6022) $6,000,000 Regional Center L Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62"tl Avenue $1,000,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road $200,000 M Pedestrian Activated Highway 99W at SW $200,000 Signalized-Crossing 71st Avenue Enhancements* M Pedestrian Activated Highway 99W at SW $200,000 Signalized-Crossing Watkins Avenue Enhancements* Subtotal $ 00,000 $12,500,000 Sidewalks to be built with Street Improvements H Bonita Road West of 72"d Avenue 72"tl Avenue $50,000 H Walnut Street 135`"Avenue Tiedeman Avenue $570,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $620,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street $1,000,000 H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue $120,000 H Tigard Street 115th Street Main Street $350,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $100,000 H Fonner Street walnut Street 121st Avenue $250,000 H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street $50,000 STAFF REPORT TO 7111 s PLANNING COMMISSION I'.X1 III3IT A PAGE 26 OF 31 CPA2008-1 NK)1 I Exhibit A Rank* Project From To Cost M 72"d Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road $1,200,000 M Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits C $670,000 M Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road $1,000,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (W) Scholls Ferry Road $950,000 (E) L 72"d Avenue Carman/Upper Durham Road $250,000 BoonesFry. Subtotal $7,180,000 Annual Sidewalk Program at$50,000 per year for 20 years $1,000,000 Action Plan , Total $20,060,000 *Requires approval from State Traffic Engineer STAFF REPORT TO TI IF PLANNING COMMISSION LXI IIBIT A PAGE 27 OF 31 CPA2O08-(X)011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 25: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 11-8: Table 11-5 Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. Update ORE 99W bike lane improvement cost from $1,300,000 to $275,000. Table 11-5 Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost Rank* Project From To Cost H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72nd Avenue $250,000 H Bonita Road 72nd Avenue West of 72nd $50,000 Ave. H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $135,000 H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 90th Avenue $300,000 H 98th Avenue Murdock Stret Durham Road $275,000 H 92nd Avenue Durham Road Cook Park $270,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Greenburg Road Walnut Street $250,000 M 121st Avenue Walnut Street Gaarde Street $400,000 L Taylor's Ferry Road Washington Drive City Limits $500,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry $100,000 Rd L O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard $275,000 L Frewing Street ORE 99W O'Mara Street $150,000 Subtotal $2,955,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $600,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Locust Street $500,000 Road H Greenburg Road Hall Boulevard Cascade $300,000 Avenue H ORE 99W East City Limits South City $ 300,000 Limits $275,000 M 72nd Avenue ORE 99W South City $960,000 Limits M Hall Boulevard Pfaffle Street Bonita Road $550,000 M Carman Drive 1-5 Durham Road $200,000 M Walnut Street ORE 99W Barrows Road $1,400,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Scholls Ferry $900,000 Road (W) Rd. (E) L Bull Mountain Road 150th Avenue Beef Bend Road $550,000 L Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls $1,600,000 Ferry Rd. Subtotal $8,860,000 $7,835,000 Multi- Use Pathways H Hunziker Link to LO Linkage to Kruse Way Trail in Lake $500,000 Oswego STAFF REPORT TO 77IE PLANNING COMMISSION EXI-JIBrr A MU'28 OF 11 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Rank* Project From To Cost M Fanno Creek Trail Tualatin River to City Hall, ORE 99W $3,600,000 to Tigard M Tualatin River Trail Adjacent to Cook Park from $2,600,000 Powerlines to Fanno M Tualatin River Crossing Near 108th Avenue $3,000,000 L Powerlines Corridor From Beaverton to Tualatin River $2,500,000 Trail Subtotal $12,200,00 0 Action Plan Total $244-1-5700 0 $22,990,00 0 STAFF REPORT TO TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION EXI IIBIT A PAGE 29 OF 31 CPA2008-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 26: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 11-9: Table 11-6 Future Street Improvements. Add asterisk to project description that identifies that based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. Table 11-6 Cost Location Description Estimate Funding Status* 1-5 Widen to 4 plus auxiliary lanes (each $200,000,000 Not Funded direction) between ORE 217 and 1-205 Not in any plan Provide additional throughput capacity (each $50,000,000 direction) south to Wilsonville ORE 217 Widen to 3 lanes plus auxiliary lanes (each $240,000,000 Not Funded direction) between US 26 and 72nd Avenue In RTP (as widening or HOV or HOT) New ORE 217/1-5 interchange between 72nd Phase 1 Funded Avenue and Bangy Road $39,000,000 Phase 2 & 3 in RTP Phase 2 $15,000,000 RTP 6027 & 6028 Phase 3 ORE 99W Widen to seven lanes (total both directions) $25,000,000 RTP 6039 Capacity and/or safety improvements at key intersections.*** 1-5 to ORE 99W Connector linking 1-5 and ORE 99W (model $250,000,000 RTP 6005 assumed connector would be located north (Toll Route) of Sherwood—specific location to be determined by further study) Overcrossings over 5 lane overcrossings linking Washington $40,000,000 RTP 6011 & 6052 ORE 217 Square and Cascade Avenue—one north of Scholls Ferry Road, one south of Scholls Ferry Road to Nimbus $15,000,000 RTP 6053 Connector Road Nimbus south to Greenburg *Based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7lanes. **Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION EXHIBIT A PAGE 30 OF 31 CPA200 8-00011 Exhibit A Proposed Amendment 27: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 11-11: Table 11-7 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements. Update table to include specific projects and add projects at the following intersections: Table 11-7 City o Tigard Future Intersection hn rouemenis No. Intersection Description Lost 8 Main/ • Southbound Left turn lane $700,000 Greenburg/ •ORE 99W • Add eastbound left turn pocket • Add westbound left turn pocket 11 Hall/ORE • Southbound right turn lane $3,700,000 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Westbound right turn overlap • Westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 12 ORE 217 • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ •:• !' •• • .. . . .. $9004000 NB Ramps/ • _ • ___ - • . •_• .r •! • _ _ _ _ $700,000 ORE 99W • 2nd northbound left turn lane 13 ORE 217 SB • 2nd northbound left turn lane $400,000 Ramps/ • _ _. ...• . • _ •_• !' !! • •_. $200,000 ORE 99W 14 Dartmouth • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ •:• *-• •• • .. __ $200,000 /ORE 99W • Add southbound through lane $800,000 • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 15 72nd/ • Southbound right turn lane $-500,000 ORE 99W • Northbound right turn overlap $300,000 • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Retain eastbound right turn lane •:• e, !! • •__ —•:- 16 68th/ .-find $1,500,000 ORE 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 25 ORE 99W/ • Westbound right turn lane $700,000 McDonald/ • Retain eastbound right turn lane $1,500,000 Gaarde • 2nd northbound left turn lane • 2nd Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 30 Walnut/ - •- •• $2-50,000 ORE 99W • Change to protected left turn phasing on Walnut $600,000 • Add westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 37 ORE 99W/ • Add westbound left turn lane $250,000 Canterbury Lane 38 ORE 99W/ • Add northbound left turn lane $250,000 Durham Road STAFF RI POR1"10 TI IE PLANNING COMMISSION EXI IIBIT A PAGE 31 OF 31 CPA20$18-((x111 EXHIBIT "B" CleanWater Services Our commitment is clear. MEMORANDUM DATE: March 10, 2009 FROM: David Schweitzer, Clean Water Services TO: Darren Wyss, Senior Planner City of Tigard Planning Division SUBJECT: Review Comments—Tigard Transportation Plan, 2008-00011 CPA GENERAL COMMENTS • We recommend following any and all relevant provisions of the current Intergovernmental Agreement(IGA)between the City of Tigard and Clean Water Services and the relevant provisions of the current Design and Construction Standards(currently R&O 07-20,available on line at: http://cleanwaterservices.org/PermitCenter/DesignandConstruction/Update/default.aspx)for all issues relating to development, vegetated corridors, erosion control,and preservation of wetlands,natural drainage ways,and enhancements thereof. 2550 SW Hillsboro Highway•Hillsboro, Oregon 97123 Phone: (503)681-3600• Fax:(503)681-3603 •www.CleanWaterServices.org EXHIBIT "C" Darren Wyss From: Jabra Khasho [jkhasho @ci.beaverton.or.us] Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 2:15 PM To: Darren Wyss Cc: Margaret Middleton; Steven Sparks Subject: Tigard Comprehensive Plan Amendments (CPA) 2008-00011 Comments We have reviewed the application for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Highway 99W in Tigard and have the following comments. Although the proposed amendments emphasize that Highway 99W should only have a maximum of 4 or 5 lane for thru traffic except at the intersections where additional intersection capacity, and turn lanes are needed to maintain traffic flow. It appears that many of the turn lanes under proposed amendment 21 to the TSP Motor Vehicles chapter were deleted. Chapter 14 of the City of Tigard current TSP confirms that even if Highway 99W is widened to 7 lanes it will operate at level of service F in the future.Therefore we believe that the proposed turn lanes in the existing TSP improvements should be maintained to assure that the 5 lane section would handle future needs of the region. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerely, Jabra Khasho City Traffic Engineer PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSURE This e-mail is a public record of the City of Beaverton and is subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. This email is subject to the State Retention Schedule. 1 EXHIBIT "D" OF Oregon Oregon Department of Transportation ` i ODOT Region 1 i . heudore R.Kuh ng,„t;,.Go,V11101 123 NW Flanders St Portland,OR 97209-4037 Telephone(503) 731-8200 FAX(503)731-8259 File code: PLA9-2A-91 ODOT Case No: 1479 3/23/2009 City of Tigard Planning Division 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Attn: Darren Wyss, Senior Planner Re: CPA2008-00011: Tigard 99W TSP Incorporation Dear Darren, ODOT supports the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment to adopt the recommendations from the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan which was developed by the City through a Transportation and Growth Management grant. By incorporating the plan recommendations for Alternative B the City and State will be better positioned to work together to obtain funding for the list of identified improvement projects that will improve the highway corridor for all travel modes. Development and adoption of the recommendations in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan is commendable. The plan seeks to balance the needs of all users of the system, adjoining property owners with limited funding for transportation. Instead of focusing primarily on adding system capacity, the plan recommendations focus on increasing safety through access management, strategic intersection improvements to address turning movements, providing transit queue bypass lanes to provide for more efficient transit, enhancing pedestrian/bicycle facilities and managing the system through signal timing coordination. The plan calls for retaining the four/five lanes on 99W instead of widening 99W to seven lanes as currently identified in the City's Transportation System Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan. Staff recommends in Part 4 that the five lanes be defined as "through lanes" which is necessary to "provide the flexibility for construction of auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, turn lanes, or access management. Furthermore, although the committee recommended a five-lane maximum, staff recommends that some seven lane intersection configurations may be needed for function, ingress/egress spacing, and access management." ODOT supports the staff recommendation for retaining the four/five lanes on 99W while allowing flexibility. However, there may be instances where an additional through lane is needed to connect between two intersections which would not meet the "auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity" language. Based on the proposed wording, the flexibility to adding additional lanes could be interpreted to be limited to intersections. Recommend further clarification to retain flexibility. ; CPA2008-00011, Tigard 99W I.r Incorporation; ODOT RESPONSE 2 In Appendix A page 4, the plan discusses pedestrian enhancements and identifies potential new crossing locations in Figure 1. As discussed in the plan, the speeds, traffic volumes and crossing widths on 99W makes identifying safe crossing treatments for pedestrians limited. The ability to meet pedestrian signalization warrants as crossing treatments is difficult on this stretch of 99W. The plan indicates that an engineering study will be required for proposed unsignalized crossings. The proposed amendments for Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects, recommends projects to add pedestrian activated signalized crossing at SW 71st Ave and SW Watkins Ave on 99W. ODOT recommends that the plan allow for flexibility to do an engineering study to determine what the most appropriate pedestrian crossing enhancements are for each of these locations. If the access management plan identifies medians to be installed at these locations, this might be an opportunity to explore how to best accommodate pedestrian crossing at the each crossing location. Median islands could provide a refuge for pedestrians but would preclude the signalized pedestrian crossing option. Instead of specifying the crossing projects as "Pedestrian Activated Signalized Crossing", we recommend the projects be identified as "Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements" with asterisk stating "requires approval from the State Traffic Engineer". ODOT looks forward to continuing to work collaboratively with the City of Tigard to implement the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan. Sincerely, �- Marah Danielson Development Review Planner C: Sam Hunaidi, Doug Baumgartner, Martin Jensvold, Canh Lam, Ross Kevlin, Lainie Smith, Rian Windschiemer, Jason Tell, ODOT Region 1 ■ PLEASE SIGN IN HERE Tigard Planning Commission TIGARD Agenda Item # 5. Z Page I, of I Date of Hearing `-E 1(t)1O9 Case Number(s) J 2COR -()0OS Case Name CJ.?_.A.Sc# VC_ 4.1)-t nr\°`t"' � ��C e m�►��S Location (--V.y w Ot If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: Name: ANi Address: Address: -7Uo .7vi 1-614 1•41 In is& City,State, Zip: City,State, Zip: �-� `fl 2-2_.; Name: Name: L Icy03-)t.vv+1 Address: Address: 6, ve) s c_evvi CT I ti S: O.l City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: l-LAW, -7 ZZ 1 Name: Name: C o W 1 Address: Address: \`I 55 51,-) t 1 L\ \ L • City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: V L�� Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City,State, Zip: City,State, Zip: 1 III s * City of Tigard T►G A R D Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner Re: Continued Hearing for DCA 2008-00005 Sensitive Lands Permit Requirements Date: March 30, 2009 Background On February 23, 2009, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider Staff's request (DCA2008-00005) to amend the Sensitive Lands Chapter of the Tigard Development Code to remove a criterion (18.775.070.B.5) prohibiting pathways located within or adjacent to the floodplain to be below the elevation of the average annual flood. The Commission received substantial public comment on the issue and decided to continue the hearing to allow time for careful consideration of the information provided and allow staff time to prepare an options analysis. In addition to a summary of public comments and the options analysis, below, staff has included a section to help clarify terms. Terms Average Annual Flood Elevation: The flood elevation used in 18.775.070.B.5; the average of annual peak daily flows over the length of available data; an elevation between "bank full" and the "2-year flood"; typically used for structural protection and maintenance purposes. 2 year Flood Elevation: A conservative proxy for the annual flood elevation. Base Flood Elevation: The computed elevation to which floodwater is anticipated to rise during the base flood (100-year flood, 1% flood, one-percent annual chance flood, FEMA floodplain extent). Adopted Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Plan: The City of Tigard Parks System Master Plan (March 1999), includes general alignments for Tigard's trail system; as funding becomes available, specific trail segment plans are developed to provide siting and design details. Practicable: Capable of being effected, done, or put into practice; feasible. 1 Summary of Public Comments Jennifer Thompson,US Fish and Wildlife (USFW): cites Metro's environmentally—friendly trails guidebook to address potential adverse impacts of trails in sensitive areas and lists potential impacts from hydrology to habitat. Nancy Munn,National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): states that NMFS generally does not support trails in floodplains (with the exception of dirt trails) because often trail design and vegetation management proximate to water conflicts with conditions that support cold-water fisheries. Eric Lindstrom,EdD: takes issue with conclusions in the staff report by elaborating on findings, potential impacts to resources; concludes that pathways are desirable components of park plans but should not compromise the functional integrity of the floodplain (Owyhee River road example). Sue Beilke, Fans of Fanno Creek: argues against removal of the elevation criterion in order to protect significant habitat and that other potentially conflicting City goals are met with the existing trail network in Fanno Creek and by other upland trails planned by the City. Brian Wegener,Tualatin River Keepers: cites comments from USFWS/Metro/NMFS (above) regarding potential impacts to natural resources; identifies potential conflict of the proposed trails with sensitive habitat areas map designation of"strictly limit"in the majority of Fanno Creek Park; addresses shortcomings with the findings in the staff report and suggests an alternatives analysis include siting trails above the average annual flood. John Frewing: identifies process issues with the City as applicant; suggests processing a variance rather than a code amendment; calls out ODOT,DSL, CWS, and Metro provisions for safety and resource protection. Mischa Connine, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW): concerned with overall decline of riparian habitat and connectivity and therefore the potential adverse impacts of paths located in riparian and associated floodplain habitats. Bob Salinger/Jim Labbe,Audubon: concerned with the incremental loss and degradation of floodplain habitats and water quality in the Tualatin Basin; supports low-impact path design including alternative alignments outside of floodplains;worried natural areas along Fanno Creek will be loved to death. Code Construction and Analysis Section 18.775.070.B (Sensitive Lands Permits Within the 100-year Floodplain) includes seven approval criteria for development within the 100-year floodplain subject to Hearings Officer review. The criteria are designed to ensure maintenance of the floodway (1 and 3), restrict uses in certain zones (2), ensure agency permitting(6), and provide for a pedestrian/bicycle pathway (4, 5, and 7). 2 p. Of the three pathway criteria, criterion 4 ensures development plans include a timely pathway improvement in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan; criterion 5 restricts the elevation of a pathway to be higher than the average annual flood; and criterion 7 assures dedication of open land area of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. The potential conflict with Criterion 5 arises for several reasons: a) the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan is often too generalized to provide guidance in siting pathways, and b) to achieve the elevation requirement within the floodplain for planned pathways could require filling, boardwalks, or re- siting outside the floodplain or in portions of the floodplain that exceed the average annual flood. Pathways crossing a creek are particularly problematic. To make sense of this potential conflict, a reasonable reading of criterion 5 would be to apply it "where practicable." This involves striking a balance between recreation use and program purpose, on the one hand, and resource protection, on the other. The following options range from retaining criterion 5 as is (Option 1), to removing it altogether (Option 4), including two options with amended language to allow paths within the floodplain where practicable and when consistent with adopted plans (Option 2) and then, additionally, subject to a natural resource assessment (Option 3). Options Analysis Option 1— retain criterion: The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood; Pros: Retaining the existing language would be the most restrictive and would limit pathway alignment to upland areas. Strict application of the standard would preclude path alignments in the floodplain and related habitat areas preserving the quality of the habitat to its maximum extent. Cons: Potentially inconsistent with other standards in the section (4 and 7) which require any proposed development within or adjacent to the floodplain to provide a pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. Option 1 would limit the City's ability to meet its Comprehensive Plan goals for trail connectivity and access to nature- oriented recreation in Fanno Creek Park and other locations. Option 1 does not provide any siting flexibility with respect to the presence, absence, or quality of habitat at any location. 3 Option 2—revise criterion: The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood, where practicable to achieve project objectives; Pros: Addition of the practicability clause would allow siting flexibility for certain path alignments be l ow the average annu al fl ood w hen upland rou tes are not o therwi se available considering cost and design feasibility and project objectives. Trail connectivity and access to natural areas for nature-oriented recreation would be possible. Option 2 would be consistent with other standards in the section (4 and 7). Cons: Although some flexibility is obtained for locating trails, the standard may preclude preferred alignments to meet other objectives. Option 2 does not directly address habitat protection which is the primary concern of the public comment. Option 3 — revise criterion: Pedestrian!bicycle pathways within the floodplain shall be sited above the elevation of the annual average flood, where practicable, and shall include a resource assessment to ensure that the proposed alignment minimizes impacts to significant wildlife habitat; Pros: The practicability clause allows the City to balance park development with resource protection. Trails could be located within the floodplain consistent with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. The requirement for a natural resource assessment implements Comprehensive Plan policies which support habitat protection (Comprehensive Plan Goal 8.1, policy 17 and Goal 8.2, policy 2). Cons: Additional cost to the applicant for a natural resource assessment. Option 4— remove criterion: Pros: Trails could be located within the floodplain below the average annual flood elevation consistent with an adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. Cons: Does not address resource protection policies referenced in the Comprehensive Plan or concerns expressed by the public. Discussion Potential conflicting goals in the Comprehensive Plan and criterion in the Development Code for floodplain management hinge around the notion of striking a balance between natural resource protection and recreational use. The public comment received clearly favors siting and designing pathways that avoid impacts to wildlife habitat and water quality. Two of the proposed options presented above include language that would accommodate balancing competing public goods (recreation/natural resources) on a site-specific basis,while still retaining the basic orientation of the 4 criterion to avoid siting below the annual average flood. Option 2 suggests a threshold of practicability which would address path location in relation to cost and design feasibility and program goals. Option 3 requires,in addition, a resource assessment to ensure path location minimizes potential adverse impacts to wildlife habitat. The proposed code amendment is legislative and would apply to all floodplains within the City. Some public comments suggested that a variance process could be used as an alternative to a code amendment, particularly since the proposed amendment arose with respect to the site-specific improvements proposed with the Fanno Creek Park Master Plan. In reviewing this approach, staff finds that two of the variance standards (18.370.010.C.2.d/e) would not likely be met: (d) siting paths below the average annual flood would most likely adversely affect wildlife habitat to some extent and, (e) the hardship would be self-imposed because not building below the average annual flood would remain an option. Recommendation Staff recommends the Commission support Option 3 to minimize potential adverse impacts to natural resources of planned park pathway improvements within the floodplain. The proposed criterion revision would allow flexibility to balance resource protection goals with community recreation goals as pathways are developed in the future, pursuant to the Park System Master Plan. 5 14 I " City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Todd Prager,Associate Planner/Arborist Current Planning Division Re: Urban Forestry Master Plan Progress Report Date: March 17,2009 INTRODUCTION On June 3,2008,Tigard City Council approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2008-00002 adding an Urban Forest section to the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 2.2 Policy 11 of the Comprehensive Plan states, "The City shall develop and implement a citywide Urban Forestry Management Master Plan." On October 28,2008,Tigard City Council approved Resolution 08-64 appointing members to the Urban Forestry Master Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC is comprised of the Tree Board plus four additional stakeholders including two certified arborists,one Home Builder's Association (HBA) representative,and one community member with expertise in public administration. The CAC represents a broad range of interests and is currently overseeing the Plan's development. On November 19,2008,the Committee for Citizen Involvement approved the Communication Plan for the Urban Forestry Master Plan. The Communication Plan breaks down each of the six phases of the process and speaks to the ways in which citizens and stakeholders may participate,communicate,and receive information about the Urban Forestry Master Plan. Staff and the CAC have completed the first half of the Urban Forestry Master Plan,and are updating Planning Commission and Council prior to embarking on the second half of the process. The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be drafted by staff over the next several months using the information collected thus far and input from the CAC during the three remaining meetings. The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be presented for adoption to Planning Commission and Council in October and November respectively. A website has been developed and is available to the community for more information and to track progress and activities of the Urban Forestry Master Plan at: www.tigard-or.gov/community/trees/master plan.asp Page 1 of 8 BACKGROUND The following excerpt from the International Society of Arboriculture website (Attachement 1) provides an excellent overview of the purpose and importance of an Urban Forestry Master Plan: 'Many community tree ordinances have been developed in response to public outcry over speciicperceived problems. Unfortunately, a "band-aid"approach to developing tree ordinances often leads to ordinances that are not consistent with sound management practices, and which can actually thwart good management. We believe that communities need to develop or review their overall urban forest management strategy before considering a new or revised tree ordinance. Policy makers must recognize that the primary goal is effective management of local tree resources, not simply regulation. Tree ordinances provide the legal framework for successful urban forest management by enabling and authorizing management activities. However, methods for managing the urban forest ecosystem are continually evolving and the input of trained professionals to the management process is critical. Therefore, we believe that ordinances should facilitate rather than prescribe management. Successful tree ordinances follow this guiding principle. If the role of a tree ordinance is to facilitate resource management, the tree ordinance must be part of a larger community forest management strategy. Most of the shortcomings attributed to tree ordinances can usually be traced to the lack of a clearly thought-out management strategy. Poor planning leads to poor ordinances, and even the best-written ordinance is unlikely to succeed in the absence of an overall urban forest management strategy. We have found that few existing tree ordinances have been developed as part of a comprehensive management strategy." antp://www.isa-arbor.com/publications/tree-ord/ordprtlb.aspx) In developing Tigard's Urban Forestry Master Plan, staff and the CAC have been following Miller's (1988) model of urban forest planning. F >1. What do we have? e e d 2. What do we want? b a c k 3. How do we get what we want? The remainder of this document describes how the above questions have been and will be answered, and what feedback processes will occur to ensure the Urban Forestry Master Plan is successfully implemented. Page 2 of 8 WHAT DO WE HAVE? The question of"What do we have?"is being answered by: • Analysis of tree canopy changes over time. • Historical and current community profile. • Review of federal, state,and local policy framework. • Review of City department/divisions with urban forest management roles. Metro completed the classification of 1996 and 2007 Tigard air photos using software that can detect the presence of tree canopy cover. This has allowed City staff to do a comparative analysis of tree cover change in the community spanning the past ten years (Attachment 2). It will also allow Tigard to continually track canopy change in the future as Metro runs the software on Tigard air photos every two years. Some highlights of the canopy data collected to date include: • 25% (1996) vs. 24% (2007) Citywide Canopy. • 63 canopy clusters>5 acres (1996) vs. 48 canopy clusters > 5 acres (2007). • 4,356 canopy clusters < .5 acres (1996) vs. 7,231 canopy clusters < .5 acres (2007). • 1,423 acres of buildable lands (1996)vs. 529 acres of buildable lands (2007). • Canopy coverage on remaining buildable lands is 42%. • If all canopy was removed from remaining buildable lands,citywide tree canopy would decline from 24% to 21%. • City of Tigard Land Area is 7,556 acres. • 5,448 acres are private and 2,108 acres are public. • City of Tigard property (388 acres) has 46%canopy. • Public Right-of-Way (1,288 acres) has 9%canopy. • Other Public Entities (432 acres) have 24%canopy. • Private Property (5,447) has 27%canopy. • Commercial Zone Canopy is 10%(2007). • Industrial Zone Canopy is 16% (2007). • Mixed Use Zone Canopy is 14% (2007). • Residential Zone Canopy is 30% (2007). Preliminary findings from the canopy study include: • Tigard canopy coverage (24%) is below the target recommendation of 40% for Pacific Northwest cities. • While Tigard canopy coverage is currently stabilized (1%decrease in 10 years),it is becoming increasingly fragmented (larger groves are replaced by individual trees). • The remaining amount of buildable lands is relatively small (529 acres),so focusing management activities solely on development code revisions will have a limited impact. • Right-of-way canopy is relatively low (9%). This is an opportunity area where canopy could be increased (e.g. Lake Oswego right-of-way canopy is 34%). Page 3 of 8 • Citywide residential canopy (30%) is much higher than commercial,industrial,and mixed use canopy (avg. 13.6%). Improving parking lot landscape standards may allow for a significant canopy increase in non-residential zones. Ongoing studies that will be completed over the upcoming months include: • An analysis of potential plantable areas in Tigard so that realistic canopy goals can be set and planting sites can be identified. • An estimation of historical canopy coverage in Tigard (pre 1996) so that a comparison can be made between current and historical tree canopy. • An estimation of current parking lot canopy coverage so that the effectiveness of current parking lot standards can be evaluated and parking lot canopy changes can be tracked over time. • Documentation of historical and current community profile. • Documentation of federal,state, and local policy framework. • Description of City department/divisions with urban forest management roles. WHAT DO WE WANT? The question of"What do we want?"is being answered by: • Review of Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. • Community surveys. • Needs assessments with City departments/divisions. • Interviews of major community stakeholder groups. • Listening posts for community members to express their opinions directly to City staff. An independent,scientific telephone survey of 400 randomly selected citizens about their attitudes towards existing and potential urban forestry policies and programs was completed by Steve Johnson and Associates (Attachment 3). The survey was funded in part by a grant from the Oregon Department of Forestry and USDA Forest Service. Some highlights of the community survey are: • Residents are satisfied with the amount and quality of trees/forests in Tigard (^-86% satisfaction). However, —74%agreed that more street trees would be good for the City. • Residents feel strongly that trees contribute to quality of life (-96%agree) and residential property values (^-92%agree). • Residents want the City to direct more resources to maintain/protect trees and forests in Tigard (-74%agree),and a majority support increasing funding for tree and forest management(-55% support). • Residents support tree preservation and replacement during development (-'88%support). In addition a majority(-56%) support development regulations even when they limit the size and extent of potential buildings or profits. Approximately 32%of residents oppose tree regulations that limit development. • Residents consistently prioritize planting,protection,and maintenance of natural forested areas over other resources such as street trees and ornamental landscape trees. Page 4 of 8 • Approximately 55%of residents would like to see new protection measures focused on larger groves of native trees as opposed to individual trees of significant size. • Residents are supportive of tree regulations for developed private property that would protect large,healthy trees (-75%support). • A majority of residents support the creation of a program where the City would become involved in disputes between neighbors regarding hazardous trees (-59%support). Preliminary findings from the community survey include: • The community values the urban forest and is satisfied with its quality. • Residents want more funding directed to protecting and maintaining the urban forest. • Residents support development regulations that protect trees even if the result is reduced development. • Residents prioritize grove protection and maintenance. • Residents support the creation of a hazard tree abatement program. A series of meetings were held with representatives from a range of City departments (Community Development, Public Works,and Financial and Information Services) and divisions (Capital Construction&Transportation,Current Planning,Development Review,Information Technology, Public Works Administration,Parks,Streets,Wastewater/Storm,and Water) to discuss urban forestry coordination issues,and identify those areas where coordination could be improved (Attachment 4). The following City needs were identified during the meetings: • Better tracking of street trees and protected private property trees needed via GIS database. • Better tracking and enforcement of required stream corridor enhancements needed. • Prior to City property acquisition,need more detailed evaluation of resource management requirements. • Need to clarify tree protection standards for building additions. • Need to create tree protection standards for City projects. • Need to formalize hazard tree response system. • Need to publicize requirements for trees in sensitive lands. • Need better tracking of tree mitigation fund expenditures. In addition to needs assessment of the City,staff is in the process of coordinating with key community stakeholder groups and jurisdictions that regularly contribute to and/or are affected by the management of Tigard's urban forest (Attachment 5). The stakeholder groups identified the following policies and programs that they think should be revised or created in the future: Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture • Do not penalize property owners with trees more than those without trees during development. • Do not continue to incentivize overplanting of trees via mitigation standards. • Prioritize natives and large stature trees. Page 5 of 8 • Make project arborists a more integral member of the development team. • Increase planting strip size and/or require root barriers. • Hire greenspace manager. Oregon Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects • More focus on preservation,less focus on mitigation. • More focus on sustainable landscape standards (not necessarily natives). • Create detailed tree and landscape design manual with planting and preservation standards. • Require warranty period to ensure landscape establishment. • Require landscape architects to be a member of the development project team. Tualatin Riverkeepers • Improve parking lot design standards to incorporate stormwater treatment and more tree canopy. • Increase stormwater incentives/requirements for development such as the "no runoff" provisions. • Establish a sustainable funding source for urban forestry. • Increase efforts to remove invasives. Tigard-Tualatin School District • Partner to plant trees on school grounds. • Focus on low maintenance and sustainable plantings. Portland General Electric • Tree plans should be routed to PGE for comment to avoid tree/utility conflicts on new developments. • PGE can partner with the City to abate existing and potential tree/utility hazards. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce • No comment. Trees and urban forestry has not been an issue for the Chamber members. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board • No comment. The remaining stakeholders to be interviewed are the Home Builder's Association,Clean Water Services, Oregon Department of Transportation,and the Tree Board. Page 6 of 8 The needs identified by citizens, the City,and community stakeholders will help guide future policy and program goals. The goals set will need to be measurable so that the City can evaluate whether or not goals are being met in the future. For example,a goal of"No net loss of tree canopy between 2007 and 2015" is preferable to a goal of"Maximize tree canopy". Finally,it will be important to ensure that the goals in the Urban Forestry Master Plan are coordinated with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. HOW DO WE GET WHAT WE WANT? After goals are identified, the question of"How do we get what we want?"will be answered through the creation of an implementation matrix. The implementation matrix will be the most important part of the Urban Forestry Master Plan because it will prioritize urban forestry program,policy, and code direction by setting a timetable for implementation. It will also allow for the Tree Board to monitor progress of the Urban Forestry Master Plan as part of their annual work program. A draft example of the implementation matrix is provided below: v' cc�d q� eta' PQ� Im lementation Goals IP Q 1.1.Establish City storm and hazard tree response protocols. a. Staff Public Works 2.3.8 L $ Time/General 2010 ISA,ODF Prior to land acquisition conduct a tree hazard assessments Fund b. Staff Hire greenspace coordinater to manage Tigard natural areas Public Works 2.2.5 H $$ Time/General 2015 TRK and develop a proactive hazard abatement program Fund c. Staff Develop and implement formal emergency response Planning 2.3.8,2.2.3 L $ Time/General 2010 ISA,ODF system for tree hazards on City streets Fund d. Staff Develop and implement formal emergency response Public Works 2.2.3,2.3.8,2.3.9, L $ Time/General 2010 ISA,ODF system for tree hazards in City parks/greenspaces 2.3.10,2.3.11 Fund 1.2 Establish City program to facilitate hazard abatement on private property. a. Staff Revise Tigard Municipal Code to grant authority to the City Planning 2.3.8 H $ Time/General 2010 ISA,ODF to become involved in.rivate.ro.e tree hazards. Fund 2.1 Revise street tree planting,maintenance,and removal requirements a. Staff Create design and maintenance manual with drawings and Planning 2.3.8 H $ Time/General 2010 ISA,ASIA,IRK specifications for planting and maintenance. Fund b. Staff Revise Tigard Municipal Code to establish permit system for Planning 2.2.5 M $ Time/General 2010 ISA,ASLA street tree planting,removal,and replacement. Fund Page 7 of 8 FEEDBACK(ARE YOU GETTING WHAT YOU WANT?) The implementation matrix will allow for the Tree Board to monitor progress of the Urban Forestry Master Plan as part of their annual work program. During the Tree Board's annual joint meetings with Council,progress on the Urban Forestry Master Plan can be communicated. In addition,canopy mapping will be occurring every two years by Metro so that the impact of City programs and policies on Tigard tree canopy can be continually tracked. Finally,the Urban Forestry Master Plan will be updated every five to seven years so that citizen,City,and community stakeholder needs can be reassessed and City programs and policies can be readjusted accordingly. ATTACHMENTS I Attachment 1: "Developing a Community Forest Management Strategy"By the International Society of Arboriculture Attachment 2: Canopy Analysis Results Attachment 3: Urban Forestry Phone Survey Results and Analysis by Steve Johnson and Associates Attachment 4: Internal City Coordination Meeting Results Attachment 5: Stakeholder Interview Results LITERATURE CITED I "Developing a community forest management strategy." International Society of Arboriculture. 18 March 2009 < http://www.isa-arbor.com/publications/tree-ord/ordprtlb.aspx> Miller, R.W. 1988. Urban forestry:planning and managing urban greenspaces. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,NJ. 404 p. Page 8 of 8 Attachment 1 . t`'. t 1 / : . ,, . . , Kaul,,Ha,aaii• . i qpiimmumgrirlimppww. . Consumer - - Conference& Education& Member Tree Climbing About ISA Education Certification' Trade Show Research Services Resources Charnship ISA Home Page Education&Research Tree Ordinance Guidelines .. :'cinar '''irt 1b I Tree Ordinance Guidelines CONSUMER <Previous I Next> INFORMATION Developing a community forest management strategy WEB STORE ISA HISPANA Many community tree ordinances have been developed in response to public outcry over specific perceived problems. Unfortunately, a"band-aid" approach to developing tree ordinances often leads to ordinances that are not consistent with sound management practices, and which can actually thwart good management.We believe that communities need to develop or review their overall urban forest management strategy before considering a new or revised tree ordinance. Policy makers must recognize that the primary goal is effective management of local tree resources, not simply regulation. Tree ordinances provide the legal framework for successful urban forest management by enabling and authorizing management activities. However, methods for managing the urban forest ecosystem are continually evolving, and the input of trained professionals to the management process is critical. Therefore, we believe that ordinances should facilitate rather than prescribe management.Successful tree ordinances follow this guiding principle. If the role of a tree ordinance is to facilitate resource management,the tree ordinance must be part of a larger community forest management strategy. Most of the shortcomings attributed to tree ordinances can usually be traced to the lack of a clearly thought-out management strategy. Poor planning leads to poor ordinances, and even the best-written ordinance is unlikely to succeed in the absence of an overall urban forest Attachment 1 management strategy.We have found that few existing tree ordinances have been developed as part of a comprehensive management strategy. How to develop a management strategy We have generally followed Millers(1988)model of the management planning process. More recently,the descriptive term adaptive management has been applied to this process. Miller(1988)presents the management planning process in terms of three basic questions: • What do you have? • What do you want? • How do you get what you want? Developing an appropriate tree ordinance may be a partial answer to the third question, i.e., it is one way of trying to get what you want. However, it should be clear that the first two questions need to be answered before the third can be addressed.Thus,assessment(determining what you have)and goal-setting(determining what you want)should precede any consideration of an ordinance. In practice,answering the first two questions is often an iterative process.Communities may have ideas about what they want before they fully assess what they have. However, an assessment of existing tree resources can help point out needs that might not be obvious,and will help the community to establish appropriate goals. Since the urban forest resource and the external factors that affect it are continually changing,developing a management strategy must be an ongoing process.Asking a fourth question helps to bring the process full circle: • Are you getting what you want? Miller(1988)represents this phase as a feedback step which connects the third question back to the first. If the planning process is to be effective, it is necessary to determine whether you actually achieve what you want. If not, methods for getting what you want may need to be changed.Alternatively, it is possible that what you get is no longer what you want, and goals will need to be revised as well. We can define a number of specific steps that address each of these four basic questions.These steps have been defined in similar ways by various authors(Lobel 1983, Miller 1988,Jennings 1978, McPherson and Johnson 1988,World Forestry Center and Morgan 1989).For the purposes of our discussion,we recognize seven distinct steps which are discussed below. Working through these steps need not be overly complicated or arduous.The entire process is driven by the specific resources and goals of the individual community. By following the process outlined below, a small community with very modest tree management goals can develop a simple ordinance that addresses its limited goals. On the other hand, communities seeking to develop a comprehensive tree management program or expand their existing programs can do so following the same process. Ordinances developed through this process will be uniquely suited to the Attachment 1 needs of each community. WHAT DO YOU HAVE? Step A. Assess the tree resource. An assessment of tree resources provides the basic information necessary for making management decisions. It also provides a baseline against which change can be measured. Ideally, this assessment should include all tree resources within the planning area of the municipality. However, in communities that are just starting to consider municipal tree management, an incremental approach may be more practical. In this case,the assessment may be focused on a certain portion of the urban forest, such as street trees or trees in a particular geographic area. Tree resource assessments are based on various inventory methods, most of which require some type of survey. Complete tree inventories of all public trees are relatively common, and play a central role in many tree management programs. However, for the purposes of setting goals and initiating a management strategy, information from a representative sample of the urban forest will often suffice. Information that may be useful for management planning includes: • total number of trees classified by species. condition, age, size, and location; • problem situations, such as sidewalk damage, disease and pest problems,or hazardous trees, preferably linked to the basic tree data listed above; • amount of canopy cover by location. Inventories vary in complexity depending on the size of the community and the nature of the data collected. They can be made by city staff. consultants, or trained volunteers. In one small community, an inventory of street trees was conducted as an Eagle Scout project. However, it is important to ensure that the data collected is valid and reliable, since this information provides a basis for decisions made in later steps in the process. Several simple sampling and evaluation techniques applicable to urban forestry are described in the Evaluation pages. Step B. Review tree management practices. An important part of understanding the status of the urban forest is knowing how it has been managed.This requires information on both past and current management methods and actions, such as • municipal tree care practices, including planting, maintenance, and removal; • existing ordinances, and the level of enforcement practiced (numbers of violations. permits and citations issued. penalties and fines Attachment 1 collected); • planning regulations and guidelines that pertain to trees, and numbers of tree-related permits granted, modified,or denied; • activities of municipal departments and public utilities that impact trees. The specific types of information involved will vary by jurisdiction,depending on the level of past and current tree management. Municipal records are the most reliable source of this information. However, records on maintenance or ordinance enforcement may not exist in some cases, and the information may have to be obtained by interviewing local government staff involved with these activities. The point of this step is to identify all of the activities that affect trees in the community. especially those that are under municipal control of one form or other. For instance,various ordinances and planning regulations seemingly unrelated to the tree program may impinge on tree resources and their impact must be taken into account. Before trying to change community forest management. we need to consider both current and historical management practices and identify all of the players involved. WHAT DO YOU WANT? Step C. Identify needs. With information on the status of their tree resources and tree management in hand, a community is in a good position to assess its urban forestry needs. Urban forestry needs can be grouped into three broad categories, although many needs may actually fall into more than one category. Biological needs are those that are related to the tree resource itself. Typical needs in this category include the need to • increase species and age diversity to provide long-term forest stability, • provide sufficient tree planting to keep pace with urban growth and offset tree removal; • increase the proportion of large-statured trees in the forest for greater canopy effects; • ensure proper compatibility between trees and planting sites to reduce sidewalk damage and conflicts with overhead utilities that lead to premature tree removal. Management needs refer to the needs of those involved with the short-and long-term care and maintenance of the urban forest. Some common management needs include: • develop adequate long-term planning to ensure the sustainability of the urban forest; • optimize the use of limited financial and personnel resources; • increase training and education for tree program employees to ensure high quality tree care; • coordinate tree-related activities of municipal departments. Community needs are those that relate to how the public perceives and interacts with the urban forest and the local urban forest management Attachment 1 program. Examples of community needs include: • increase public awareness of the values and benefits associated with trees; • promote better private tree care through better public understanding of the biological needs of trees; • foster community support for the urban forest management program; • promote conservation of the urban forest by focusing public attention on all tree age classes, not just large heritage trees. The needs listed above are common to many communities. However.the specific needs of each community will vary, and may include others not noted here. Step D. Establish goals. Now that we know what we have and what we need,we are ready to set goals to address local urban forestry needs and to guide the formation of the management strategy.To establish realistic goals, it's important to consider limitations posed by the level of community support, economic realities, and environmental constraints. Because of limited resources, communities may be unable to immediately address all of the needs identified. If this is the case, it will be necessary to prioritize goals. In setting priorities, it is important not to neglect goals that require a long-term approach in favor of those that can be achieved quickly. At this point in the process, it is absolutely critical to get community involvement and support. Most tree ordinances rely heavily on voluntary compliance by the public. Such compliance is only likely to be achieved if members of the community support the goals which have been set. Management goals reached through public involvement are likely to reflect community values and therefore enjoy public support. Public participation in the goal-setting process also serves an educational function, providing an opportunity for citizens to see how urban forest management affects their community. Goals are the tangible ends that the management strategy seeks to achieve. It is therefore important to set goals which are quantifiable in some way, so that progress toward the goals can be monitored. For example, while it is admirable to seek to"improve the quality of life"or"protect the health and welfare of the community", such goals are generally too diffuse to be measured in any meaningful way. However a goal such as "establish maximum tree cove(can be made quantifiable by setting canopy cover or tree density standards.Typical tree program goals which are consistent with good urban forest management are discussed in more detail on the Ordinance Goals page. HOW DO YOU GET WHAT YOU WANT? Step E. Select tools and formulate the management strategy. The objective of this step is to develop a management strategy that addresses your specific goals.There are many approaches that can be used to address each goal. and the pros and cons of each approach should be considered. Feasibility, practicality, legality, and economics should be Attachment 1 considered in selecting the appropriate management tools. Some typical tools include: • public education programs. • assistance and incentive programs; • voluntary planting programs; • mitigation guidelines; • planning regulations and guidelines, including the general plan and specific plans: • ordinances. Community involvement and support continues to be important in this phase of the process. Management approaches and tools that are unacceptable to the community are unlikely to succeed. If a local government intends to push for more progressive tree management than local citizens are ready to accept, it should choose tools that will build community awareness and support, including educational and incentive programs.Your assessment of current and past management practices,should provide ideas about the effectiveness of various methods that have been used in your community. Public input and comment should be sought for any new approaches that may be contemplated or developed. In analyzing the approaches or tools that may be used.the role of the tree ordinance in the overall strategy should become clear. In some cases, ordinance provisions will be necessary to authorize various management approaches, such as establishing the position of municipal arborist, requiring the development and implementation of a community forest master plan, or mandating a program of public education. In other cases. ordinance provisions may directly provide necessary parts of the strategy, for example by outlawing destructive practices. The provisions placed in the tree ordinance should be directly related to the goals your community has established for its community forest.As noted earlier, these provisions should designate responsibility, grant authority, and specify enforcement methods.They should set basic performance standards, yet allow for flexibility in determining how these standards can be met. You can follow this link to see our goal-driven Guide to Drafting a Tree Ordinance, but be sure to read about the last two critical steps in the management process below. Step F. Implement the management strategy. Although a plan may appear ideal on paper, it clearly cannot achieve anything unless implemented. This requires the commitment of resources necessary to hire personnel, enforce ordinances, run educational programs, and carry out other components of the management strategy.The number of steps involved in implementing the management strategy may differ between communities.Steps typically involved in implementation may include: • passing an ordinance, • budgeting necessary funds, • hiring a municipal forester or arborist. • appointing a citizen tree advisory board. • formulating a master tree management plan. Attachment 1 • developing public education programs. Since a number of steps are usually involved in implementing the management strategy, it is useful to map out an implementation schedule. This time/action schedule should show the steps that are involved and the time frame within which they should be completed. Progress checks should be built into the schedule to ensure that delays or problems are detected and dealt with. These progress checks could be in the form of required progress reports to the city council or county board of supervisors. It is important to maintain a high profile for the management program during implementation to foster public interest and maintain the commitment of the local government. If interest and support dissipate before the strategy is implemented, the efforts spent to get to this point may be for naught. ARE YOU GETTING WHAT YOU WANT? Step G. Evaluate and revise. Even a successfully implemented management strategy must be monitored to ensure that progress is being made and standards are being met. Evaluation provides the feedback necessary to determine whether the management strategy is working. Periodic evaluation also provides an opportunity to reassess the needs and goals of the community. The management strategy may need to be adjusted to reflect new or altered goals. By providing for regular evaluation as part of the management process. the need for change can be identified before a crisis develops. If you have set quantifiable goals. evaluating progress will be a relatively straightforward process.The types of evaluation techniques you will use will vary with the goal being evaluated. The Evaluation Methods page describes a number of simple techniques that can be used to monitor ordinance effectiveness. <Previous I Tree ordinance web site map I Next> ISA home page I Submit comments or suggestions ©International Society of Arboriculture 2008 P.O.Box 3129,Champaign,IL 61826 (217)355-9411 Email comments&questions to isa©isa-arbor corn Friday,March 27,2009 11:43:36 AM(CST/ISA Headquarters Time) Please click here to view our privacy policy. 1 Attachment 2 1 I Canopy Cover(both 1996 and 2007)located within the June 2008 Tigard City Limits City Limits, June 2008 7556 acres 1996 2007 Percent of Percent of June 2008 June 2008 Acres City Limits Acres City Limits Canopy Cover 1952.75 25.84% 1852.69 24.52% 1996 2007 I Percent of 1 Percent of Percent of Percent of 1996 1996 2007 2007 Canopy Canopy Canopy Canopy Size of Canopy Cluster Acres Cover Clusters Cover Acres Cover Clusters Cover Less than 0.5 acres 366.55 18.77% 1 4356 1 90.94% 584.30 31.54% 7231 93.86% 0.5 to.99 acres 135.76 6.95% 197 4.11% 167.25 9.03% 242 3.14% 1.0 to 1.99 acres 159.25 8.16% 113 2.36% 177.88 9.60% 131 1.70% 2.0 to 4.99 acres 190.86 9.77% 61 1.27% 157.00 8.47% 52 0.67% 5.0 or more acres 1100.33 56.35% 63 1.32% 766.26 41.36% 48 0.62% Total 1952.75 100% 4790 100% 1852.69 100% 7704 100% I Attachment 2 Urban Renewal Zone 191 acres 1996 2007 Acres Percent Acres Percent Canopy Cover of Urban Renewal Zone 19.67 10.30% 18.41 9.64% Attachment 2 Within June 2008 City Limits Jan 1,2008 Buildable Lands Inventory(BU) 528.75 acres BU 1996 1423.32 acres Canopy Cover Year BLI Acres Acres Percent _ 1996 _ _ 1423.32 646.52 45.42% 2007 528.75 226.26 42.79% 1996 BU Canopy Cover Change 1996 Canopy Cover 2007 Canopy Cover within 1996 BLI within 199.6 BU Acres Acres Percent _ Acres Percent 1996 BLI 1423.32 646.52 45.42% 495.24 34.79% Attachment 2 City Limits,June 2008 7556 acres May 13,2008 Taxlots 2007 Canopy Cover Percent Ownership Taxlot Ownership Number Acres Acres Cover City of Tigard 235 388.41 179.18 46.13% Public Right-of-Way n/a 1,288.30 117.45 9.12% Other Public Entity 79 431.65 105.10 24.35% Private 15,880 5,447.64 1,450.96 26.63% Total 16,194 7.556.00 1,852.69 24.52% Attachment 2 Significant Habitat Areas 2007 Canopy Coverage 1852.69 acres res I Acres in 2007 Canopy Coverage Percent of 2007 Citywide Habitat Class Tigard Acres Percent Canopy Cover Highest Value 590.51 267.84 45.36% 14.46% Moderate Value 374.88 193.28 51.56% _ 10.43% Lower Value 447.84 234.96 52.47% 12.68% Total 1413.23 696.08 49.25% 37.57% Attachment 2 Sensitive Lands _ 2007 Canopy Coverage 1852.69 ,acres 1996 Canop Coverage 1952.75 acres_ Acres in 2007 Canopy Coverage 1996 Canopy Coverage Percent Change 1996 Type Tigard Acres Percent Citywide Percent Acres Percent Citywide Percent to 2007 Local Wetland Inventory 290.91 116.01 39.88% 6.26% 145.98 50.18% 7.48% -10.30% CWS Vegetated Corridor 704.78 302.85 42.97% 16.35% 348.16 49.40% 17.83% -6.43% FEMA 100-yr Floodplain 592.6 188.05 31.73% 10.15% 213.17 35.97% 10.92% -4.24% Slopes>25% 195.51 129.64 66.31% 7.00% 13028 66.64% 6.67% -0.33% Total 1783.8 736.55 41.29% 39.76% 837.59 46.96% 42.89% -5.66% f Attachment 2 Subdivisions Approved in 1996/97 Canopy Coverage 1996 2007 Number Total Acres Acres Percent Acres Percent Change 1996-2007 18 72.76 18.32 25.18% 12.49 17.17% 31.82% Attachment 2 City Limits,June 2008 7556 1996 Canopy Cover 2007 Canopy Cover _Percent Change 1996 Zoning 2008 Acres Acres Percent Acres Percent _ to 2007 Commercial 800 88.13 11.02% 80.52 10.07% _ -0.95% _ Industrial 863 139.81 16.20% 137.58 15.94% -0.26% Mixed Use _ _ 701 150.3 21.44% 99.79 14.24% _ -7.21% Residential 5192 1574.42 30.32% 1534.72 29.56% -0.76% Total 7556 1952.66 I 25.84% 1852.61 24.52% -1.32% Attachment 3 CITY OF TIGARD 2008 URBAN FORESTRY SURVEY STEVE JOHNSON&ASSOCIATES * P.O. BOX 3708 * EUGENE,OREGON 97403 TOPLINE FREQUENCIES **Topline results include the text of each question, the response categories, and the number and percent of responses in each category.All questions include categories for Refused(7 or 97), Don't Know(8 or 98)and No Answer(9 or 99). In the interest of space, responses such as "I don't know," "I can't think of anything,"and "no comment"have been removed from the document. The "open answers"are recorded verbatim. They have been corrected for spelling but not grammar. HELLO! Hello, I'm calling on behalf of the City of Tigard. They have asked us to conduct a survey of residents 18 and older about trees in the city and urban forestry. The survey takes about ten minutes and is voluntary and anonymous. I'd like to start now. [INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF RESPONDENT SELF IDENTIFIES AS UNDER 18 ASK FOR SOMEONE OVER 18. IF NO ONE IS AVAILABLE TRY AND SCHEDULE CALL BACK. IF THIS IS THE LAST DIAL ATTEMPT GO TO NOQUAL] PRESS START TO BEGIN—OR—PRESS DISPO TO SCHEDULE CALLBACK *INTRO FOR PARTIALS: Hi, I'm calling back to finish an interview for the City of Tigard that we began earlier. Is that(you/person available)? SATIS1 I'd like to begin by asking if you are very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees in the following locations. First, what about the trees on your street? PROBE: Are you very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees on your street? l VERY SATISFIED 103 25.75% 2 SATISFIED 246 61.5% 3 DISSATISFIED 32 8% 4 VERY DISSATISFIED 10 2.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 9 2.25% 400 100% SATIS2 What about the trees in your neighborhood? PROBE: Are you very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees in your neighborhood? City of l ivard l;rhan Forestry Sur e∎ 2008 1 opline Frequencies Page I Attachment 3 1 VERY SATISFIED 104 26% 2 SATISFIED 242 60.5% 3 DISSATISFIED 43 10.75% 4 VERY DISSATISFIED 5 1.25% 7 REF/8DK/9NA 6 1.5% 400 100% SATIS3 What about trees in the city as a whole? PROBE: Are you very satisfied, satisfied, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied with the quantity and quality of trees in the city as a whole? 1 VERY SATISFIED 61 15.25% 2 SATISFIED 251 62.75% 3 DISSATISFIED 59 14.75% 4 VERY DISSATISFIED 10 2.5% 7 REF/8 DK/9 NA 19 4.75% 400 100% HOOD Does your neighborhood need more trees and landscaping to improve its appearance and environmental quality? 1 YES 101 25.25% 2 NO 294 73.5% 7 REF/ 8 DI(/9 NA 5 1.25% 400 100% IMPORT! Now I would like to read you some statements people have made about trees. For each one, would you tell me if you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. First, trees are important to a community's character and desirability as a place to live. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 249 62.25% 2 AGREE 138 34.5% 3 DISAGREE 10 2.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 1 0.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 2 0.5% 400 100% IMPORT2 It is important to me to have a view of trees from my home. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? I STRONGLY AGREE 218 54.5% Cite of l-iard urban Forests Surve\ - 2008 Toplinc Frequencies l'aoe 2 Attachment 3 2 AGREE 148 37% 3 DISAGREE 28 7% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 4 1% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 2 0.5% 400 100% IMPORT3 Trees contribute to the value of residential property. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 200 50% 2 AGREE 170 42.5% 3 DISAGREE 19 4.75% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 3 0.75% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 8 2% 400 100% IMPORT4 Trees contribute to the value of commercial property. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 125 31.25% 2 AGREE 205 51.25% 3 DISAGREE 45 11.25% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 3 0.75% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 22 5.5% 400 100% IMPORTS More street trees would be good for the City. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 97 24.25% 2 AGREE 202 50.5% 3 DISAGREE 62 15.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 9 2.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 30 7.5% 400 100% IMPORT6 It would benefit the City if more resources could be directed to better maintain and protect existing trees. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? 1 STRONGLY AGREE 102 25.5% City of Tigard l.rban F otestry Surrey —2003 Topline Frequencies Page 3 Attachment 3 2 AGREE 203 50.75% 3 DISAGREE 50 12.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 10 2.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 35 8.75% 400 100% IMPORT? The City should require that some trees be preserved and new ones planted on sites that are being developed. PROBE: Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree? I STRONGLY AGREE 160 40% 2 AGREE 193 48.25% 3 DISAGREE 30 7.5% 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 9 2.25% 7REF/ 8DK/9NA 8 2% 400 100% FORESTI All cities have an urban forest. The urban forest in Tigard consists of the trees in parks, along streets, in yards, on empty lots and in forested areas. Do you think the overall quality of Tigard's urban forest has increased, decreased or stayed the same in the last 10 years? 1 INCREASED 73 18.25% 2 DECREASED 166 41.5% 3 STAYED THE SAME 117 29.25% 7REF/ 8DK/9NA 44 11% 400 100% FOREST2 In the future, do you expect the overall quality of Tigard's urban forest to increase, decrease, or stay the same? l INCREASED 113 28.25% 2 DECREASED 126 31.5% 3 STAYED THE SAME 138 34.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 23 5.75% 400 100% FOREST3 On a scale of 1-10, where one is poor and 10 is excellent , how would you rate the extent and appearance of trees in Tigard? I ONE 3 0.75% 2 TWO 0 0% 3 THREE 14 3.5% 4 FOUR 11 2.75% ( it■ of I i,ardt t rban Forestr), Serve■ 2008 Iopline Frequencies Pa_e 4 Attachment 3 5 FIVE 61 15.25% 6 SIX 48 12% 7 SEVEN 96 24% 8 EIGHT(GO TO TAXI) 119 29.75% 9 NINE(GO TO TAXI) 19 4.75% 10 TEN (GO TO TAXI) 24 6% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 5 1.25% 400 100% FOREST4 What could be done to improve the appearance and quality of trees in Tigard? OPEN ENDED—RECORD EXACT RESPONSE Not cut them all. They are cutting out more than they are putting in. They should require developers to keep some of the existing trees. Better maintenance. More variety. They need to plant more trees when they remove them. Do not just plant commercialized trees. Maintain the trees. Trimming them and things like that. Ask the people to clean up more. During the fall, clean up sidewalk areas like they should. More maintenance, I say plant more,just preserve the ones that are there. Certain areas. Save certain trees. Taken care of the trees. I don't have any good ideas. Don't cut down more big trees. Trimmed when it comes to wires,and in areas with no trees new ones could be planted. When they are doing commercial development they should plant trees when they are done building. In the vast expanses of parking lots there should be shade trees for the cars. It would help with gas so people don't have to use the AC. Shade trees help a lot. Public awareness. Developers not remove existing trees as much. One thing I don't like is the power company coming along and trimming them to look stupid. Better trees that don't tear up streets and utilities. Don't do anything. They'll grow by themselves. No sense in paying tax payers' money on trees that can take care of themselves. High quality maintenance. Let the trees get older. You know you do a good job. Keep up the good work. Add trees along Durham Road and downtown Main Street. More fir trees or pine green trees. Plant more, I guess. I think more of them. And better maintenance of the area around the trees. Plant more trees;take care of them. They don't have a nice setup in Tigard, lack of parks. City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey—2008 Topline Frequencies Page 5 Attachment 3 Maintenance More maintenance from landowners and the city. Better protection of the exciting trees in areas. Keeping them clean, away from street signs and pruning them. Quit cutting them down I think. They could be taken care of. Trimming. Quit cutting them down. They can be trimmed up so they can plant more trees. Plant more trees. Prevent cut down of existing ones, plant more trees. They could put the areas back that used to be there,that are gone. Plant more. I think if they planted the proper trees so that the roots would not appear and break up the sidewalks. I think people either put them down and don't pull out the roots. Ones left are well maintained, pick up leaves off sidewalks and streets for bikers. To trim them. Plant more street trees on Greenburg Road. Not letting people cut them down. Grow more. There are places where there are a lot of trees and places where there are none,trees should be everywhere, especially where there are none. It would also be good to discus the things people don't want to see, especially industrial areas. Trees should be used to shield them from their neighbors. Streets be lined with trees. Leave them alone. Basic maintenance. I think if there is some sort of a plan. When you build new housing areas and existing areas you should have a comprehensive plan about the comprehensive trees. Whether the city is going plant the trees or it is going to be left to individuals. In some areas I think you need to have management people that know what is going on. Placement of trees and people with knowledge of what is going on. It would be more beneficial to have more parks.Percentage of parks in a residential area. Protection of some of the areas, like stream land from development. Maintenance around power lines. More trees. Nothing else. Trees aren't taken care of well,trees in vacant lots should become less neglected. Fertilize. Find a way to keep away all the leaves. Pruning and maintained health, be maintained better. More volunteers to maintain them. Plant more trees! Plant more quality trees. I think that we need to keep the landscaping up. We need to maintain our trees. If we have more trees we will have a better community. City of Tigard Urban Forestry Survey 008 Topline Frequencies Page 6 Attachment 3 Put them in strategic locations like downtown. They should put a ton of trees downtown. They want to improve downtown they should put in good trees. Don't put them there for no reason. Just so much building going on more regulations about what trees need to remain. Probably the amount. There could be more of them on major highways. Highway 99 has none on that road. Plant more trees. More placed in better locations, not be so messy. Add more trees, keep the exciting trees. Better pruning with trees along the streets a lot that have grown big and unruly. Better maintenance. I think that some of the street trees get in the way. Probably just more attention to them. The property owners need to pay more attention to their trees probably. If we are going to have trees,they need to be maintained. Not be willing to cut so many when they are developing. Don't know, maintain them. Get the city counsel in the city forest, they should be running the city not the trees. Maintain damage is done. Leave them standing, pruning assisting their health. Maintain what they have and not let the new buildings do away with the trees. Plant new ones after they have built homes or buildings. Plant more and not chop down forest to put up condos. I wish people would take care of trees better. They could have more trees where there are no trees. More street trees. Don't think anything should be done. Trim them. Highway 99 at the bridge. Just be conscientious. Plant more trees, when you remove trees, plant trees where the space is available. It should be a law to plant trees. Provide good maintenance. Downtown area needs more trees. Old trees be cut down, plant new ones. Preserve during development. Better overall maintenance. Better maintained. Pick up more leaves. I don't have a problem with it, so nothing. Need more trees in old town. Cut them all down,too many large trees,they are blocking the view of everything. They need to at least be trimmed. Developer should put trees of appropriate size for the lot. A little bit better maintained by people that take care of the trees. More of them along the main streets. They could be preserved. Planting the right trees. And more of them. Trimming and landscaping around trees. Like the downtown,they made it look all cutesie. Cit■ ofTisard Urban FOrestr, Serve) 2008 Tonline Frequencies Pace 7 Attachment 3 Plant more, let more streets be planted next to trees. Less shopping malls, have an area of trees planted, 99 west.They put ugly storage unit,they cut down beautiful trees for that. Improve the city council decisions. Pruning. A little bit of pruning. There could be improvements on highway 99 and on commercial properties. I see a lot of death that needs to be maintained a little bit better. More trees on busier streets. Plant more of them, take care of them,and cut their branches and everything. First of all plant more trees if there is the space. Largely, plant new ones and stop cutting down the old ones. Probably more aggressive street tree planting program. Out reach to property owners that have trees and preserve them. Most of the trees are on private property. As to the ones that are on public domain, they should be maintained professionally with an eye towards long term growth. I like where homes don't go right to the creek and there is green spaces along creeks. Maybe more trimming on trees. Plant more. Expert looking at the issue. Old ones let go. Cleaned up. By preserving existing trees. Better maintenance. Leave them alone. Remove many of them. Public works departments are not funded to protect neighborhoods as a result of leaf fall. There is not enough street sweeping services. Downtown could plant trees. Lining the streets and putting them in parks, but I think they're doing that right now. Where I live there are many trees in the community. More trees, as far as the existing trees, I'm not sure what to say about their quality and appearance. Proper maintenance of the trees and removal of the dead or improper growth. Plant more, rip up cement and plant trees. In certain neighborhoods there could just be more of them. And more yard debris pick-up, so that people are not afraid to have trees. Anything that would make having a tree easier would be good. I would like to see their messes cleaned up quicker. If they had left the old trees to live, it would have been better. They put up some new dinky trees.And they just don't look as good. It's too late. Maybe better maintained and kept trees. Maintain existing trees. Plant more. City to replace trees that are deceased or need to be replaced. Cut down dying trees,take care of trees next to main roads. Stop cutting them down. When a large tree is cut down, requires two of three tree in their place. Adding variety. More of them in public areas. In downtown Tigard. it\ of"I"igard Urban Forestry Survey -2008 Topline Frequencies Page 8 Attachment 3 I think they need to plant more trees along streets and in newly developed areas. Add some along 99. Better trimming and maintenance. Maybe more appropriate trees in the area they're going to be planted. I guess I'm thinking about some trees are planted too close to the street, and that causes problems with leaves in the sewer and sidewalks heaving from the roots. Maintenance Maintenance and replanting with trees that die. Just encourage more people to plant proper trees and take care of the ones they have. And not cut them down unnecessarily. Pruning. In the greenway, we have lots of English ivy that is destroying our trees. Dead trees. Not cutting down massive amounts when they build new areas. Plants more trees along the parks. I don't know what could be done to make them better. I noticed when new development is going in were their is a forestry areas and they take out the tress and I don't like that. I don't like the ripping up of the stuff along Vano Creek. Stop chopping down trees. More maintenance and planting more trees. Plant more decorative trees. Some of the ones that flower in the spring. More evergreens. The big scrub maples, big yellow leaves. Replace stuff with more colors for spring and fall. More red maples. Planting more tress in the downtown Tigard area and taking care of trees that are at the end of their life. Taking down and replacing trees that are dying. They're in pretty good shape. Maintain the one we have, and plant more. Keep them trimmed away from the important stuff. Replace trees as they are taken out. Medians planted with trees. Uniform tree type on various streets so that it isn't so raged looking. Better up keep. Get rid of the old ones that are dying.Just clean up. Plant more. Help maintain the huge fir trees. I think that the city needs to be a little more proactive in trimming them so things can be seen. So that people who are unfamiliar with the area can see the street signs. It's a huge sign. If people are elderly then they can't trim them themselves.Need to be more proactive. I really don't know if I like a tree in front of my house, I wouldn't plant it but I think trees are important. Stop cutting down all the trees on all developments. Keep them trimmed up a little bit nicer and leaves in the fall are a big problem, they make a mess. Nothing I think they are fine. Take down the trees that drop leaves. I'm not sure we need more trees. Cite of I igard f roan I-orestr∎ Suir■e■ - 2008 Topline Frequencies Page 9 Attachment 3 I don't really know, stop cutting down all the trees, build where they do not have to remove trees. Just prune and thin out the trees. Increase the health of trees. More open green spaces and more trees in commercial areas. Plant more trees. Better maintaining by replanting. More planting. Plant more. I'm thinking of the one on the corner of my lot, it has pruning problems due to the power lines. It really distorts the shape of the tree. Stop building houses. Cutting them back and some pruning them. More planting. Do not cut down anymore than they absolutely have to. I think maybe stronger education on how to take care of trees. More development of downtown,Tigard with lots of trees and landscaping. Better management by the city and government. When developing, keep more trees that are already existing. Or replanting trees that have been taken down to build a new house. Regular maintenance. I think there should be more, plant more. I feel that every time they cut one down they put new ones in. They've stopped doing that. They don't replace anything, it looks like a concrete forest. I think more of the visual stuff and getting the community more involved,too many businesses. I think they are okay. I don't have an opinion on it. Planting to include green space and park settings, Bull Mountain is an example of how not to do it. More trees. Better upkeep. Not cut them down. I would think that they could be better shaped, and trimmed when needed. I fit the location where they fit size wise. Leave the consumer alone. They have their own trees, so let them do what they want. Some of them need to be shaped better. The ones on the road. I don't know,just make sure they're maintained and plant new trees as ones die or become available. They are properly cared for and planted more of them. Better maintenance. Better care and clean up. Variety and maintenance. I would presume plant more. We're going to suggest the city does a better job of maintaining them. To improve our park, we're on Woodard park, it would improve the park if they would thin the trees that are diseased and prune them, or remove them. Quit cutting them down for new developments. Planting more trees. of Tigard l;rban Forestr Serve) 2008 Topline Frequencies Pauc I0 Attachment 3 Just constant vigilance. More and just more. Plant trees where there are no trees. Where I live there are lots of trees. Leave them alone. Better maintenance. Plant more. TAXI Currently, property owners are responsible for maintaining street trees in front of their property. Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose a program that transfers the responsibility for maintaining street trees to the City? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 65 16.25% 2 SUPPORT 128 32% 3 OPPOSE 136 34% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 38 9.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/ 9NA 33 8.25% 400 100% TAX2 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose additional funding from increased city fees, charges, or property taxes to fund a City street tree program? I STRONGLY SUPPORT 25 6.25% 2 SUPPORT 151 37.75% 3 OPPOSE 132 33% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 63 15.75% 7 REF/ 8 DK/ 9 NA 29 7.25% 400 100% TAX3 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose additional funding from increased city fees, charges, or property taxes to fund a more comprehensive tree planting and maintenance program in Tigard parks and open spaces? PROBE: This would include trees throughout Tigard, not just on streets. 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 32 8% 2 SUPPORT 190 47.5% 3 OPPOSE 104 26% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 53 13.25% 7 REF/ 8DK/ 9NA 21 5.25% 400 100% TAX4 Would you prefer volunteering to plant and maintain trees or paying a fee to the City to do this? PROBE: Even if you are not a property owner, which would you prefer? ( I ip.uJ I rhan I r■ 200N I I IL IL•nclr, I';ICI I I Attachment 3 1 PLANT 208 52% 2 PAY 106 26.5% 3 IF VOL—NEITHER 61 15.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 25 6.25% 400 100% CHOICE1 Which of the following would be your first choice of where the city should plant more trees? (PROBE FROM LIST) 1 ALONG STREETS 99 24.75% 2 IN PEOPLE'S YARDS 10 2.5% 3 IN COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL AREAS 51 12.75% 4 IN PARKS 79 19.75% 5 NEAR STREAMS/NATURAL FORESTED AREAS 129 32.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9NA 32 8% 400 100% CHOICE2 Which of the following statements most closely represents your opinion about trees. 1 PRESERVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE 128 32% 2 WHEN TREES ARE REMOVED, REPLACE THEM 129 32.25% 3 PRESERVE LARGE OR UNIQUE TREES 60 15% 4 ALLOW INDIVIDUALS REMOVE TREES IF WISH 71 17.75% 5 IF VOL—NONE OF THESE STATEMENTS 1 0.25% 7 REF/8 DK/9 NA 11 2.75% 400 100% HAZARD Currently, if there is a dispute between neighboring property owners regarding a potentially hazardous tree,the City does not get involved, and instead directs the neighbors to work out a solution through civil means. Would you strongly support, support, oppose,or strongly oppose the creation of a program where the City would become involved in disputes between neighbors regarding hazardous trees? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 54 13.5% 2 SUPPORT 185 46.25% 3 OPPOSE 101 25.25% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 49 12.25% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 11 2.75% 400 100% Cite of Tigard La ban 1 orest ■ Smey 2003 Topline Frequencies Page 12 Attachment 3 REG1 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose tree removal regulations during property development, even when they limit the size and extent of potential buildings or profits? 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 59 14.75% 2 SUPPORT 168 42% 3 OPPOSE 99 24.75% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 32 8% 7REF/8DK/9NA 42 10.5% 400 100% REG2 If you had the opportunity to develop your property, would you be in favor of city tree regulations that required preservation of existing large trees and landscaping or tree planting afterwards? 1 YES 264 66% 2 NO 97 24.25% 3 IF VOL— IT DEPENDS 14 3.5% 7 REF/ 8 DK/9 NA 25 6.25% 400 100% REG3 Should the City allow the decision to preserve trees to be left to the developer? 1 YES 80 20% 2 NO 293 73.25% 3 IF VOL— IT DEPENDS 17 4.25% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 10 2.5% 400 100% REG4 If the City were to enact new tree protection measures, would you like to see them focused on natural areas, ornamental landscape trees, both types equally, or on something else. 1 NATURAL AREAS 149 37.25% 2 ORNAMENTAL TREES 11 2.75% 3 BOTH 192 48% 4 SOMETHING ELSE 25 6.25% 7 REF/8 DK/9 NA 23 5.75% 400 100% REG5 Would you strongly support, support, oppose, or strongly oppose city regulations that would provide some level of protection for large, healthy trees on developed private property? PROBE: This would apply to all current private property. 1 STRONGLY SUPPORT 78 19.5% City of Tigard Urban Forestry Serve) —2008 Topline Frequencies Page 13 Attachment 3 2 SUPPORT 224 56% 3 OPPOSE 60 15% 4 STRONGLY OPPOSE 20 5% 7 REF/ 8DK/ 9NA 18 4.5% 400 100% REG6 If the city were to enact new tree protection measures, where would you prefer to see them focused: on larger groves of native trees or individual trees of significant size. 1 LARGE GROVES 221 55.25% 2 INDIVIDUAL TREES 113 28.25% 3 IF VOL— BOTH 31 7.75% 4 IF VOL—NEITHER 18 4.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 17 4.25% 400 100% AGE In what year were you born? Coded Categories: AGE 18-24 3 0.75% AGE 25-34 23 5.75% AGE 35-44 59 14.75% AGE 45-54 106 26.5% AGE 55-64 91 22.75% AGE 65 AND OLDER 118 29.5% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 0 0% 400 100% GENDER Are you male or female? 1 MALE 160 40% 2 FEMALE 240 60% 7 REF/ 8DK/9NA 0 0% 400 100% RENT Do you own your home, or do you rent? 1 OWN 344 86% 2 RENT 49 12.25% 7 REF/ 8DIU9NA 7 1.75% 400 100% ('itv of I ieard I than I ev 2(08 ()Mine I rcyucncic, N;r!c 14 Attachment 3 STREET What neighborhood do you live in? PROBE: What is your closest elementary school? PROBE: What is your closest cross street? OPEN ENDED—RECORD EXACT RESPONSE END That's the end of the survey! On behalf of the City of Tigard, we would like to thank you for your time and participation. Have a great day. Good bye. NOQAL I'm sorry, we can only interview residents of who are 18 years of age or older). I'm sorry to have bothered you. Have a nice (day/evening). Cit■ of I ieanl I Than I-urestr■ Survey 2UU3 — I Ohline frequencies Pone I ti Attachment 3 • STEVE JOHNSON&ASSOCIATES • P.O.BOX 3708 • EUGENE,OREGON 97403 Summary of Results Tigard Urban Forestry Survey By Stephen Johnson, PhD& Christine McCaslin, MCRP December 2008 Introduction The City of Tigard has an active program to regulate, encourage and manage trees inside the city. As part of these efforts Tigard decided to conduct a survey to assess the opinions of residents on the quality of Tigard's trees, the state of the urban forest inside the city, and attitudes toward changes in regulations and funding related to the future management of the urban forest. Working closely with Tigard's City Arborist, Todd Prager, Steve Johnson&Associates planned and implemented a telephone survey of 400 Tigard residents in the Fall of 2008. Survey Results This report summarizes the major survey results. Readers can look at the Topline Frequencies section of the report for the exact question wording and the summarized responses to each question. Readers may refer to the 26 tables in the Banners section of this report for more detail and to find cross-tabulations of each question with a wide range of demographic information. Readers should also look at the open-ended responses inside the Topline section, where respondents give narrative answers to one of the questions. Finally, when looking at the figures in this report readers should note that the horizontal scale is not always the same. The goal of each figure is to give the reader an accurate visual representation of the positions taken by respondents and the scale is adjusted with that goal in mind. The exact numbers used to produce each figure are available both in the Topline and in the Banner Tables. For this survey of 400 Tigard residents the margin of error is+4.8%at a confidence level of 95%. This means for any result there is a 95%chance the true answer, if all residents of Tigard had been interviewed, would be within a range no greater than 4.8%above or below the number estimated from the survey and used in this report. tilly C ,IuhI1�UIl c� \��11CIUIU� i,,wc ( its 1)1 I icar.l I rhan 2i1n5 ,)I Results Attachment 3 Satisfaction with City Trees In general, residents of Tigard are satisfied with the quality and quantity of trees in the city. The survey asked respondents to judge their satisfaction with trees on their own street, in their neighborhood, and in the city as a whole. The following figure shows the percentage of respondents who are either"very satisfied,"or"satisfied"with the trees in each of these three locations. Figure One: Satisfaction with Quantity and Quality of Trees 100%- 90% - - - 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Trees on Your Street Trees in Your Neighborhood Trees in the City •Very Satisfied •Satisfied As displayed in Figure 1,the levels of satisfaction with the trees in Tigard is high, especially on people's own street and in their own neighborhood, where in both cases 87%of respondents report being either"satisfied,"or"very satisfied." For the city as a whole the level of satisfaction is slightly less, but still a very high 78%. As a follow-up to the questions on satisfaction with trees, respondents were also asked if their neighborhood needed more trees or landscaping. A large majority, 74%, thought that more trees or landscaping was not needed, further reinforcing the idea that people are well satisfied with the current state of trees in the city. At a later point in the survey respondents were asked if they thought the overall quality of the urban forest had"increased,""decreased,"or"stayed the same"over the last 10 years. Forty-eight percent thought the quality of the urban forest had either"increased," or"stayed the same,"while 42%thought it had"decreased." Older respondents, over age 65,were much more likely to think the quality of the urban forest had"increased." Such respondents are more likely to have been in the city during the last 10 years than are younger respondents. There was also a significant difference between men and women on this question,with women twice as likely as men to think the quality of the urban forest had "increased." See Banner Table 11 for more detail. SIC\C,I,�hI1�Un d \»t ciate, - - - Page 2 ('il\ olI iiard I rhan I oreslr■ Sur\c■ 2I)ll8 tiunn lar\ or Results Attachment 3 Respondents were also asked if they expected the quality of the urban forest to "increase,""decrease,"or"stay the same" in the future. Respondents were very optimistic about the future of the Tigard urban forest, with 63%thinking the quality would either"increase"or"stay the same." Again, respondents over age 65 were the most optimistic about the future of the urban forest, while there was no difference between men and women. See Banner Table 12 for more detail. As a final question about the quality of the urban forest, respondents were asked to rate the extent and appearance of the trees in Tigard on a scale from 1-10,where one is poor and 10 is excellent. Forty-one percent of respondents gave the trees in Tigard a high score of 8, 9, or 10,while only 4% gave trees a"poor" score of 1, 2, or 3. For those who gave the trees anything other than one of the three highest scores, we asked a follow-up question about what could be done to improve the appearance and quality of the trees. These respondents had many suggestions, but by far the most common ideas were to add more trees, prevent trees from being removed, and to improve the maintenance of existing trees. See the narrative responses to question Forest 4 in the Topline section that follows this report for the complete set of suggestions for tree improvements. The Importance of Trees Respondents were asked to give their level of agreement with seven statements about the importance of trees, or what trees contribute to the city of Tigard. For each question respondents were asked if they"strongly agreed,""agreed,""disagreed,"or"strongly disagreed"with the statement that was read to them. Figure 2, below, shows the percentage of respondents who either"strongly agreed,"or"agreed"with each statement. Ste\e John,on Page 3 (•it\ uI I it2ard I rhan I orest ■ Sur\e\ 21)(18 tiumntar■ t,f Results Attachment 3 Figure Two: Level of Agreement with Statements About Trees 100% - - 90% 80% 70% - 60% 50% � - 40% p�p 30% 8 - 20% - 10% IM 1111 0% I Community View ofTrees Residential Commercial More Street More Preserve and Character Value Value Trees Resources Plant ■Strongly Agree ■Agree Looking at Figure 2 it is clear that a substantial majority of the people of Tigard agree with every statement about the importance of trees and what they contribute to the city. The"lowest" level of support is a very high 75%for the idea that more street trees would be good for the city,while the"highest" level of support is almost 97%for the idea that trees are important to a community's character and desirability as a place to live. For three of the items: the importance of trees to community character;the importance of being able to view trees from home;and the importance of trees to residential property values, trees are so highly valued that the level of strong agreement with each statement is over 50%, and total agreement is over 90%. An analysis of the data shows that women are much more likely than men to hold strong opinions in support of trees, with the level of"strong agreement"ranging from 12%to 25%higher than that of men. However, unlike the position older respondents took on the questions about satisfaction with trees, older respondents were the least likely to "strongly agree"with the statements on the importance of trees, although a majority of older respondents did generally agree with each statement. See Banner Tables 5 to 10 for more information. til��c.I,,hn.0m << �titillcia1C? I'aC'e 4 ( it■ ul I iCaI l l rhan I nrc.u-], 'uric∎ 201il ',II mm;u t I Itcsult� Attachment 3 Funding Programs for Trees At this point in the survey,respondents were asked about their level of support or opposition for possible new tree programs. In addition, support for increased fees, charges, or property taxes to pay for new tree programs was also investigated. See Figure 3 below for the level of support and the level of opposition for each of these programs. Figure Three: Support Levels for City Tree Taxes 60% 50% - 40% -- - 30% - 20% — 10% - - - 0% -- Street Tree Maintenance Transfer Increase Charges for Street Tree Increase Charges for to City Program Comprehensive Tree Program •Strongly Support•Support 0 Oppose ii Strongly Oppose From Figure 3, we see that there is weak support for the idea of transferring responsibility for the maintenance of street trees from property owners to the City(48%vs. 44%). However, when asked about the idea of increased taxes or fees for a City street tree program, the weak support turns to opposition with almost 50%of respondents opposed. On the question of fees for a comprehensive tree program inside Tigard parks and open spaces, respondents are much more receptive, with significantly greater support than opposition (56%vs. 39%). For the funding increase questions,women are more supportive than men, and support levels are highest among respondents from ages 35 to 64 (the ages when people are more likely to be employed). For each of the funding increase questions, approximately 90% of the supporters for one program also support the other program. The main difference is that the program for trees in the parks picks up additional supporters. See Banner Tables 14, 15 and 16 for more detail. In addition to the three questions about programs and funding, respondents were also asked whether they would prefer to volunteer to plant and maintain trees, or to pay a fee for the city to do this type of work. See Figure 4 below. 4,wv Page ('its ail I i"ir.l I than I Or■\tr■ `un \ 2 llli 'ummar) f I culls Attachment 3 Figure Four: Volunteer to Plant or Pay a Fee? 60% - - 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Plant Pay Neither As Figure 4 shows, by a two-to-one majority, people would prefer to volunteer rather than pay. This was true across a wide spectrum of the people of Tigard, with majorities of both women and men, renters and owners, and all ages except those over 65 or younger than 25. However,there was weak support for volunteering among those who strongly supported the idea of increased funding for tree programs. Supporters of increased funding for trees were more supportive of paying the city to carry out tree planting and maintenance. See Banner table 17 for more information. Planting and Preserving Trees Respondents were next asked to pick their first choice for where the City should plant new trees from a list of five possible places. Figure 5 shows, in descending order,what percentage of respondents support each of the five choices. ‘,11‘c.101111~011 I'uEc t) ('if\ o1 LI I rhan I rc lr Sur 211115 'unun:u' OI It�tiuIIs Attachment 3 Figure Five: Where Should the City Plant Trees? 35% - 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Near Along Streets h Parks In Commercial Areas In People's Yards Streams/Natural Areas The most common choice for where to plant new trees is clearly near streams and natural areas. In addition, if the support for planting new trees in parks is added to the support for steams and natural areas,the total support level would slightly exceed 50%. There is nearly twice as much support for new trees along streets,than there is support for new trees within private commercial property or within people's private yards. According to the open-ended responses within the Topline section, many respondents desired street trees and specifically, Highway 99 trees. Respondents were also asked to choose among four different statements about tree preservation that most closely represented their own opinion. Figure 6 shows the level of support for each of these statements. I'a<g'c ( it■ ul I I rhun I urc to ti ii e.\ 2(181 tiunlnlal'\ ��I Ru alts Attachment 3 Figure Six: Tigard Residents Want To... 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% j - - 10% , 5% LIU 0% Replace Trees Wien Preserve as Many Trees Allow Individuals to Reserve Large or Unpue Removed as Possible Remove Trees Trees As Figure 6 shows,two very related opinions are the most commonly held by residents of Tigard. Thirty-two percent of the public wants trees replaced if they are removed, and 32%want as many trees as possible to be preserved. On the other hand,there is very little support(18%) for allowing individuals to remove trees if they wish to. Hazardous Trees Respondents were asked if they thought the City should create a new program where they would be directly involved in disputes between neighboring property owners over potentially hazardous trees. Residents of Tigard are in favor of such a program and by a margin of 60%to 38%and want the City to become directly involved. Those residents who want the City to be more involved are also strong supporters of transferring responsibility for street trees to the City and increased funding for tree programs. See Banner Table 20 for more information. New Tree Regulations The survey finished by asking respondents a set of questions about six possible new tree regulations the city might consider. The first regulation concerned the regulation of tree removal during property development. It was made clear in the question that such a regulation might limit the size and extent of possible building or profits from development. However, even with this limit explicitly described a strong majority of residents, 57%, were in support of the idea, and only 33%were opposed. Respondents who had previously supported increasing fees were much more likely to support this idea than those who opposed increasing fees. See Banner Table 21 for additional information. The second regulation asked about requiring the preservation of existing large trees,as well as subsequent landscaping and tree planting, if the respondent were to develop their sto e John,m �L \,uiciulc, Pate. K t it ■rt 1 i gird I rhun I ,r ,u +urn c 2018 tiununan ol l cult'. Attachment 3 own property. Even though such a regulation might have a direct economic impact on respondents, 66%said they would be in favor of regulation, and only 24%were opposed. The opponents of this measure were much more likely to also oppose increasing tree related fees than were the supporters. See Banner Table 22 for more information. The third regulation asked if the City should leave tree preservation decisions up to developers. Tigard residents were overwhelmingly opposed to this idea, with opposition almost four times as large as support(73%vs. 20%). Here too,the supporters of this measure were also much more likely to oppose tree taxation measures. See Banner Table 23 for more information. The forth regulation asked if people desired protection measures on trees in natural areas, on ornamental landscape trees, or on both equally. Most people (48%)wanted the protection focused on both areas equally. However, a large number of people wanted the protection focused on natural areas(37%), and few respondents wanted the protection focused on ornamental trees(3%). The fifth regulation asked for their level of support for rules that would give some protection for large healthy trees on developed private property. The total level of support for this idea was a very high 77%, although strong support was only 20%. Similarly to the second regulation above,the opponents of this measure were much more likely to also oppose increasing tree related fees than were the supporters. See Banner Table 25 for more information. Finally, respondents were asked if they would prefer to see the City enact tree protection measures aimed at large groves of native trees, or at individual trees of significant size. By almost two-to-one(55%vs. 28%)residents would prefer to see protection aimed at large groves of native trees. Conclusions The residents of Tigard have substantial interest and concern about trees inside the City, as demonstrated by their agreement with with statements about the importance of trees and their choices regarding tree preservation. In general residents are very satisfied with the trees in Tigard, in particular those on their street or inside their neighborhood. The residents also think the Tigard urban forest is in good shape and is likely to stay that way or improve over time. Tigard residents think trees are important community attributes and that they contribute to and enhance the community in a variety of ways, including both residential and commercial property values. Tigard residents want trees preserved,new trees planted, and increased regulation aimed at the protection of groves of trees as well as individual trees. In particular residents would like to see more trees planted in natural areas and along streets. Ste■e Assoelateti I'agc 9) C its ul I it!aal I Than 1 oicsi \ tiw\ 200S tiunuitar■ OI Results Attachment 3 In addition, residents of Tigard are in support of regulations that would add limits to what property owners and developers can do with existing trees especially when making changes or additions to their property. Most residents want more resources to be directed to better maintain and protect existing trees. However,there is limited support for funding and an urban forestry program through new fees or taxes. Although most residents felt more street trees would be good for the city,there is higher support for increasing funding for trees inside parks or open spaces compared to street trees. Stec Johnson & Associates faze IU ('it■ nn( I ward I Than I (rests Sui c' 21)0R •ununa ■ Of Results Attachment 4 1,1 City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Todd Prager,Associate Planner/Arborist Re: Urban Forestry, City of Tigard Internal Coordination Meeting Results Date: March 26, 2009 On January 21, 2009, a coordination meeting was attended by key City staff members that have a role in coordinating and implementing Tigard's urban forestry programs,policies, and ordinances. Meeting attendees included representatives from a range of City departments (Community Development, Public Works, and Financial and Information Services) and divisions (Capital Construction&Transportation, Current Planning, Development Review, Information Technology, Public Works Administration,Parks, Streets, Wastewater/Storm, and Water). The purpose of the meeting was to discuss urban forestry coordination issues, and identify those areas where coordination could be improved. As a result of the meeting, the following list was generated that identified areas where urban forestry coordination efforts could be improved. 1. Street trees on record drawings don't reflect where they are actually planted (Planning, Engineering,Public Works, IT/GIS); 2. Development engineering inspects vegetated corridors after development, but no long term/sustained maintenance requirements (Engineering, Planning/Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT/GIS); 3. Difficult to track deed restricted trees after development (Planning, IT/GIS); 4. Difficult to track required landscape trees (parking lot trees, buffer trees, etc.) after development (Planning/Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT/GIS); 5. Difficult to track mitigation trees after development (Planning/Arborist, IT/GIS); 6. No inventory of street trees (Planning, Engineering, Public Works, IT/GIS); 7. When City acquires greenspaces, no detailed understanding of maintenance costs (especially regarding hazard trees) (Planning/Arborist, Public Works); 8. No policy for protecting deed restricted trees and significant habitat trees during building additions (Planning, Building); 9. No policy of requiring exempt City projects to follow standards required by private development (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); 10.No review of exempt City projects for trees by planning staff(Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation,Public Works); • Attachment 4 11. No formal hazard evaluation process for parks/greenspaces (Planning/Arborist, Public Works/Parks, Risk); 12. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards on streets (Planning/Arborist,Public Works/Streets); 13. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards in parks/greenspaces (Planning/Arborist,Public Works/Parks); 14.Tree removal in sensitive lands requires tree removal permits, not sure if there is awareness of this Code provision (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); 15.No formal process for spending/tracking tree mitigation fund expenditures and planting (Planning/Arborist,Public Works, IT/GIS, Finance);and 16. No formal process for determining adjustments to street standards to preserve trees (18.810.030.A.7) (Planning/Arborist, Engineering). 17. No formal street tree maintenance process for limb/root clearance and removal (Planning/Arborist,Public Works/Streets). After the list was generated, a series of meetings was held with representatives from the groups affected by the coordination issues. The purpose of the smaller group meetings was to discuss the coordination issues and formulate possible solutions that could improve coordination efforts. The following list identifies the coordination issues (in black) and possible solutions (in red) that were formulated after the group meetings. 1. Street trees on record drawings don't reflect where they are actually planted (Planning, Engineering,Public Works, IT/GIS); • Make note on record drawings that actual street tree locations may vary, see street trees in GIS for actual locations. • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of street trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on street trees to include location (x/y coordinates), size (dbh), species,date planted,condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. • Consider creating program where developers pay a fee to the City to plant and GPS street trees. 2. Development engineering inspects vegetated corridors after development, but no long term/sustained maintenance requirements (Engineering, Planning/Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT/GIS); Attachment 4 • Development engineering inspects vegetated corridors after planting, and after a defined maintenance period (usually two years) to ensure compliance with Clean Water Services (CWS) requirements. • If the vegetated corridor becomes City property, then the Wastewater/Storm Division of Public Works assigns crews to ensure long term maintenance. • If the vegetated corridor is privately owned, the City of Tigard does not currently have a program to inspect/enforce long term vegetation maintenance. The City will clarify with CWS what agency is responsible for ensuring long term maintenance of vegetated corridors. 3. Difficult to track deed restricted trees after development (Planning, IT/GIS); • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS locations of deed restricted trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on deed restricted trees to include location (x/y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date inventoried, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. 4. Difficult to track required landscape trees (parking lot trees, buffer trees, etc.) after development (Planning/Arborist and Code Enforcement, IT/GIS); • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of required landscape trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on required landscape trees to include location (x/y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. 5. Difficult to track mitigation trees after development (Planning/Arborist, IT/GIS); • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of mitigation trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on mitigation trees to include location (x/y coordinates), size (dbh), species,date planted,condition, cash assurance/bond release date, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. 6. No inventory of street trees (Planning, Engineering, Public Works, IT/GIS); Attachment 4 • Require developers to GPS or pay a fee to the City to GPS actual locations of street trees prior to final approval. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Hire AmeriCorps member and/or recruit volunteers to assist in inventory of existing street trees outside development process. • GPS actual locations of street trees planting during annual street tree planting program. • Information on street trees to include location (x/y coordinates), size (dbh), species, date planted, condition, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. • Consider creating program where developers pay a fee to the City to plant and GPS street trees. 7. When City acquires greenspaces, no detailed understanding of maintenance costs (especially regarding hazard trees) (Planning/Arborist, Public Works); • Create budget sheet to track personnel, material, and service costs associated with greenspace acquisition. • Budget sheet should detail first year costs as well as costs for years two through five. • A benefits section should be included on the form to identify mitigation, connectivity, and other potential benefits. • The budget sheet needs to be routed to the appropriate departments and divisions for input before it is finalized. • There is an evaluation form for land acquisition that was used for CIP projects that may be used as a template (contact Carissa). • If hazard trees are an issue during land acquisition associated with development projects, require developer's arborist to conduct a hazard assessment for review and inspection by City Arborist. 8. No policy for protecting deed restricted trees and significant habitat trees during building additions (Planning, Building); • This item should be further addressed during the Tree Code updates. • However, for deed restricted trees, the City can require a protection plan for building additions that complies with the original tree protection plan for the development project. Attachment 4 • For trees in sensitive lands, the City can restrict access/building within the driplines of trees through the use of tree protection fencing. Section 18.790.060 prohibits damage to a protected tree or its root system. 9. No policy of requiring exempt City projects to follow standards required by private development (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); • City Arborist to attend "kickoff meetings" for City projects to identify applicable City rules and regulations. • Project plans will be routed to City Arborist for review and comment prior to completion. • Depending on the size of the project, the City Arborist may provide assistance on tree protection and planting specifications, or recommend that the City hire a project arborist. • Work with the Tree Board and Community Development Director on developing a set of standards for City projects to follow. 10.No review of exempt City projects for trees by planning staff(Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); • City Arborist to attend"kickoff meetings" for City projects to identify applicable City rules and regulations. • Project plans will be routed to City Arborist for review and comment prior to completion. • Depending on the size of the project, the City Arborist may provide assistance on tree protection and planting specifications, or recommend the City hire a project arborist. 11. No formal hazard evaluation process for parks/greenspaces (Planning/Arborist, Public Works/Parks, Risk); • Budgeting has eliminated non-emergency management and evaluation of hazards in parks/greenspaces due to the transfer of the greenspace coordinator (urban forester) position from Public Works to the associate planner/arborist (city arborist) position to Community Development. • Proactive evaluation and management of City owned parks/greenspaces would be best accomplished through the hiring of a greenspace coordinator to fill the position vacated in Public Works. Attachment 4 • A greenspace coordinater could develop a program based off of protocols developed by the USDA Forest Service and/or International Society of Arboriculture. • Alternatively, the City could contract with a private arborist to develop a hazard evaluation and management program. 12. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards on streets (Planning/Arborist, Public Works/Streets); • When a member of the public calls the City about a potential hazard tree on a City street, they should be forwarded to the Public Works front desk (503- 639-4171). • Operators at Public Works will route the call to the Streets Division manager, who will in turn assign a staff member to investigate the complaint. • If the tree clearly is not a hazard, the Streets Division will contact the citizen and close the case. • If the tree is already down or is clearly an immediate hazard, the Streets Division will coordinate traffic control, contact other impacted agencies (such as PGE if power lines are involved), and remove the tree from the street and sidewalk right-of-way using the City's contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available). The debris from the removal will be placed on the owner's property, and debris disposal will occur at the owner's expense. • If the tree hazard is a borderline case, the City Arborist will make a determination whether the tree should be retained, monitored, removed, or further investigated by the contract arborist. • If the City Arborist decides the tree is a hazard and there is enough time,he will write a letter to the responsible property owner giving them a specific period of time to abate the hazard. If the deadline is not met, the responsible owner will be cited through Code Enforcement. • If the hazard is after hours, citizens will need to call the Public Works after- hours number (503-639-1554). Public Works will then investigate the hazard after hours and either contact the contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) if there is an immediate hazard, or forward the inquiry to the Streets Division for follow up the following business day if the hazard is not immediate. The Streets Division will then follow the same process outlined above. 13. No formal emergency response system for tree hazards in parks/greenspaces (Planning/Arborist, Public Works/Parks); Attachment 4 • When a member of the public calls the City about a potential hazard tree on City property, they should be forwarded the Public Works front desk (503- 639-4171). • Operators at Public Works will route the call to the appropriate division manager,who will in turn assign a staff member to investigate the complaint. • If the tree clearly is not a hazard, the responsible division will contact the citizen and close the case. • If the tree is determined to be an immediate hazard, the responsible division will contact the City's contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) to abate the hazard immediately. • If the tree hazard is a borderline case, the City Arborist will make a determination whether the tree should be retained, monitored,removed, or further investigated by the contract arborist. • The City Arborist is estimated to respond to one "borderline" call per week on average. If the time commitment is significantly more, the process may need to be reevaluated. • If the hazard is after hours, citizens will need to call the Public Works after- hours number (503-639-1554). Public Works will then investigate the hazard after hours and either contact the contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) if there is an immediate hazard, or forward the inquiry to the appropriate division if the hazard is not immediate for follow up the following business day. The responsible division will then follow the same process outlined above. 14.Tree removal in sensitive lands requires tree removal permits, not sure if there is awareness of this Code provision (Planning, Capital Construction and Transportation, Public Works); • City Arborist to attend "kickoff meetings" for City projects to identify applicable City rules and regulations. • Tree removal permits and fees in Tigard Development Code Section 18.790.050 are applicable for any tree removal over six inches in diameter within sensitive lands (including City projects). • Publicize program through periodic Community Development/Public Works/Capital Construction and Transportation coordination meetings. • Ensure the sensitive lands GIS layer is available through Tigard Maps for all divisions/departments. • Clarify with Community Development Director if invasive/exotic trees are exempt from tree removal permit requirements. Attachment 4 15. No formal process for spending/tracking tree mitigation fund expenditures and planting (Planning/Arborist,Public Works, IT/GIS, Finance); and • GPS actual locations of mitigation trees/areas. The spatial data can then be loaded into the City's GIS system for tracking. • Information on mitigation trees to include location (x/y coordinates), size (dbh), species,date planted, condition, cash assurance/bond release date, tree ID code, and any additional information necessary to conduct resource analyses in the future. • Link mitigation trees (via a GIS point layer) and mitigation areas (via a GIS polygon layer) with IFIS (accounting system) so that expenditures can be directly related to specific projects. 16.No formal process for determining adjustments to street standards to preserve trees (18.810.030.A.7) (Planning/Arborist, Engineering). • The City's policy is to maintain the required curb to curb width standards in the Tigard Development Code in all cases, regardless of existing trees. • However,during the development review process,when a healthy and sustainable tree in the right of way is identified by the project arborist and/or City Arborist, Development Engineering will allow adjustments to planter strip and/or sidewalk standards on a case by case basis. • The City does not currently have the authority to require private developers to preserve trees if they choose not to. 17.No formal street tree maintenance process for limb/root clearance and removal (Planning/Arborist,Public Works/Streets). • If the street tree is the responsibility of the City, the corresponding division will maintain the clearance requirements outlined in the Tigard Municipal Code. • If a citizen complaint is received, the Streets Division will investigate. • If there is an immediate hazard (e.g. blocked stop sign, hanging limb, etc.), the Streets Division will prune the tree immediately. • If there is not an immediate hazard, the Streets Division will contact the responsible party directly and explain the Code requirements, or gather the information and forward to Code Enforcement if the owner is nonresponsive. • If the potential branch clearance hazard is after hours, citizens will need to call the Public Works after-hours number (503-639-1554). Public Works will then investigate the hazard after hours and either contact the contract arborist (or any other available private arborist if the contract arborist is not available) if there is an immediate hazard, or forward the inquiry to the Streets Division if Attachment 4 the hazard is not immediate for follow up the following business day. The Streets Division will then follow the same process outlined above. • When tree roots are impacting City streets or utilities, the responsible division will investigate and, if needed,contact the City Arborist for root pruning advice. • If the City Arborist decides the tree can be safely root pruned to make the necessary repairs, the responsible division will absorb the cost of root pruning. • If the tree cannot be safely root pruned and the tree needs to be removed, the City will absorb the cost of removal, but the property owner will be responsible for stump removal and replanting. Prior to removing a street tree, the City Arborist shall be contacted. • Attachment 5 _ " City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Todd Prager,Associate Planner/Arborist Re: Urban Forestry, Stakeholder Interview Results Date: March 26, 2009 In addition to internal coordination of City Departments, is coordinating with key community stakeholder groups and jurisdictions that regularly contribute to and/or are affected by the management of Tigard's urban forest. The following list of groups and organizations were identified as key community stakeholders relative to urban forestry: • American Society of Landscape Architects, Oregon Chapter • Clean Water Services • Home Builder's Association of Metropolitan Portland • Oregon Department of Transportation • Pacific Northwest Chapter of the ISA • Parks and Recreation Advisory Board • Portland General Electric • Tigard Chamber of Commerce • Tigard-Tualatin School District • Tualatin River Keepers • Tree Board The following list of questions have/will be asked of all stakeholder groups: 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well? 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? The following lists the summarized stakeholder responses (in red) to the above questions: • Attachment 5 American Society of Landscape Architects, Oregon Chapter (ASLA) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • High level of familiarity with Tigard's tree and landscape ordinances. • Regularly implements codes during development projects to meet landscape and mitigation requirements. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Tigard actually has a tree and landscape ordinance whereas some cities do not. • Tigard staff is easily accessible to discuss issues with and work out solutions. • The Urban Forestry Master Plan will result in a more comprehensive approach to future tree and landscape ordinance updates. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Replanting on a caliper inch basis does not work because it incentivizes overplanting. • Site planning is focused too heavily on building needs and not on existing site conditions. This causes an excessive amount of clear cutting. • Landscape architects do not have enough flexibility in landscape design because landscape code requirements are overly specific. • Street tree list is outdated, and many of the species are no longer appropriate or relevant. • Street trees and streetscapes are non-uniform. Different development projects choose different types of trees so city blocks become a hodgepodge of street trees. • Many parts of the tree code are overly vague, which creates loopholes and a wide variety of interpretations. For example, there are no spacing, species, or nursery stock quality standards with respect to mitigation trees. • Need more tree and landscape related expertise on the Tree Board. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Focus tree code revisions on preservation and less on mitigation. If preservation requirements are increased, then mitigation could occur on a tree for tree basis rather than inch for inch. • Need to be stricter on grading with respect to trees. This can occur by focusing more on existing conditions and how trees can be incorporated into the building design. Also, landscape architects should be required to Attachment 5 collaborate more with project arborists in order to identify which trees are appropriate for preservation, and how to adjust grading to preserve trees. Perhaps there should be a dual sign off on preservation plans between the landscape architect and project arborist. • Allow for more flexibility in landscape requirements in future updates. Require landscape architects to be part of the design team, and sign off on planting before, during,and after installations. • Update street tree list. • To improve uniformity of streetscapes, the developers should have to survey the street trees in a 4-5 block radius and choose trees that complement existing plantings. • The tree/mitigation code sections need more specificity. The City of Salem has a detailed development design handbook with detailed drawings and specifications that are referred to in their development code. This allows for more clarity as to what is expected of the development. • When advertising Tree Board vacancies, specify that you are looking for members with tree and landscape expertise. Advertise vacancies with local professional organizations. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • Sends drafts of tree and landscape code revisions to ASLA for review and comment. • Contact ASLA to see if members could get credit hours for developing codes and design handbooks. • Hire ASLA members to help develop code and design guidelines. • Share example codes that require maximum preservation of existing trees. 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • More focus on preservation through improved grading plans, less focus on mitigation. The City needs to take a leadership role in this. • More focus on sustainable landscapes. Not necessarily native trees, but trees that are appropriate for site conditions. • Need detailed design/preservation manual with illustrations. • Need to have a warranty period for required landscaping to ensure establishment. • Need to require powerlines to be shown on landscape plans to avoid future overhead utility conflicts. • Landscape architects should be a required member of the design team. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Attachment 5 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • During development,the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) reviews street tree planting plans in ODOT right of ways for compliance with ODOT specifications. • ODOT reviews and grants permits for City tree planting projects in ODOT right of ways (99W, Hall Boulevard, Highway 217). 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • No comment. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Street tree planting under powerlines causes conflicts because traffic lanes are closed for ongoing maintenance issues. • Some trees cause damage to infrastructure (sidewalks, curbs, streets). • Trees planted on top of underground utilities cause future conflicts due to root interference. • Some City tree planting and placement requirements are not coordinated with ODOT requirements (root barriers, site distance, clear distance, limb clearance) 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Require overhead utilities to be shown on site plans to avoid inappropriate tree planting that will create future conflicts. Route plans to Portland General Electric for review. • Select street trees that will not conflict with hard features. Require root barriers and other design feature that will help to minimize conflicts. • Require development projects to locate utilities on planting plans prior to ODOT and City review. This help to ensure that trees are not planted on top of existing utilities. • Clarify jurisdictional requirements and coordinate during future Code updates. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • Clarify jurisdictional requirements and coordinate during future Code updates. 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Attachment 5 • Prohibit the planting of trees that will conflict with powerlines. Route plans to Portland General Electric for review. • Require root barriers and other design feature that will help to minimize conflicts with hard features. • Require development projects to locate utilities on planting plans prior to ODOT and City review. • Clarify jurisdictional requirements in ODOT right of ways: o ODOT site distance requirements supersede Tigard requirements. o ODOT clear distance requirements supersede Tigard requirements. o ODOT branch clearance requirements supersede Tigard requirements. o ODOT has final signoff authority on any trees planted or removed in ODOT right of way (ODOT permit required). Pacific Northwest Chapter of the International Society of Arboriculture (PNWISA) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • High level of involvement with tree ordinance through development projects. • Assist private property owners with tree management outside the development process. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Tree code helps to incentivize preservation because increasing tree removal requires increasing mitigation and associated costs. • Bi-weekly arborist report condition of approval helps to ensure better project oversight and tree plan implementation. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Tree code penalizes property owners with heavily treed lots more than those with un-treed lots. Mitigation is tied solely to tree removal. This may have the effect of precluding development in heavily treed areas such as the Tigard Triangle that are zoned for dense development. • Mitigation standards encourage overplanting of trees or planting of small stature trees to meet mitigation requirements. Requiring tree replacement on a caliper inch basis may not be appropriate for every tree and contributes to overplanting. • No sustainable funding for urban forestry programs. There needs to be a stable funding source for Tigard's urban forestry program that can be utilized for tree maintenance,not just tree planting. Attachment 5 • Bi-weekly arborist reports can be hard for the City to track, especially during the transition from site development to building phase. • Project arborists are hired to protect their clients. This can result in arborist reports with false or misleading information. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Determine tree stocking levels based on plantable areas as is done in the City of Vancouver,WA. This could be accomplished by matching available soil volumes for lots of various sizes with trees. • Allow required trees such as parking lot and street trees to count for mitigation. This will help alleviate overplanting of mitigation trees. • Provide incentives for planting of natives and large stature mitigation trees. One incentive could be to offer more mitigation credit for planting natives and large stature trees. This will help alleviate overplanting and encourage the planting of trees that offer the most environmental benefits. • Develop spacing standards based on the mature size of trees to improve long term growth and health. • Urban forestry funding can be more sustainable if it tied to stable sources such as stormwater fees,permit fees, transportation fees, etc. This will also allow for the urban forestry funds to be used for long term tree maintenance. • Bi-weekly arborist reports should be required in future code updates. The City should require a copy of the contract for bi-weekly reports and require the project arborist to send a notice to the City if the contract is terminated. If a different arborist is to provide bi-weekly reports, then the original project arborist should have to sign off prior to the new arborist amending the tree preservation plan. • The City should require more personal accountability for project arborists to discourage false or misleading information. Measures could include revoking business licenses and/or fines so that project arborists have more personal accountability when providing false or misleading information. • An alternative method to limit false or misleading reports would be for the City to hire a third party the arborist to do the tree preservation report and bi- weekly inspections. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • ISA can provide input and review on future tree code revisions. • ISA can be a resource for code provisions that have been successful in other jurisdictions and may be appropriate for Tigard. 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? Attachment 5 • Require mitigation based on stocking levels,not on a caliper inch basis. • Develop clear and specific mitigation requirements that favor native and large stature trees, and require spacing per industry standards. Allow required landscape trees and street trees to count towards mitigation requirements. • Do not unfairly penalize property owners with heavily treed lots that will have trees that are overcrowded and not in good condition. • Incentivize protection and replanting of natives and large stature trees. • Identify sustainable funding sources for urban forestry programs. Fund long term maintenance of trees, not just tree planting. • Require project arborists to be brought onto the project team as early as possible. • Allow the project arborist to drive the tree preservation plan in future code updates, not the project engineer. • Require metal fencing in future code updates. • Develop a zone of clearance for building footprints, and don't penalize developers for removing trees in clearance zones. This zone could be 5'-10' or 3 to 5 times the diameter of the tree. However, site and species characteristics should be considered when crafting code revisions. • Increase planting strip size and require root barriers to protect streets and sidewalks. • Require utilities to be under the street, not in the planter strip where trees should be. • Hire a greenspace coordinator to manage the City's greenspaces. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) • No comments. Portland General Electric (PGE) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • PGE continually trims trees away from overhead conductors in Tigard to provide for the safe,reliable and continual source of electricity to meet the needs of commercial and residential customers. • PGE considers the City of Tigard an integral participant in this process in terms of establishing approved street tree lists, encouraging appropriate and responsible plantings, approving of ideal specimens for their heritage tree program and having the long term vision to develop and maintain an urban forestry program. Attachment 5 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • As a whole,Tigard's urban forestry program works extremely well. There is very qualified and attentive stewardship of trees in the City of Tigard. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Some inappropriate street tree plantings in the City of Tigard. • Several potentially hazardous tree/utility conflicts in the City of Tigard. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Remove and replace inappropriate street trees. • Aid in the hazardous tree removal by providing the labor and equipment necessary. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • PGE can contribute appropriate trees to new planting sites. • Aid in hazardous tree removal where the threat of an overhead conductor is a factor. • Attend monthly City coordination meetings. • Share in the exchange of information and of past experiences of what works well and what doesn't work quite well in other municipalities. • Assist in any educational capacity such as right tree/right place programs. 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Future programs need to recognize the conflict between a static overhead distribution system of electricity and the dynamic nature of vegetation management around PGE facilities. • Invite PGE to monthly City coordination meetings. • Route tree plans to PGE for review. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce • Christopher Zoucha,Chief Executive Officer of the Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce informed me that urban forestry has not been an issue for the Chamber members, and therefore declined providing input as a stakeholder group for the Urban Forestry Master Plan. Attachment 5 Tigard Tualatin School District (ITSD) 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • Somewhat limited. • Participation in the Tigard Neighborhood Trails Study. • Manage trees on School District property. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Adequate budget for tree planting and early establishment. • City of Tigard is very cooperative with the School District. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Lack of communication prior to planting trees on School District property. It is important to coordinate with Facilities Division so that long term maintenance issues can be addressed prior to planting. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Bring Facilities Division into the planning process from the beginning of a tree planting project. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? • School District properties may offer opportunities to utilize City tree planting funds. • Wetlands on School District properties may offer wetland mitigation opportunities for the City. • Facilities Division would be able to provide guidance as to the types of trees and planting layouts that will facilitate long term maintenance by the District. • School District can contact City Arborist to find out if permits are required for tree removal and/or planting. 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Bring Facilities Division into the planning process from the beginning of tree planting projects on School District properties. • Focus on low maintenance plantings with evergreens and other trees with low leaf litter. Attachment 5 Tualatin River Keepers 1. What is your level of interaction with Tigard's urban forestry program? • High level of involvement. • Work closely with the City and Metro on restoration projects in Tigard. • Provide comments on municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4) permits. • Provide comments on City of Tigard Parks plans and occasionally on private development applications. • Participated in the development of the Healthy Streams Plan by Clean Water Services. • Member of Oregon Community Trees, a non-profit organization that promotes urban and community forestry in Oregon. 2. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program work well? • Mitigation fee structure provides an adequate budget for tree planting. 3. What features of Tigard's urban forestry program do not work well, and why? • Trees could be better utilized for stormwater management in developed areas such as along street and in parking lots. • Urban forestry funds could be collected and utilized more strategically. An example would be to use stormwater management fees to fund restoration programs. • The City of Tigard could make more of a public commitment to sustainability efforts such as by signing the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. 4. What could be done in the future to improve the programs that do not work well? • Improve parking lot design standards to incorporate stormwater treatment features and more tree canopy. • Retrofit existing parking lots to improve stormwater treatment and tree canopy using grant money and other funding sources. • Encourage/require the use of more evergreen species in parking lots and streets so that the stormwater benefits of trees can be utiltized during the winter rainy season. • Collect urban forestry funds more strategically through stormwater fees, development fees, etc. so that the funding sources are more sustainable and can be used for more than just tree planting. 5. How can we work together in the future to improve Tigard's urban forest? Attachment 5 • Tualatin Riverkeepers can assist with volunteer recruitment for urban forestry projects. • Tualatin Riverkeepers can help educate kids about the importance of environmental stewardship through camp and recreation programming. • Tualatin Riverkeepers can help identify potential restoration sites. • Tualatin Riverkeepers can provide training to Planning Commission, City Council, City staff, and others on low impact development techniques. 6. What should be included/excluded from Tigard's urban forestry programs? • Improve parking lot design standards to incorporate stormwater treatment and more tree canopy. • Increase stormwater incentives/requirements for development such as the "no runoff" provisions as in Lacey Washington. • Collect urban forestry funds more strategically through stormwater fees, development fees, etc. so that the funding sources are more sustainable and can be used for more than just tree planting. • More public commitment to sustainability efforts such as signing the Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. • More efforts in invasive species removal. Incentivize and/or require private landowners to remove invasives. *The remaining stakeholder groups to be completed over the next month are: • Clean Water Services • Home Builder's Association of Metropolitan Portland • Tree Board 120'DAYS = N/A DATE MAILED: 6-26-2009 III • CITY OF TIGARD TIGARD Washington County, Oregon NOTICE OF FINAL ORDER BY THE CITY COUNCIL Case Number: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2008-00011 Case Name: TIGARD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS TO INCORPORATE TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS Applicant's Name/Address: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard,OR 97223 Owner's Names/Addresses: N/A Address of Property: Citywide Tax Map/Lot Nos.: N/A A FINAL ORDER INCORPORATING THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (ORDINANCE NO. 09-10). THE CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL HAVE REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PLANS, NARRATIVE, MATERIALS, COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES, THE PLANNING DIVISION'S STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION DESCRIBED IN FURTHER DETAIL IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE "TESTIMONY ON April 6, 2009 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE REQUEST. THE CITY COUNCIL ALSO HELD A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON June 23, 2009 PRIOR TO MAKING A DECISION ON THE REQUEST. THIS DECISION HAS BEEN BASED ON THE FACTS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FINAL ORDER. Subject: > 1. Update the Tigard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes identified in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan;; 2.Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings; 3. Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12:Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigard 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee;and 4.Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A (under Goal 12.2) to reflect recommended 5 lanes for Highway 99W through Tigard. The complete text of the proposed Code Amendment can be viewed on the City's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/code_amendments.AT THE 6/23/09 CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING,THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THIS REQUEST (Ordinance No. 2009-10). ZONES: All Zones APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Chapters Goal 1: Citizen Involvement; Goal 2: Land Use Planning; Goal 6: Environmental Quality; Goal 12: Transportation; Oregon Transportation Plan; Oregon Highway Plan;Regional Transportation Plan;Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 11, and 12; and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-12. Action: > ® Approval as Requested ❑ Approval with Conditions ❑ Denial Notice: Notice was published in the newspaper, posted at City Hall and mailed to: ® Affected Government Agencies ® Interested Parties Final Decision: THIS IS THE FINAL DECISION BY THE CITY AND IS EFFECTIVE ON July 22,2009. The adopted findings of fact, decision and statement of conditions can be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division,Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, Oregon. Appeal: A review of this decision may be obtained by filing a notice of intent with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) within 21 days according to their procedures. Questions: Call the City of Tigard Planning Division or the City Recorder at (503) 639-4171. CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 09- / Q AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CPA2008-00011 TO UPDATE THE TIGARD TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCORPORATE TIGARD 99W IMPROVEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN RECOMMENDA- TIONS. WHEREAS,the Tigard City Council directed staff to develop solutions to traffic congestion on Highway 99W; and WHEREAS, the City applied for and received grant funding to develop the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan;and WHEREAS, the City has proposed amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Comprehensive Plan to incorporate Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan recommendations;and WHEREAS,the Tigard Planning Commission held a public hearing,which was noticed in accordance with City standards,on April 6,2009,and recommended approval of the proposed CPA 2008-00011 by motion and with unanimous vote;and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2009, the Tigard City Council held a public hearing, which was noticed in accordance with City standards, to consider the Commission's recommendation on CPA 2008-00011;and WHEREAS, on June 23,2009,the Tigard City Council adopted CPA 2008-00011 by motion,as amended, pursuant to the public hearing and its deliberations; and WHEREAS,Council's decision to adopt CPA 2008-00011 is based on the findings and conclusions found in the City of Tigard staff report dated June 5,2009,and the associated record,which are incorporated herein by reference and are contained in land-use file CPA 2008-00011. NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard Transportation System Plan is amended to include new text and to rescind existing text as shown in "EXHIBIT A";and SECTION 2: The Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan is adopted by reference as findings for the Tigard Transportation System Plan;and SECTION 3: The Tigard Comprehensive Plan is amended to include new text and to rescind existing text as shown in "EXHIBIT A";and SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Mayor,and posting by the City Recorder. ORDINANCE No. 09-1 0 Page 1 PASSED: By tin an (Yts vote of Council members present after being read by number and title only, this,23 r=dday of , 2009. /( Catherine Wheatley,City Recorder ' APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this 3 day , !01. yk Cr irtsen',Mayor Approved as to form) j"-\"‘"--1 `" J V City Attorney .JC.ti11� c3) r ()coq Date ::►pied to be a True Copy of w iginal on File Deputy Recorder- City of gaT rd ORDINANCE No. 09- ) 0 Page 2 EXHIBIT A CPA2008-00011 Proposed Amendments Part 1: Update the Tgard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan; The proposed changes are specific strikethrough and figure changes to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and are found in Appendix C of the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan.The proposed amendments reflect improvements associated with Alternative B in the Tigard 99W Plan. Many of the changes are in tables or reference illustration changes and are listed below. There are 27 proposed modifications (beginning on page 5 of this Exhibit,each amendment can be found as a separate page). In summary they are: • Proposed Amendment 1 updates the Pedestrian Action Plan List along ORE 99W to include a sidewalk project scope and cost. • Proposed Amendment 2 updates the Bicycle Master Plan description of bicycle lanes south of Gaarde/McDonald to Durham Road to note that these facilities are existing, not planned. • Proposed Amendment 3 updates the Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. • Proposed Amendment 4, 5, 13, 17, 18, 19 and 26 advises that both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. • Proposed Amendment 6 and 20 add intersection improvements to Durham Road and SW Canterbury Lane. • Proposed Amendment 7 updates potential pedestrian projects along ORE 99W to increase project scope. • Proposed Amendments 8 and 9 add pedestrian activated signalized crossings. • Proposed Amendment 11 updates a Park and Ride location. • Proposed Amendment 10 updates plan to include existing bike lanes just north of SW Greenburg Road. • Proposed Amendment 12 updates potential transit projects to implement transit queue bypass lanes along ORE 99W at several locations. • Proposed amendments 14, 15 and 16 identify access management measures for highway 99W. • Proposed Amendment 21 updates the table to include specific projects and add project intersections. • Proposed Amendment 22,23 and 24 updates the Pedestrian Action Plan project list funding and implementation ranking. • Proposed Amendment 25 updates the Bicycle Action Plan funding and implementation ranking. • Proposed Amendment 27 updates the City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements table to include specific projects and add projects at the several intersections. Part 2: Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings. The Transportation Planning Rule,OAR 660 Division 12, requires local jurisdictions to prepare and adopt local transportation system plans that serve as the transportation element for their CPA2008-00011 PAGE 1 OF 31 comprehensive plans (OAR 660-012-0015(4)). Since the City of Tigard proposes to amend the Tigard Transportation System Plan(TSP) based on recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan,the background information needs to be adopted by reference as findings to amend the TSP. No specific text changes are needed. • Part 3: Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigard 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee. The City proposes to amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan based on recommended policy-related language developed by the project's citizen advisory committee. The following 10 statements will be added to the recommended action measures found under Section 1 of the Transportation chapter. The numbering will start as indicated: 24. Prior to implementation ofprojects associated with the Highway 99W Corridor Plan, especially those requiring additional right-of-way or affecting property access, there shall be established protocols whereby affected property owners or businesses are made aware ofpending improvements. Those that might be affected shall be informed and asked to be involved in the project development process as early as possible. 25. The City of Tigard shall state a position that alignment of the proposed I-5/Hwy 99W Connector be established as one which reduces through traffic and freight movement on Highway 99W to the greatest extent possible;and that the City shall support this position and otherwise participate in the project as an active member of the I-5/99W Connector Steering Committee. 26. As part of the transportation management,planning and design process, the livability benefits of future Highway 99Wimprovements shall be publicly discussed and evaluated. 27. The City shall adopt Alternative B as contained in the Tigard 99WPlan as part ofits Transportation System Plan and prioritize its recommendations. Subsequently, the City shall, in conjunction with other agencies,jurisdictions, and stakeholders, develop action plans to implement the alternative's specific project recommendations. Action plans to implement Alternative B shall indude design and engineering strategies, funding measures, and stakeholder and citizen engagement. Reasonable time frames shall be associated with the action plans. 28. Other transportation and land development projects within the vicinity ofHighway 99W shall be evaluated to determine potential negative or positive impacts on the facility. Negative impacts shall be avoided or mitigated. Furthermore,it is important that solutions to Highway 99W problems be evaluated to assess impacts on other streets, and that negative impacts in these circumstances are avoided or mitigated and positive impacts promoted. 29. A land use planning effort shall be a priority for future City/state efforts to recreate the Highway 99W corridor. In particular, coordinated land use and transportation planning is essential to promote transit as a viable transportation option. CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 2 OF 31 30. The City should be imaginative and "think outside the box"with the purpose of creating a safe, attractive, transit oriented, and vibrant urban corridor along Highway 99W. When there are obvious benefits to specific physical improvements, the City should request design exceptions from ODOT. 31. In the near term, the City and ODOT shall develop an Access Management Plan for Highway 99W. Each property identified as needing access management treatment shall be treated as unique.A one-size fits all approach should not be used. The economic vitality of businesses is important. 32. Implementing improved transit service should be an ongoing priority with the long- term objective oflight rail service along the Highway 99W corridor. Iflight rail is not possible within the reasonable future, then improved bus service/rubber tired vehicles shall serve as an alternative until it is. 33. Highway 99W Action Plans shall seek to enhance the economic vitality of the corridor through transportation, aesthetic land use, and other improvements. In addition, resources shall be used to coordinate business development and retention activities, and aid in communication among the business community and city government. Part 4: Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A of Goal 12.2 to reflect recommended five lanes for Highway 99W. The Tigard 99W Management and Improvement Plan recommends the Tigard TSP is amended to retain four/five lanes rather than the current TSP designation to widen Highway 99W to seven lanes.To maintain consistency with the proposed TSP amendments, the City proposes to amend Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A under Goal 12.2. Staff feels the language change is necessary to provide the flexibility for construction of auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity,turn lanes,or access management.Furthermore,although the committees recommended a five-lane maximum, staff recommends that some seven lane intersection configurations may be needed for function,ingress/egress spacing, and access management. This would effectively generate four thru-lanes and up to two temporary/short duration/turn lanes for access management. Goal 12.2 Trafficways Policy 6. The City shall adopt the following transportation improvement strategy in order to accommodate planned land uses in the Tigard Triangle: A. Highway 99W should . • - . _ . - . htterseetions-retain a 5 lane section throughout the study area, except where necessary to accommodate adjacent development impacts, spot capacity improvements, and intersection improvements. (tool box). Thin improvement shettld be con3tructcd in the Short term. In the event that CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 3 OF 31 dcmand. • The 27 proposed amendments from Part 1 are found individually beginning on the following page. CPA200R-00011 PAGE 4 OF 11 Proposed Amendment 1: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-15: Pedestrian Action Plan List—Update ORE 99W sidewalk project from"McDonald to South City Limits" to "Interstate 5 to South City Limits". Update cost from $500,000 to $800,000. • Rank* Project From To Cost H North Dakota Street 1215t Avenue Greenburg Road $230,000 H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard $200,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road $350,000 H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80`"Avenue $500,000 H ORE 99W McDonald Street South City Limits $500,800 Interstate 5 $800,000 M Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road $1,200,000 M Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road $300,000 M 12151 Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street $450,000 M Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72"Avenue $250,000 M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements (RTP 6022) $6,000,000 Regional Center L Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62"Avenue $1,000,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road $200,000 Subtotal $100,099 $12,100,000 Sidewalks to be built with Street Improvements H Bonita Road West of 72"Avenue 72"Avenue $50,000 H Walnut Street 135th Avenue Tiedeman Avenue $570,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $620,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street $1,000,000 H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue $120,000 H Tigard Street 115th Street Main Street $350,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $100,000 H Fonner Street walnut Street 121st Avenue $250,000 H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street $50,000 M 72""Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road $1,200,000 M Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker South City Limits $670,000 Street M Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road $1,000,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road Scholls Ferry Road (E) $950,000 (W) L 72"Avenue Carman/Upper Durham Road $250,000 BoonesFry. Subtotal $7,180,000 Annual Sidewalk Program at$50,000 per year for 20 years $1,000,000 Action Plan Total $-1-966;500 $19,660,000 CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 5 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 2: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-15: Bicycle Master Plan. Update the description of bicycle lanes south of Gaarde/McDonald to Durham Road to note that these facilities are existing, not planned. OKS Associates ;N. ,•. - - s-� --.1 r- . I 011Y OF 0 4�--r::::•-•:-.1. . : Transportation ''._• _'`'' ,"• 1 . Systems Plan• • 1. •eki•- 'A TI,' , ILA!'. :,`. =:re.: i. I •y.' a !: ;' -...:. I : .f-1 'ji-v,',I,,lt ':,•L,, ,�,c';:, .Arley l ',..., ••• ....1. Il• 1. < I.e....•Ji1�•"�•• • .P. n'i� e' i••. `.v •,�a s •'• I 1 I f `, ,. -•= It ,r=1il.•: • 1-;ea Si1_•'':,5,'. • . • i 1s;fp...is ; h. _•""`.r•: — .. .rely •1- •:.I. �:, J •--1 — '. - .;'r - - '• 'e• I -'- q_ , I 1.1.1' 'L 1' ,' I• _: 1 1 j •�, I 1.1• .-• �. .a•p,i�',', I—�,���I,r.�- Proposed .14.:L f rL*' .'•` ' Amendment I Figure 6-2 ___;.9g,1-#u. I I 1 BICYCLE MASTER PLAT,' 1 , 1,� _ . 1.1;, I :I ,•• I.. • - I IF'uuirrvuII,0viionl CPA2008-0001 1 PAGE 6 OF 31 ill Proposed Amendment 3: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-18: Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. Update ORE 99W bike lane improvement cost from $1,300,000 to $275,000. Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost RANK* Project From To Cost H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72nd Avenue $250,000 H Bonita Road 72nd Avenue West of 72"d Ave. $50,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $135,000 H Oak Street(RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 90th Avenue $300,000 H 98th Avenue Murdock Stret Durham Road $275,000 H 92"d Avenue Durham Road Cook Park $270,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Greenburg Road Walnut Street $250,000 M 121St Avenue Walnut Street Gaarde Street $400,000 L Taylor's Ferry Road Washington Drive City Limits $500,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Rd $100,000 L O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard $275,000 L Frewing Street ORE 99W O'Mara Street $150,000 Subtotal $2,955,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $600,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Locust Street $500,000 H Greenburg Road Hall Boulevard Cascade Avenue $300,000 H ORE 99W East City Limits South City Limits $1,,300,000 $275,000 M 72"d Avenue ORE 99W South City Limits $960,000 M Hall Boulevard Pfaff le Street Bonita Road $550,000 M Carman Drive I-5 Durham Road $200,000 M Walnut Street ORE 99W Barrows Road $1,400,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road(W) Scholls Ferry Rd. (E) $900,000 L Bull Mountain Road 150th Avenue Beef Bend Road $550,000 L Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls FerryRd. $1,600,000 Subtotal $8,860,000 $7,835,000 Multi- Use Pathways H Hunziker Link to LO Linkage to Kruse Way Trail in Lake Oswego $500,000 M Fanno Creek Trail Tualatin River to City Hall, ORE 99W to Tigard $3,600,000 M Tualatin River Trail Adjacent to Cook Park from Powerlines to Fanno $2,600,000 M Tualatin River Crossing Near 108th Avenue $3,000,000 L Powerlines Corridor From Beaverton to Tualatin River Trail $2,500,000 Subtotal $12,200,000 Action Plan Total $24000 $22,990,000 CPA200S-00011 PAGE 7 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 4: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-25: Future Streets: Where ROW is Planned for More Than Two Lanes. Update figure to change Hwy 99W from 7 lane (red line) between Interstate 5 to Greenburg Road to 5 lane (yellow). °KS fissocietes ;'\ ;_It ' ,--- II - 1 ?- I J cirY ar�n, 1 •I • --' •1i Trarspo tatian • 1 Proposed ' Systems Plan•1 r. r."':• ■••• • Amendment �?; 1,9c.,(3,...; At .:....,..,.......:..,.••■• 101 • ...= ,-, / 1 1 .1- - ' '11''—„-e ', . I , , ( 1414 Al ..I,• . '''Y'.+F. 'fall.• 4' •�• 4��. t +...1 i. •.��11-•1 14. 411..1..►'...N•..I.iJ.f. _ _ t I I. 1 V.11411 r I.H•«3111,•Al �i •. I I• i •.(J Ai:..µ.,,,,.,/'..,,-•y. ••w•, {{ •. , r�( —, . u Y a b r 11• I I�,I.' .ice , IN•C. _• •_;., 1 ..1 I — 0. ...--.1 I _ , 1,,•L': • •Z 11 I -r' e.4P.I M• r - FIyuR 8.11 F '' r�-. _ - YJ•` r - Futurr Streets Whirl* i ..!.i.. - '::t- ROW Is Plumed for I ' _. -- i1'; :• More Then Tuna Lanes ***Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 8 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 5: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-30: Street Improvement Plan(Figure). Update figure to remove 7 lane improvement along Hwy 99W from Interstate 5 to SW Greenburg Road. DIGS Associates W.Nnb)1w,oMr,.n A U576d 77no dv. _l -/`'. / �( .►ham NOT �' CITY OF TIGARD 1C scut 1 Proposed rya... �IT rw Transportation Systems Plan Amendment 1 • rf Legend s go. r,8r—•-�s J dS l E J © ..NUMr Mow s S 1 5 _ p / Fn..r r i ,: V ppoftl Poy/w r y 1 sio d ' _ i..J lx«wry.Mno . n1 n1'l r , � • cto it.. !.•,,' V N \ © 31 r��� r \� © ' i ,-, .1....._//ta. / � ��© q 7 \ 1 � y�,lW ' .+ go.WWI Peon Conant,/®-Pns«ww9n.otwlrwr 7lam •Cmidt MywlSLk No ? -1 j 0 # 9 r \ .,,_ — ..- olikii r e . ) ' moo;.; i f 7', re''`' Fi ure 8.19 . ( /' STREET I Fhb____ •/r::: i.lyW 67,4 IMPROVEMENT PLAN 4fV1 J'� d I-2II5.WiE.n N1 Pones � ,oiNh io Wl.omnIN —_—i *Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic}low and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA2008-00011 PAGE 9 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 6: TSP Chapter 1: Summary Committee Recommendation: Page 1-31: Intersection Improvement Locations. . Update Figure 8-20 to include intersection improvements at: • [#37] ORE 99W/SW Durham Road • [#38] ORE 99W/SW Canterbury Lane DICS.Asscci des - f� a "y, ! ! CM'Of ARf3 r fr, Y. , •/ • F'>''• _ Transportation y Q s� y ��. ,i_ Systems Plan 'fat s s i ..� BLS:" •(g; — Neta— r•"' 1''%41,. •> • . V�.:.tin-,r.w., .1 „Y , , 4a. 'Yn -TA...1%Rf.4•I .•.060.0r" `i.,�„ ,. 1 I �• --i' gr '�,i s • ,1_ I R, s'F7.ti1 j •".. -.— I • . 19I"t :.— _ l'.7... I ;•v..T ii._ _ Proposed ,>,. I ? •• " g Amendment M 11 11 T "T I I L ii , y, n I Amendment yo.4 ;;i F =INZd INTERSECTION ).•• :'A' ; e__ 1+ IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS CPA2008-00011 PAGE 10 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 7: TSP Chapter 5: Pedestrians Committee Recommendation: Page 5-9: Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects. Update ORE 99W project from "McDonald Street to South City Limits"to "Interstate 5 to South City Limits". Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects Rank* Project From To Action Plan Projects H Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62"d Avenue H Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue H 72"tl Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road H 72nd Avenue Carman/Upper Boones Ferry Durham Road H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72"d Avenue H Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits H Bonita Road West of 72"d Avenue 72nd Avenue H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard H ORE 99W Interstate 5 South City Limits H Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road H Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road H Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road H Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road (West) Scholls Ferry Road (East) H Walnut Street 1351n Avenue Tiedeman Avenue H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W H 12151 Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street H North Dakota Street 12151 Avenue Greenburg Road H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road H Tigard Street 115`"Avenue Main Street H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard H Fonner Street Walnut Street 12151 Avenue H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street H Oak Street (RTP Hall Boulevard 80'"Avenue 6019) CPA2008-00011 PAGE 11 OF 31 Proposed Amendments 8 and 9: TSP Chapter 5: Pedestrians Committee Recommendation: • Page 5-11: Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects. Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking. AND • Page 5-11: Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects. Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking. Table 5-2 Potential Pedestrian Projects Rank* Project From To Other Potential Projects M Mistletoe Drive Hillshire Drive Benchview Terrace M Benchview Terrace White Cedar Place Bull Mountain Road M 132"Avenue Walnut Street Benchview Terrace M Menlor Lane Barrows Road Sunrise Lane M Sunrise Lane Menlor Lane 1501"Avenue M 1501h Avenue Sunrise Lane Bull Mountain Road M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements Regional Center (RTP 6022) M Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Existing Sidewalk to North M Watkins Avenue Park Street Walnut Street M Off-Street Multi-Use Tualatin River Crossing at approximately 108th Avenue Path M Off-Street Multi-Use 1-5/ORE 217 Kruse Way Bridge linkage to 72" Avenue south of Path ORE 217 M Off-Street Multi-Use Powerline Corridor/Tualatin River/Fanno Creek/Greenway Park Path Loop M Pedestrian Highway 99W at SW 71st Avenue Activated Signalized-Crossing Enhancements* M Pedestrian Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue Activated Signalized-Crossing Enhancements' *Requires approval from State Traffic Engineer CPA2008-0001I PAGE 12OF31 Proposed Amendment 10: TSP Chapter 6: Bicycles Committee Recommendation: Page 6-8: Figure 6-1 Bicycle Plan Alternative. Update figure to include existing bike lanes just north of SW Greenburg Road. DKKSAssociates /\ : ` CITY OF nGAPD - tau �„ Transportation ,I 1 I I'j Systems Plan r----4-. r--- ,' tr -- J Lewd r ! .i. --+--S. j .ci.yu.ur.■ ® , c a< r` -.,�.�116.SC 1.��. ... � tip - vw a y L_ i xw. ` AEI, "4 `3iu ti i s i • **. s.wu, m a 1 p ban rpm Lteigke.ft i '1••1<ff ' ' A 2 11 1 w r s-,,,.. , U 9 / 1,.t' ; r Figure 6-1 +t+ BICYCLE PLAN 4 o }rlf ALTERNATIVE o (AI Att■rialslColledorsOpdon) CPA2008-00011 PAGE 13 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 11: TSP Chapter 7: Transit Committee Recommendation: Page 7-1: Paragraph 4, Line 3 Update text to "...park and ride at ORE 99W/72nd Avenue 74th Avenue)." Chapter 7 Transit •41=41' CITY OF TIGARD 0•%011 This chapter summarizes existing and future transit needs in the City of Tigard. The following sections outline the criteria to be used to evaluate needs, provides a number of strategies for implementing a transit plan and recommends a transit plan for the City of Tigard. The needs, criteria and strategies were identified in working with the City's TSP Task Force. This committee provided input regarding the transportation system in Tigard, specifically exploring transit needs. The methodology used to develop the transit plan combined citizen and staff input. NEEDS There are currently 12 fixed bus routes which provide service within the City of Tigard. These bus routes are summarized in Chapter 3 (Existing Conditions). There are four express routes providing service to Tigard residents (12E, 64X, 92X and 95X). Existing transit headways on bus routes in Tigard range from 10-15 minutes on Routes 12 and 92X to about 30 minutes on Routes 76 and 78 during peak commute periods. Metro's Draft Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) identifies the following routes on its Public Transportation System Map (Figure 7-1)1: • ORE 217 HCT Corridor • Greenburg/Hall/Durham HCT Corridor • ORE 99W(East of ORE 217) HCT Corridor • Hall Boulevard (North of ORE 217) Frequent Bus • Hunziker Street Frequent Bus • ORE 99W(West of ORE 217) Primary Bus • Scholls Ferry Road (East of Murray) Primary Bus • 121 st/Walnut Street Primary Bus • 68th Parkway/Hampton Street Primary Bus • 72nd Avenue (South of Hampton) Primary Bus Based upon these designations, the City of Tigard designates all bus stops on HCT Corridors and Frequent Bus routes as Major Transit Stops. In addition, all park and ride sites and transit stations are designated major transit stops (Downtown Tigard, Washington Square, park and ride at ORE 99W/7-2 °veue74fh Avenue). While Tri-Met bus ridership in Tigard increased by 35%from 1990 to 1994 and another 15%from 1994 to 1999 (comparing 12 routes), transit ridership represents 6 percent of Tigard PM peak hour trip making. 1 Public Transportation System Map,Metro,Version 4.0,December 1, 1997. CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 14 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 12: TSP Chapter 7: Transit Committee Recommendation: Page 7-9: Table 7-2 Potential Transit Projects. Update table with following potential transit project(s). Table 7-2 Potential Transit Projects Rank Project Description 1 Provide Commuter Rail As part of the Beaverton to Wilsonville Commuter Station in Tigard Rail system provide a park and ride station in downtown Tigard. Support regional study of western extensions of commuter rail service (or comparable options). 2 Provide Transit Amenities at Provide shelters, information kiosks, etc key transit Major Transit Stops routes in Tigard with land use development. Focus on development of"SMART" bus stops. 3 Improve Pedestrian Construct sidewalks, crosswalks, etc. adjacent to Connections to Transit transit routes and facilities (i.e. park-and-ride lots, Facilities bus stops, etc.). Within 1/4 mile of bus stops, focus on enhancing pedestrian access. Enhance Regional Center and Town Center pedestrian access to transit. 4 Decrease Headways Provide more frequent transit service during peak commute periods. 5 Establish Additional Transit Provide service along Durham Road and in the Routes western part of the City (i.e. Durham Road, Barrows Road, Murray/Walnut/Gaarde) . Time additional transit service to coordinate with major road extensions or street improvements. 6 Add a new Transit Center at Provide a new transit center with the development of the Murray/Scholls Town the Murray/Scholls Town Center. The Downtown Center Town Center and Washington Square Regional Center are the existing Transit Center locations. 7 Enhance transit Implement transit queue bypass lanes along ORE reliability along 99W at the following locations: regional facilities • SW Gaarde/SW McDonald Street • SW Walnut Street • SW Hall Boulevard(northbound) • SW Dartmouth Avenue (northbound) • SW 68th Avenue Work with TriMet to relocate transit stops along ORE 99W(where appropriate) to allow for far side stop operations at signalized intersections to reduce potential delay to transit operations. CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 15 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 13: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-21: Figure 8-11 Future Streets. Where ROW is Planned for More Than Two Lanes. Updated figure to change Hwy 99W from 7 lane(red line)between Interstate 5 to Greenburg Road to 5 lane(yellow line). DKS Associates rl -Zi] I�11 ,< ".1 •: i 7 �I-III' Off Y OF TIGARD CONON Proposed Transportation ,i,i Amendment r Systems Plan "1 �� , r ut �_ y Legend -y.r� � .,._en J� nna aywi d W.r AV' SP'.d7 ".hi. _ L 7iL /N u.,.. . ‘All. .dig p. . ' avoi.. ir , I .Lew , 41,11' '''," . ' 1.:- t A/`� _' .YLn� , . rJ I -J.4 t ,.I• - M6. I 1 I 'V�1.� GYN.�.4.4o....V..Nn. a ,.v d (� . t 1 : <<! •.+ 14 -7' ( 1 f ` i 1 O -wrr'R rb6l.rr,.0. • • • �` 1' \ ~ �.,�,,..-. L. .. , +Ore NNt.a:hl a1.4lbc'u L. :f r arwml.m.1LW.virS...nW Win r I ( rC f1 'r }r .� -.a7 i dma�nexren,at. Win - Y. F � P. � t'� \ KO kadso rmu,r. j r'•) J �� 1 .'} m"'••• .f'ty�_` Irealue lnse-/Oa wood lot uev.� 1 wreswl-.:..aco.,rns.n.uwol F-- a. g l �aa.ru:mw.a:w tiroad )� J wrns.e ,r " a � 1 I .L `� � � 1 � �i�� - Y� r Figure 8.11 `t �.wr 1 fr- ` ' �1- Future Streets Where ';elL pi 1 x lD• ! r ROW Is Planned for g' r7 L, c3 ' ���.;- i .(. , More Than Two Lanes ***Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 16 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 14: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-34 and 8-35: Last Paragraph. Update text to "...The TSP recommends: 1) . • e ' _ " '' ' F.; extensive intersection improvements —turning lanes;42)aggressive access management,including the development of an access management plan for the corridori5 improvements to ORE 217 and I-5 noted above;61)off system improvements such as freeway improvements and arterials such. as TAValma extension;and Z)consideration of a western/Yamhill County commuter rail corridor:" 4. ORE 99W fails in the future without improvement. Of all the regional transportation issues in Tigard, ORE 99W is probably the closest to a "rubik's cube". Tigard depends heavily on ORE 99W as its primary arterial. There are no parallel routes to ORE 99W and its diagonal alignment and the physical features of Tigard make using ORE 99W essential for also any trip in Tigard. ORE 99W's statewide status and linkage to Yamhill County and the Oregon Coast have similar issues—the only route servicing northeast-southwest travel. The future demand for this corridor is well beyond its five lane capacity without system-wide improvements. Ten various alternatives to improving ORE 99W were investigated, ranging from the no improvement to radical capacity improvements. Table 8-5 summarizes the wide range of alternatives. Unfortunately, no one improvement results in desirable (better than level of service F) operation. The most significant finding was that no matter whether ORE 99W was widened southwest of Greenburg Road,the end result was failure. Added capacity on ORE 99W (tested by modeling seven lanes) resulted in significantly higher turning movements on/off ORE 99W and large through movements on ORE 99W. The end result was that not only would you have to widen to seven lanes but at nearly every intersection additional turning lanes were needed (double lefts, right turn) creating nearly a 10 lane cross section at intersection. And even after that the end result was level of service F conditions.Therefore the recommended approach combines several elements to produce a minimally acceptable operating condition. The TSP recommends: 1) _ - -• . extensive intersection improvements— auxil'ary turning and/or through lanes at key intersections on Highway 99W;-2)aggressive access management, including the development of an access management plan for the corridor;53)improvements to ORE 217 and I-5 noted above;44) off-system improvements such as freeway improvements and arterials such as Walnut extension;and-75) consideration of a western/Yamhill County commuter rail corridor." CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 17 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 15: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-37: Last Paragraph, first bullet. Update text to "ORE 99W access management with auxiliary turn and/or through lanes at key intersections. " Tigard Triangle Area. This subarea is also subject of a recently adopted plan. The basic package of street improvements needed to mitigate level of service F conditions in this area include: • ORE 99W seven-lanes access management with auxiliary turn and/or through lanes at key intersections. • Dartmouth Street five lanes • 72nd Avenue five lanes • Atlanta Street extended from Haines Street to 72nd Avenue • Backage roads to ORE 99W (providing access to business but not directly on ORE 99W) CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 18 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 16: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-38: Table, third item: Update text to `_ . . - - . This option would limit the potential of the Tigard Triangle to serve the projected land use in the future without localized intersection improvements. There improvements could include additional approach turn and/or through lanes northbound and southbound on ORE 9911/for short periods • ,. „ Other options considered in this sub area included a Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing of ORE 217, an extension of Atlanta Street to Dartmouth Street and five lanes on ORE 99W. The following summarizes the findings of these options: Dartmouth Attracts less than 5,000 vehicles per day by itself; extend Walnut to link to Hunziker up with the overcrossing of ORE 217 and the volume increase to 8,000 ORE 217 per day. Implement complete ramp metering in the Tigard Triangle Overcrossi area (on ORE 217 and 1-5) and the volume increases to 13,000 ng vehicles per day. Most of the traffic benefits of the overcrossing are produced with the Hunziker to Hampton overcrossing and the Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing has limited additional benefit. Unfortunately, ORE 99W still requires mitigation with or without overcrossing; access to ORE 217 would not be allowed by ODOT due to substandard spacing resulting in unsafe operation at large expense. One option where this overcrossing may be desirable in the future would be where ramp metering is fully operational and improvements to ORE 217 include a High Occupancy Toll (HOT) or High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane alternative where direct connections to ORE 99W are desired. The Dartmouth to Hunziker overcrossing could provide access to the Tigard Triangle and ORE 99W area via drop in ramps. Therefore, a potential alignment should be preserved for future consideration (where the alignment would go through parking lots). However, the overcrossing is not part of the street improvement plan in the TSP. Atlanta While the Atlanta extension to 72nd is 10,000 to 15,000 vehicles per day Extension the segment to the south connecting to Dartmouth is well below that to level. Recent development has blocked an optimal alignment. Dartmouth Backage roads will be more effective in this setting. The TSP includes the Atlanta extension to 72"d and backage roads with redevelopment. Five lane _ . . - - -- - .• .- - • _. . •_ _ •. . . •_ This ORE 99W option would limit the potential of the Tigard Triangle to serve the projected land use in the future without localized intersection improvements. These improvements could include additional approach turn and/or through lanes northbound and southbound on ORE 99W for short periods. _ _ . . - -. . . _. . - - . CPA200R-00011 PAGE 19 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 17: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-42: Table 8-6 Project Number 21. Add asterisk to project description that identifies that based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan,both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five- lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. Table 8-6 Proposed Metro and Planned CIP Projects Table 8-6 Project Project Name(Facility) Project Location Project Description Estimated No. Project Cost South Washington County Transportation Projects (RTP Round 3-1999) 18 Bonita Road Hall Boulevard to Bangy Widen to four lanes $ 8,000,000 Improvements Road 19 Durham Road Upper Boones Ferry Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,500,000 Improvements to Hall Boulevard 20 Durham Road Hall Boulevard to 99W Widen to two lanes $ 5,000,000 Improvements westbound, 1 lane eastbound, turn lane, bikeways and sidewalks 21 99W Improvements 1-5 to Highway 217 Widen to seven lance $267000,000 Capacity and/or safety improvements at key $ 9,000,000 intersections.* ** 22 72nd Avenue 99W to Hunziker Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,000,000 Improvements 23 72nd Avenue Hunziker Road to Bonita Widen to five lanes $ 5,000,000 Improvements Road 24 72nd Avenue Bonita Road to Durham Widen to five lanes with $ 5,000,000 Improvements Road bikeways and sidewalks 25 Upper Boones Ferry 1-5 to Durham Road Widen to five lanes $ 3,000,000 Road 26 Dartmouth Street Dartmouth Road to Hunziker Three lane extension; new $28,000,000 Extension Road Highway 217 overcrossing 27 Dartmouth Street 72nd Avenue to 68th Widen to four lanes with turn $ 500,000 Improvements Avenue lanes 28 Walnut Street Walnut Street at Gaarde Intersection improvement $ 1,358,000 Improvements, Phase 2 Street 29 Highway 217/72nd Highway 217 and 72nd Complete interchange $ 15,000,000 Avenue Interchange Avenue reconstruction with additional Improvements ramps and overcrossings 30 Scholls Ferry Road At Hall Boulevard Add SB right turn lane from $ 500,000 Intersection SB Hall Boulevard Improvement * Based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99Wlmprovements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7lanes. **Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where CPA2008-0001 1 PAGE 20 OF 31 traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA200R-0001 I PAGE 21 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 18: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-45: Table 8-7 Third Project Listed. Add asterisk to project description that identifies that based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five- lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. The recommended TSP motor vehicle improvements are summarized in Table 8-7 and Figure 8-19. Several spot improvements were also identified at various intersection in Tigard and they are summarized in Figure 8-20 and Table 8-8. Prioritization should occur in coordination with the CIP Figure 8-18 Street Improvement Plan process. All improvements on arterials and collectors shall include sidewalks, bike lanes and transit facilities. These improvement lists should be used as a starting point for inclusion in regional funding programs for streets. Table 8-7 Future Street Improvements All Pro ects include sidewalks, bic cle lanes and transit accommodations as re.uired Location Description Funding Status* 1-5 Widen to 4 plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) between Not Funded ORE 217 and I-205/Wilsonville Not in any plan Widen to 4 lanes (each direction) south to Wilsonville ORE 217 Widen to 3 lanes plus auxiliary lanes (each direction) Not Funded between US 26 and 72nd Avenue In RTP (as widening or HOV or HOT) New ORE 217/1-5 interchange between 72nd Avenue and Bangy Road Phase I Funded Phase II in RTP ORE 99W • - -• - e - -e • e• . -•s) between--I-5-and In RTP Greenburg Road Capacity and/or safety Not Funded improvements at key intersections.*** In prior plans 4:Based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7lanes. **Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA200R-00011 PAGE 22 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 19: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-47: Figure 8-19: 20 Year Street Improvement Plan. Update figure to remove seven lane widening project from Hwy 99W. • DKSAssociates A ® t / l TO CITY OF TIGARD i..d Proposed Transportation ,J • Amendment Systems Plan H y 4: t .Minhd4tr I !! /d' I fsrt/N1YNy }C'' q r ®. •RoW!Mlly Z_ I •-RNtW hale, ' I —1tWG \ -- •.'')AtInimphpuwwR• t �I rmnemN `' rrf rd r In.MYRhm.W.q '( I 0 1 *141 O `\ I •Nwrpfi '40 Uns j '.r Y �A t Q c ..r� \O , i j t ' Tn... - • ____ • NW Nn'1 -.. , a4 I.Ii� • ( � / Figure&19 • -4'� iBbME acv} ¢1 2O YEAR STREET 111 Mbl..pat..tol Q �• t�ruxR.ir IMPROVEMENT PLAN t lvs Mlt.t.ms wt r Moult *High way 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA2008-00011 PAGE 23 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 20: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-48: Figure 8-20 Intersection Improvement Locations. Update figure to include projects at the following intersections: #37-ORE 99W/SW Durham Road #38-ORE 99W/SW Canterbury Lane DKS.4S_•cc.6.Pio �', CITY Of TIGAga a 't -. A.: .. .t.., Transportation '+ '' i Systems Plan _ . f j'. . , t 4 4 p _ ic�y�r. :I Wtti.'W., • V �,.• Y {/spy-`IA.•. • d'M-o. ia r - <.• --- JJJ — - r- - -7, .......,, ____ _, ill ..,_ .:....,1 li. • Proposed " 11 .. .;- Amendment N J I Proposed ;.:Vr`• a '' Figure 820 Amendment y'" 4' IKTER$EiCTION 4 ,7 IMPROVEMENT LOCATIONS CPA'2008-00011 PAGE 24 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 21: TSP Chapter 8: Motor Vehicles Committee Recommendation: Page 8-49 through 8-51: Table 8-8 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements. Update table to include specific projects and add projects at the following intersections. Table 8-8 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements No. ' Intersection Description 8 Main/ • Southbound Left turn lane Greenburg/0 RE 99W • Add eastbound left turn pocket • Add westbound left turn pocket 11 Hall/ORE • Southbound right turn lane 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Westbound right turn overlap • Westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 12 ORE 217 NB • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ Ramps/ ORE 99W • 2"a northbound left turn lane 13 ORE 217 SB • 2nd northbound left turn lane Ramps/ _ ! ORE 99W 14 Dartmouth/ • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ ORE 99W • Add southbound through lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 15 72nd/ • Southbound right turn lane ORE 99W • Northbound right turn overlap • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south 16 68th/ •-2"o ORE 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 25 ORE 99W/ • Westbound right turn lane McDonald/G • Retain eastbound right turn lane aarde • 2nd northbound left turn lane • 2nd Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 30 Walnut/ ORE 99W • Change to protected left turn phasing on Walnut • Add westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 37 ORE 99W/ • Add westbound left turn lane Canterbury Lane 38 ORE 99W/ • Add northbound left turn lane Durham Road CPA200R-00011 PAGE 25 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 22, 23 and 24: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 11-7: Page 11-7: Table 11-4 Pedestrian Action Plan Project List • Update ORE 99W project from "McDonald Street to South City Limits" to "Interstate 5 to South City Limits". Update cost from $500,000 to $800,000. • Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW 71st Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking and cost of$200,000. • Add pedestrian activated signalized crossing on Highway 99W at SW Watkins Avenue to project list with "Medium" ranking and cost of$200,000. Table 1 1-4 Pedestrian Action Plan Project List Rank* Project From To Cost H North Dakota Street 12151 Avenue Greenburg Road $230,000 H McDonald Street ORE 99W Hall Boulevard $200,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Walnut Street Greenburg Road $350,000 H Oak Street(RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 80m Avenue $500,000 H ORE 99W South City Limits $500;000 Interstate 5 $800,000 M Bull Mountain Road ORE 99W Beef Bend Road $1,200,000 M Roshak Road Bull Mountain Road Scholls Ferry Road $300,000 M 12151 Avenue Gaarde Street North Dakota Street $450,000 M Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72"Avenue $250,000 M Washington Square Pedestrian Improvements (RTP 6022) $6,000,000 Regional Center L Taylor's Ferry Rd Washington Drive 62"Avenue $1,000,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry Road $200,000 M Pedestrian Activated Highway 99W at SW $200,000 Signalized-Crossing 71st Avenue Enhancements* M Pedestrian Activated Highway 99W at SW $200,000 Signalized Crossing Watkins Avenue Enhancements* Subtotal $1-1400,000 $12,500,000 Sidewalks to be built with Street Improvements H Bonita Road West of 72"tl Avenue 72"°Avenue $50,000 H Walnut Street 135'"Avenue Tiedeman Avenue $570,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $620,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Road Pfaffle Street $1,000,000 H Dartmouth Street 72nd 68th Avenue $120,000 H Tigard Street 115th Street Main Street $350,000 H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $100,000 H Fonner Street walnut Street 121st Avenue $250,000 H Commercial Street Main Street Lincoln Street $50,000 CPA2008-000I I PAGE 26 OF 31 Rank* Project From To Cost M 72"6 Avenue ORE 99W Bonita Road $1,200,000 M Hall Boulevard North of Hunziker Street South City Limits $670,000 M Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls Ferry Road $1,000,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Road(W) Scholls Ferry Road $950,000 (E) L 72nd Avenue Carman/Upper Durham Road $250,000 BoonesFry. Subtotal $7,180,000 Annual Sidewalk Program at$50,000 per year for 20 years $1,000,000 Action Plan $1-9360,000 Total $20,060,000 *Requires approval from State Traffic Engineer CPA2008.00011 PAGE 27 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 25: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 1 1-8: Table 1 1-5 Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost. Update ORE 99W bike lane improvement cost from $1,300,000 to $275,000. Table 11-5 Bicycle Action Plan Improvement List and Cost Rank* Project From To Cost H Hunziker Street Hall Boulevard 72"d Avenue $250,000 H Bonita Road 72' Avenue West of 72"d $50,000 Ave. H Burnham Street Main Street Hall Boulevard $135,000 H Oak Street (RTP 6019) Hall Boulevard 90th Avenue $300,000 H 98th Avenue Murdock Stret Durham Road $275,000 H 92nd Avenue Durham Road Cook Park $270,000 H Tiedeman Avenue Greenburg Road Walnut Street $250,000 M 121st Avenue Walnut Street Gaarde Street $400,000 L Taylor's Ferry Road Washington Drive City Limits $500,000 L Washington Drive Hall Boulevard Taylor's Ferry $100,000 Rd L O'Mara Street McDonald Street Hall Boulevard $275,000 L Frewing Street ORE 99W O'Mara Street $150,000 Subtotal $2,955,000 H Gaarde Street Walnut Street ORE 99W $600,000 H Hall Boulevard Scholls Ferry Locust Street $500,000 Road H Greenburg Road Hall Boulevard Cascade $300,000 Avenue H ORE 99W East City Limits South City $17300T000 Limits $275,000 M 72"d Avenue ORE 99W South City $960,000 Limits M Hall Boulevard Pfaffle Street Bonita Road $550,000 M Carman Drive 1-5 Durham Road $200,000 M Walnut Street ORE 99W Barrows Road $1,400,000 M Barrows Road Scholls Ferry Scholls Ferry $900,000 Road (W) Rd. (E) L Bull Mountain Road 150th Avenue Beef Bend Road $550,000 L Beef Bend Road ORE 99W Scholls $1,600,000 FerryRd. Subtotal $8,860,000 $7,835,000 Multi-Use Pathways H Hunziker Link to LO Linkage to Kruse Way Trail in Lake $500,000 Oswego CPA2008-0001 I PAGE 28 OF 11 Rank* Project From To Cost M Fanno Creek Trail Tualatin River to City Hall, ORE 99W $3,600,000 to Tigard M Tualatin River Trail Adjacent to Cook Park from $2,600,000 Powerlines to Fanno M Tualatin River Crossing Near 108th Avenue $3,000,000 L Powerlines Corridor From Beaverton to Tualatin River $2,500,000 Trail Subtotal $12,200,00 0 Action Plan Total 0 $22,990,00 0 CPA2008-00011 PAGE 29 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 26: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 11-9: Table 11-6 Future Street Improvements. Add asterisk to project description that identifies that based on the recommendations of the Tigard • 99W Improvements Plan,both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. Table 11-6 Cost Location Description Estimate Funding Status* 1-5 Widen to 4 plus auxiliary lanes (each $200,000,000 Not Funded direction) between ORE 217 and 1-205 Not in any plan 'Provide additional throughput capacity (each $50,000,000 direction) south to Wilsonville ORE 217 Widen to 3 lanes plus auxiliary lanes (each $240,000,000 Not Funded direction) between US 26 and 72nd Avenue In RTP (as widening or HOV or HOT) New ORE 217/1-5 interchange between 72nd Phase 1 Funded Avenue and Bangy Road $39,000,000 Phase 2 & 3 in RTP Phase 2 $15,000,000 RTP 6027 & 6028 Phase 3 ORE 99W Widen to seven lanes (total — both directions) $25,000,000 RTP 6039 Capacity and/or safety improvements at key intersections.*** 1-5 to ORE 99W Connector linking 1-5 and ORE 99W (model $250,000,000 RTP 6005 assumed connector would be located north (Toll Route) of Sherwood—specific location to be determined by further study) Overcrossings over 5 lane overcrossings linking Washington $40,000,000 RTP 6011 & 6052 ORE 217 Square and Cascade Avenue—one north of Scholls Ferry Road, one south of Scholls Ferry Road to Nimbus $15,000,000 RTP 6053 Connector Road Nimbus south to Greenburg * Based on the recommendations of the Tigard 99W Improvements Plan, both the TSP and RTP should be amended to retain four/five-lanes rather than the current designation to widen ORE 99W to 7 lanes. **Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity, function, turn lanes, or access management at key locations, such as major intersections, where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained. For locations within 600 feet of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange, staff will determine, based on accepted engineering practices, the cross-section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection. CPA200 8-00011 PAGE 30 OF 31 Proposed Amendment 27: TSP Chapter 11: Funding/Implementation Committee Recommendation: Page 1 1-11: Table 1 1-7 City of Tigard Future Intersection Improvements. Update table to include specific projects and add projects at the following intersections: Table 11-7 City ofTigard Future Intersection In novements No. Intersection Description Cost 8 Main/ • Southbound Left turn lane $700,000 Greenburg/ ORE 99W • Add eastbound left turn pocket • Add westbound left turn pocket 11 Hall/ORE • Southbound right turn lane $3,700,000 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Westbound right turn overlap • Retain westbound right turn lane when ORE 09W widened to 7 lanes • Westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 12 ORE 217 • Retain eastbound right turn lane whon ORE 99W widened to 7 lanes $900,000 NB Ramps/ - __ ._. _ - • : •. - - - $700,000 ORE 99W • 2nd northbound left turn lane 13 ORE 217 SB • 2nd northbound left turn lane $4007000 Ramps/ ._. .r $200,000 ORE 99W 14 Dartmouth • Retain eastbound right turn lane_ •:• e' -- - -- -- - •:- $400,000 /ORE 99W • Add southbound through lane $800,000 • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound direction 15 72nd/ • Southbound right turn lane $500,000 ORE 99W • Northbound right turn overlap $300,000 • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Retain eastbound right turn Ian° •:• e' !s •-_ _ •__ 16 68th/ •—ed $1,500,000 ORE 99W • Northbound left turn lane • Southbound left turn lane • Change to protected left turn phasing north/south • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 25 ORE 99W/ • Westbound right turn lane X00,000 McDonald/ • Retain eastbound right turn lane $1,500,000 Gaarde • 2nd northbound left turn lane • 2nd Southbound left turn lane • Eastbound through lane • Westbound through lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 30 Walnut/ ..'• :_ ._-•_ . • - _ •_• e' !! - -_ - - -- $250,000 ORE 99W • Change to protected left turn phasing on Walnut $600,000 • Add westbound left turn lane • Add transit que bypass lanes in northbound and southbound directions 37 ORE 99W/ • Add westbound left turn lane $250,000 Canterbury Lane 38 ORE 99W/ • Add northbound left turn lane $250,000 Durham Road CPA200R-00011 PAGE 31 OF 31 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes April 6, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER President Inman called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 2. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: President Inman; Commissioners Anderson, Caffall, Doherty, Hasman, Muldoon, and Vice President Walsh Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Fishel,Vermilyea, and alternate Commissioner Gaschke Staff Present: Ron Bunch, Community Development Director; Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager; Gus Duenas, City Engineer; Darren Wyss, Senior Planner;Todd Prager, City Arborist; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner; Doreen Laughlin, Planning Commission Secretary 3. COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Doherty reported that she'd attended the Metro 101 session in Hillsboro. She gave a short report and distributed CD's with the information to the Commissioners, along with an Urban and Rural Reserves Phase 3 Public Meeting Schedule. Commissioner Caffall reported that he'd attended the CCI (Committee for Citizen Involvement) meeting, and that he found that most of the neighborhoods are up and live with their websites. He said that's going well. He reported that Gus Duenas (City Engineer)is keeping the committee busy with Hwy 99W and street improvements. Vice President Walsh reported that he'd attended the Tree Board meeting the week before and they would be getting an update at the end of the meeting tonight. 4. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES 3-2-09 Meeting Minutes: There was a motion by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Muldoon to approve the 3-2-09 Planning Commission meeting minutes as submitted. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 1 of 9 The motion to approve the minutes as submitted passed unanimously on a recorded vote, the Commissioners voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, and Commissioner Muldoon (4) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: Commissioner Anderson, Caffall, and Walsh (3) ABSENT: Commissioner Fishel,Vermilyea (2) 3-16-09 Meeting Minutes: There was a motion by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Muldoon to approve the 3-16-09 Planning Commission meeting minutes as submitted: The motion to approve the minutes as submitted passed unanimously on a recorded vote, the Commissioners voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, and Commissioner Muldoon (5) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: Commissioners Caffall and Walsh (2) ABSENT: Commissioners Fishel and Vermilyea (2) 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5.1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2008-00011 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Tigard Transportation Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendments to Incorporate Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan Recommendations PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Darren Wyss, Senior Planner, presented the staff report on behalf of the City. [Staff reports are available for public review at the City one week prior to public hearings.] Wyss said the Planning Commission was being asked to make a recommendation to City Council on CPA2008-00011,which will amend the Tigard TSP and Comp Plan. He noted the Commission previously held a workshop on the proposed amendment on March 2, 2009. He said the proposed amendments will incorporate recommendations found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan and those made by the project's Citizen Advisory Committee [CAC]. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 2 of 9 Wyss highlighted a few components of the process: • Intended to develop concept-level recommendations for transportation improvements and additional interventions to meet future needs in the corridor. • The primary focus was to identify potential projects aimed at alleviating congestion and improving circulation. • The planning process ended up evaluating three alternatives • A—partial widening of 99W thru Tigard • B —access management strategy in Tigard • C —Widening of 99W to 7 lanes thru Tigard Wyss noted that in the end, Alternative B was chosen as the preferred alternative as it best met the project objectives and criteria while carrying the fewest negative impacts. He said it was important to keep in mind that choosing Alternative B was not done in a vacuum. Both public involvement and interagency coordination factored into choosing the preferred alternative. The proposed amendments found in CPA2008-00011 were developed as a result of Alternative B being chosen. In addition to the recommendation found in the Plan, the CAC developed a list of its own recommendations to Council which are included as proposed Recommended Action Measures to be added to the Comp Plan transportation chapter. He said the proposed amendments are divided into the following four components: 1. Update the Tigard Transportation System Plan to include recommended changes found in the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan; 2. Incorporate the Tigard 99W Improvement and Management Plan by reference into the Tigard Transportation System Plan to serve as findings; 3. Update the recommended action measures for Tigard Comprehensive Plan Goal 12: Transportation to include language recommended by the Tigard 99W Plan Citizen Advisory Committee; and 4. Amend the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.A (under Goal 12.2) to reflect recommended through lanes for Highway 99W. (Staff recommended for consistency with TSP amendments.) Wyss noted a few minor changes had been made to the proposed amendments since the PC workshop on March 2, 2009. These changes were based on two things: • PC feedback at the workshop • Comments sent in by ODOT and Beaverton At this point Wyss went over a PowerPoint presentation. (Exhibit A) QUESTIONS BY COMMISSIONERS Is `function"defined? We can do that. PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN FAVOR—No one signed up to speak in favor. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 3 of 9 PUBLIC TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION —No one signed up to speak in opposition. President Inman asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this. Sue Beilke, 11755 SW 114th Place,Tigard, had a couple of questions regarding changes Wyss had made to table 11-4 and 11-5 —which he answered to her satisfaction. PUBLIC TESTIMONY CLOSED DELIBERATIONS/MOTION After a short deliberation, there was a motion by Commissioner Doherty, seconded by Commissioner Caffall: "I move the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council of application CPA2008-00011 and recommend the City Council adopt the amendments to the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Tigard Comprehensive Plan as found in Exhibit A [of staff report]." The motion passed unanimously on a recorded vote, the Commissioners voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, Commissioner Muldoon, and Commissioner Walsh (7) NAYS: None (0) ABSTAINERS: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners Fishel and Vermilyea (2) After the vote, Wyss was reminded that they would like him to add the definition of "function." He said he would. President Inman noted this will go to Council's 6/23/09 Business Meeting. 5.2 PUBLIC HEARING (Continued from 2-23-09) DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2008-00005 - SENSITIVE LANDS PERMIT REQUIREMENTS - On behalf of the City, Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner, handed out a revised memo (Exhibit B) with the changes in red. He said they offer a refinement in staff recommendation — Option 3.c [3.c states: "Pedestrian/bicycle pathways within the floodplain shall include a wildlife assessment to ensure that the proposed alignment minimizes impacts to significant wildlife habitat."] He said there were some comments [from Brian Wegener &John Frewing] at the back of that memo as well as a memo from Public PLANNING COMMISSION MEE'T'ING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 4 of 9 Works, Steve Martin [Parks & Facilities Manager]. Pagenstecher went over the memo which, he said, reflects the input he'd received. Pagenstecher said there were basically two issues: 1) the elevation criteria; and 2) the wildlife habitat issue. The revised recommendation gets rid of the elevation criteria altogether and instead requires a wildlife assessment for pathways within the floodplain. Briefly, the elevation criteria were originally designed for structure, protection, and maintenance. He said the Public Works memo spoke to that advising him that it simply wasn't an issue. Adding a criterion for wildlife is recommended for trails in the flood plain. QUESTIONS BY COMMISSIONERS There was a general question about the difference between bike and pedestrian impacts. PUBLIC TESTIMONY— IN FAVOR—No one was signed up to speak in favor. PUBLIC TESTIMONY—IN OPPOSITION— John Frewing, 7110 SW Lola Lane, Tigard, OR spoke in opposition. He went over his written submitted comments at the back of the packet (back of Exhibit B). With regard to 3.c—he said there were several things that caused him concern. He'd like to see 3.c changed to say "pedestrian or bicycle pathways which are either replaced, new, or modified from this date forward, shall include this wildlife assessment." Secondly, he asked "what is a wildlife assessment?" He said he can do a wildlife assessment in about 1 second. Someone else may take more time because it involves fish, or birds, or frogs, or whatever — are there standards that we can reference in that regard? He said he doesn't know. "Thirdly, you've used the word "significant wildlife habitat" that in our [Tigard] code — there's a map of significant wildlife habitat adopted for Goal 5 and I presume that's what you mean, but it doesn't say that here." He went on to say that "CWS right now has a waiver for existing roads and trails in these low lying areas and so anything that exists that you're going to modify, repave, or replace escapes through that provision of CWS. And I don't want it to escape. I want it to have the wildlife assessment." Pagenstecher answered that any trail would go through a design development process and where trails are, for instance, modified for width, you would expect to have an assessment because they would be "new" trails and would be subject to the criterion for pathways in a floodplain. Frewing said that was comforting to him. He then asked about the standard for wildlife assessment. Pagenstecher said there is no criterion for wildlife assessment at this time. It's not in the code and not proposed here. There are standards for it. There are wildlife assessments —they are ordered for a purpose. Secondly, Frewing asked whether wildlife assessment would be done at one point in time, or done over several important seasons. Pagenstecher said wildlife assessments indicate time of year done and try to accommodate for that. Frewing said seasonal differences should be picked up in a wildlife assessment. Did you say that would be picked up? Pagenstecher said yes, I think that would PLANNING COMMISSION FETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 5 of 9 be picked up. Frewing: Lastly, does "significant wildlife habitat" correspond to the city's map? Pagenstecher: What we're talking about here is a criterion that applies specifically to floodplains in the City of Tigard. Floodplains correlate with the highest height and limit value on the habitat map. Frewing: Okay— so it refers to the map. Pagenstecher: Yes. Erik Lindstrom, 6801 SW Canyon Crest Drive, Portland 97225 spoke in opposition— He thanked Gary for meeting with them on Friday and answering many of his concerns. He said he'd studied the watershed very intently for two years as part of writing a book about Fanno Creek. He spoke about management of ecosystem services and wildlife habitat within the City limits. He said he was concerned about the process itself. He doesn't like the idea of modifying code to meet the plan. He's not convinced the details are there that the certain damage that will occur to the watershed as a result of this is mitigated and offset by other activities. There were no questions from staff. Sue Beilke, 11755 SW 114th Place, Tigard spoke in opposition. She handed out her comments in written form and went over them (Exhibit C). There were no questions from staff. Brian Wegener, 12360 SW Main Street, Suite 100,Tigard, OR of the Tualatin Riverkeepers hadn't signed up, but spoke in opposition. He said he's concerned about bicycle road kills in these sensitive areas. He'd seen some of them. He's also concerned about trail washouts. Impacts should be minimized. He thinks the wildlife assessment should be defined. He's hoping this will be a "win-win" situation. He likes trails and access to nature but wants to make sure we are not taking away that nature by putting those trails in. QUESTIONS FROM STAFF: What do you believe is the solution? The solution could be perhaps putting trails going through wet areas up on pilings. In a slope situation— there are a lot of different choices. Reduce impervious areas that are causing stormwater run-off- that's very important to areas close to the streams. QUESTIONS OF STAFF Did ODF&W further comment? No. Pagenstecher said he called to follow up on their first comment. He said the comment was global in that when there's a limited resource — generally speaking, the policy is —protect it whenever you can. He said that's consistent with their mission. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 6 of 9 Is there the possibility of the City looking at what sort of surface— what the trail's going to be made out of— before a trail is put in a floodplain?Is there any possibili y in this code to go through and have that as part of the criteria? There are opportunities to introduce and apply green [environmentally friendly] trail criterion in the design development of any trail segment that the City may undertake. PUBLIC TESTIMONY CLOSED DELIBERATIONS President Inman said a floodplain is not necessarily a natural resource area so, potentially, we could be requiring wildlife assessments for a parking lot. She believes this is above and beyond other standards that are currendy out there, and potentially onerous. She said she leans towards faith in CWS and other regulations as far as protecting resources and buffers — there's a dedicated public who will follow the development of the plan and will give input with regard to paths. That being said, she's not opposed to adding a wildlife assessment. The commissioners deliberated at length. MOTION After deliberations, there was a motion by Commissioner Muldoon, seconded by Commissioner Hasman: "I move we adopt DCA2008-00005 Sensitive Lands Permit Requirement, selecting Option 3.c as amended April 6, 2009." The motion passed on a recorded vote- the Commissioners voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Caffall, Commissioner Doherty, Commissioner Hasman, Commissioner Inman, and Commissioner Muldoon (5) NAYS: Commissioner Walsh (1) ABSTAINERS: None (0) ABSENT: Commissioners Fishel and Vermilyea (2) PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED President Inman noted this will go to the 5/12/09 Council Business Meeting. 6. URBAN FORESTRY MASTERPLAN City Arborist,Todd Prager, said the slide presentation he was about to present highlights the packet that was distributed to the commissioners earlier. He encouraged them to review the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 7 of 9 packet over the coming months to become familiar with the data that's been collected thus far for the Urban Forestry Master Plan. At this point he went over his slide presentation as an update of the Master Plan (Exhibit D). QUESTIONS FOR STAFF Why has the tree canopy decreased? Dick Bewersdorff, Planning Manager, answered, "There'd been more development in those years than we've ever had in Tigard." Prager added, "The fragmentation where the larger groves were being replaced with smaller individual plantings may indicate that the mitigation is helping to restore canopy in these residential zones." There were a few other questions and then the commissioners thanked Prager for a presentation they said was well done. 7. OTHER BUSINESS— Joint Meeting on April 21St—Tuesday—ideas for topics: The commissioners talked about some of the topics they may wish to discuss at that meeting. The consensus was that their main topic would be that of communication between the Council and the Commission; specifically,if Council chooses to over-ride one of their recommendations. They wondered what the plan is to communicate Council's reasoning as to why they disagree. Minutes: Planning Commission Bylaws -Article IV Section 12.E There was a decision to change the way the Commission considers/approves minutes. It was decided that, in light of the heretofore overlooked portion of the bylaws (below), in the future they would approve them differently than in the past. Article IV Section 12.E of the Planning Commission bylaws states: "Commissioners are expected to vote for approval of the minutes based on the accuracy of representation of events at the meeting. If there are no corrections, the President may declare the minutes approved as presented, without the need for a motion and vote. A vote in favor of adopting minutes does not signify agreement or disagreement with the Commission's actions memorialized in the minutes." So, if after asking if there are any corrections and, there being none, the President may declare the minutes "approved as presented"without the need for a motion and vote. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 8 of 9 8. ADJOURNMENT President Inman adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. '-'-C---=-1-Deu-,24 .--`. . ‘A-QP--°------ Doreen Laughlin, Planning C .ssion Secretary ,it 4,,,,,,, ,-, ,or J.--71-/W47 ATTEST: President Jodie Inman PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES—April 6,2009—Page 9 of 9 EXHIBIT A CPA2008-00011 City of Tigard M •Recommendation to Council CPA2008-00011 •Commission Workshop on March L —ifikji. ,- Planning Commission 2,2009 ., • Public Hearing •Proposed Amendments in Exhibit A ' April6,2009 e i' -•,.-• •Tigard 99W Improvement and + :: Management Plan ' ` AO,.2033 4 m, ..a,k. ■ Tigard 99W Plan Proposed Amendments •Alleviate Congestion&Improve -'i`i •1.Update TSP Circulation •2.Incorporate by reference . •Evaluated Three Alternatives • ti - •3.Update Comp Plan — •Alternative B—Preferred •�•',a " ` A 6 �; Recommended Action Measures .. -it, •CAC Recommendations ' -' "-- ' ii."... II i •4.Amend Comp Plan Policy 6.A b.;,,.MA mk,�.•>Mk.,. 3 =,3■6.1[09 mk.io,,..uvwrwe.+m.., Changes After March 2nd Workshop Commission Requested Changes •27. The City shall adopt Alternative B as contained in the Tittard +r .: 99W Plan as part of its Transportation System Plan and prioritize its •Feedback from Commission J , recommendations. Subsequently,the City shall,in conjunction with 3-� other agencies,jurisdictions,and stakeholders,develop action plans •ODOT Comments M l to implement the alternative's specific project recommendations. • Action plans to implement Alternative B shall include design and •-. ' engineering strategies,funding measures,and stakeholder and citizen •City of Beaverton Comments •, • engagement. Reasonable time frames shall be associated with the action plans. •Details in Memo Dated March 30th ', •33.Highway 99W Action Plans shall seek to enhance the economic ..,,R-a= vitality of the corridor through transportation,aesthetic land use,and Q other improvements.In addition,staff-resources shall be eetomitled �•• used to coordinate business development and retention activities, and aid in communication among the business community and city government. b.n•.3ma n.,,.m,c.mm..m„wa<k».., s .•MU 3039 r,.'M<ommk...c„bk,,..m„ 6 1 4/10/2009 Commission Requested Changes ODOT Comments •Remove any reference to 5-lanes as"through lanes" •Proposed amendments 8,9,23, 24 •Proposed amendments 8,9,23, 24 •Auxiliary lanes in the asterisk language `Highway 99W may include auxiliary lanes for additional intersection capacity,function,turn lanes,or access management at key locations,such as major intersections,where traffic flow and/or capacity would otherwise be constrained For locations within 600 feel of any signalized intersection or freeway interchange,staff will determine,based on accepted engineering practices,the cross- section and auxiliary lanes that will be necessary to serve that intersection." •Raoulraa approval from stole traffic Engine, .., >4nni.•cemmmb.Publit..nne r �,•.6:� .an . m..�a.•.a<�...�• Beaverton Comments Staff Recommendation •Deleted Turn Lanes ManlGreerb.rgiORE 99W soutmnd Left San harr Find CPA2008-00011 complies with the applicable review wwORE 99N/ Scuttound rapt tun,w» criteria;and f4orthbound Recommends the City Council adopt the amendments to the Westbound rgM Nn overlap ORE 217 NB Ramps/ORE 99W Rear,eastbound,gm n,,,w,e_w..o ORE OW., Tigard Transportation System Plan and Tigard Comprehensive ..dvw NSNwc Plan as found in Exhibit A. Zr norwtond haft km lane ORE 217 sB Ramps 7"rx eSoind l e Mn lane ORE 99W DartrrnfxORE 99W Ratan eastbound rght turn hane_seon ORE 9644 a.d.a.o4o J Naos BBOJORE 99W NoretpnW hall nrn lens soutltpind felt turn lane Gong.to protected haft turn phavg north/south mos .i„mxyCommesenrwe»«rift, ??Questions?? t • April 5,20C9 Mannineemenission Mowing „ ' b: 2 . , IP Iii EXHIBIT B " City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner Re: Continued Hearing for DCA 2008-00005 Sensitive Lands Permit Requirements (REVISED MEMORANDUM) Date: April 6, 2009 Background On February 23, 2009, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider Staff's request (DCA2008-00005) to amend the Sensitive Lands Chapter of the Tigard Development Code to remove a criterion (18.775.070.B.5) prohibiting pathways located within or adjacent to the floodplain to be below the elevation of the average annual flood. The Commission received substantial public comment on the issue and decided to continue the hearing to allow time for careful consideration of the information provided and allow staff time to prepare an options analysis. In addition to a summary of public comments and the options analysis, below, staff has included a section to help clarify terms. Terms Average Annual Flood Elevation: The flood elevation used in 18.775.070.B.5;the average of annual peak daily flows over the length of available data; an elevation between "bank full" and the"2-year flood"; typically used for structural protection and maintenance purposes. 2 year Flood Elevation: A conservative proxy for the annual flood elevation. Base Flood Elevation: The computed elevation to which floodwater is anticipated to rise during the base flood (100-year flood, 1% flood, one-percent annual chance flood, FEMA floodplain extent). Ordinary High Water(OVA 33C1'R 328.3(e)): The term ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas." Adopted Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Plan: The City of Tigard Parks System Master Plan (March 1999),includes general alignments for Tigard's trail system; as funding becomes available, specific trail segment plans are developed to provide siting and design details. 1 Practicable: Capable of being effected, done, or put into practice; feasible. Summary of Public Comments Jennifer Thompson. US Fish and Wildlife (USFW): cites Metro's environmentally—friendly trails guidebook to address potential adverse impacts of trails in sensitive areas and lists potential impacts from hydrology to habitat. Nancy Munn. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS): states that NMFS generally does not support trails in floodplains (with the exception of dirt trails) because often trail design and vegetation management proximate to water conflicts with conditions that support cold-water fisheries. Eric Lindstrom,EdD: takes issue with conclusions in the staff report by elaborating on findings,potential impacts to resources;concludes that pathways are desirable components of park plans but should not compromise the functional integrity of the floodplain (Owyhee River road example). Sue Beilke,Fans of Fanno Creek: argues against removal of the elevation criterion in order to protect significant habitat and that other potentially conflicting City goals are met with the existing trail network in Fanno Creek and by other upland trails planned by the City. Brian Wegener,Tualatin River Keepers: cites comments from USFWS/Metro/NMFS (above) regarding potential impacts to natural resources;identifies potential conflict of the proposed trails with sensitive habitat areas map designation of"strictly limit"in the majority of Fanno Creek Park; addresses shortcomings with the findings in the staff report and suggests an alternatives analysis include siting trails above the average annual flood. John Frewing:identifies process issues with the City as applicant;suggests processing a variance rather than a code amendment;calls out ODOT,DSL,CWS, and Metro provisions for safety and resource protection. Mischa Connine. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW): concerned with overall decline of riparian habitat and connectivity and therefore the potential adverse impacts of paths located in riparian and associated floodplain habitats. Bob Salinger/Jim Labbe,Audubon: concerned with the incremental loss and degradation of floodplain habitats and water quality in the Tualatin Basin; supports low-impact path design including alternative alignments outside of floodplains;worried natural areas along Fanno Creek will be loved to death. Code Construction and Analysis Section 18.775.070.B (Sensitive Lands Permits Within the 100-year Floodplain) includes seven approval criteria for development within the 100-year floodplain subject to Hearings Officer review.The criteria are designed to ensure maintenance of the floodway (1 and 3),restrict uses in certain zones (2), ensure agency permitting(6), and provide for a pedestrian/bicycle pathway (4, 5, and 7). Of the three pathway criteria,criterion 4 ensures development plans include a timely pathway improvement in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle pathway plan; criterion 5 restricts the elevation of a pathway to be higher than the average annual flood;and criterion 7 assures dedication of open land area of a suitable elevation for the construction of a pathway within the floodplain in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. 2 The potential conflict with Criterion 5 arises for several reasons: a) the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan is often too generalized to provide guidance in siting pathways,and b) to achieve the elevation requirement within the floodplain for planned pathways could require filling, boardwalks, or re-siting outside the floodplain or in portions of the floodplain that exceed the average annual flood. Pathways crossing a creek are particularly problematic. To make sense of this potential conflict, a reasonable reading of criterion 5 would be to apply it"where practicable."This involves striking a balance between recreation use and program purpose, on the one hand, and resource protection, on the other. The following options range from retaining criterion 5 as is (Option 1), to removing it altogether (Option 4), including two options with amended language to allow paths within the floodplain where practicable and when consistent with adopted plans (Option 2) and then, additionally, subject to a natural resource assessment (Option 3). Options Analysis Option 1—retain criterion: The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood; Pros: Retaining the existing language would be the most restrictive and would limit pathway alignment to upland areas. Strict application of the standard would preclude path alignments in the floodplain and related habitat areas preserving the quality of the habitat to its maximum extent. Cons: Potentially inconsistent with other standards in the section (4 and 7) which require any proposed development within or adjacent to the floodplain to provide a pathway in accordance with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. Option 1 would limit the City's ability to meet its Comprehensive Plan goals for trail connectivity and access to nature-oriented recreation in Fanno Creek Park and other locations. Option 1 does not provide any siting flexibility with respect to the presence, absence, or quality of habitat at any location. Option 2—revise criterion: The plans for the pedestrian/bicycle pathway indicate that no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood, where practicable to achieve project objectives; Pros: Addition of the practicability clause would allow siting flexibility for certain path alignments below the average annual flood when upland routes are not otherwise available considering cost and design feasibility and project objectives. Trail connectivity and access to natural areas for nature-oriented recreation would be possible. Option 2 would be consistent with other standards in the section (4 and 7). Cons: Although some flexibility is obtained for locating trails, the standard may preclude preferred alignments to meet other objectives. Option 2 does not directly address habitat protection which is the primary concern of the public comment. 3 Option 3—revise criterion: a. Pedestrian/bicycle pathways within the floodplain shall be sited above the elevation of the average annual flood, where practicable, and shall include a resource assessment to ensure that the proposed alignment minimizes impacts to significant wildlife habitat;oo- h. Pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the,floodplain shall be sited above Ordinary High Water, where practicable, and shall include a wildlife assessment to ensure that the proposed alignment minimizes impacts to .significant wildlife habitat;or w ' c. Pedestrian/bicycle pathway within the floodplain shall include a ildlife assessment o ensure that the proposed alignment minimizes impacts to significant wildlife habitat; - Pros: a. The practicability clause allows the City to balance park development with resource protection. Trails could be located within the floodplain consistent with the adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. The requirement for a natural resource assessment implements Comprehensive Plan policies which support habitat protection (Comprehensive Plan Goal 8.1, policy 17 and Goal 8.2,policy 2). The habitat assessment would also complement CWS standards for trail location within vegetated corridors. b. The elevation standard, if kept,would be more easily implemented if changed to "OHW" from "average annual flood" (In March 2009, DSL changed their elevation reference for determining applicability of the removal/fill law from the 2-year flood elevation to OHW) c. Removing the elevation standard would not in practice, diminish trail protection or increase maintenance (PW memo) and because existing TDC wetland and CWS vegetated corridor protections are in place to guide trail alignments. Cons: Additional cost to the applicant for a natural resource assessment. Option 4—remove criterion: Pros: Trails could be located within the floodplain below the average annual flood elevation consistent with an adopted pedestrian/bicycle plan. Cons: Does not address resource protection policies referenced in the Comprehensive Plan or concerns expressed by the public. Discussion Potential conflicting goals in the Comprehensive Plan and criterion in the Development Code for floodplain management hinge around the notion of striking a balance between natural resource protection and recreational use.The public comment received clearly favors siting and designing pathways that avoid impacts to wildlife habitat and water quality. Two of the proposed options presented above include language that would accommodate balancing competing public goods (recreation/natural resources) on a site-specific basis,while still retaining the basic orientation of the criterion to avoid siting below the annual average flood. Option 2 suggests a threshold of practicability which would address path location in relation to cost and design feasibility and program goals. Option 3 requires,in addition,a resource assessment to ensure path location minimizes potential adverse impacts to wildlife habitat. 4 The proposed code amendment is legislative and would apply to all floodplains within the City. Some public comments suggested that a variance process could be used as an alternative to a code amendment, particularly since the proposed amendment arose with respect to the site-specific improvements proposed with the Fanno Creek Park Master Plan. In reviewing this approach, staff finds that two of the variance standards (18.370.010.C.2.d/e) would not likely be met: (d) siting paths below the average annual flood would most likely adversely affect wildlife habitat to some extent and, (e) the hardship would be self- imposed because not building below the average annual flood would remain an option. Recommendation Staff recommends the Commission support Option 3.c to minimize potential adverse impacts to natural resources of planned park pathway improvements within the floodplain. The proposed criterion revision would allow flexibility to balance resource protection goals with community recreation goals as pathways are developed in the future,pursuant to the Park System Master Plan. 5 Gary Pagenstecher From: Steve Martin Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 3:18 PM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: Fanno Creek Trail Gary, The question of the maintenance on the Fanno Creek trail and flooding came to my attention. It should be noted that, with the exception of a bridge that needs to be lengthened to get the footings further outside of the stream banks, flooding has only a small impact on the maintenance of the trails along Fanno Creek. The flood waters inundate the trail a few times each year, usually for less than a day, though occasionally for a couple days. My estimate is that flooding occurs roughly 6 times or less each year. The maintenance after the flooding is usually confined to the occasional sweeping, or shoveling of the trail where it is lower than the surrounding landscape. In those places the sediment will settle, while in most areas, the sediments flow over the asphalt and leave a light dusting that quickly dissipates. After most of the flood events, no special action is taken because there is not much sediment left on the trail. The edge of the trail is mowed for pedestrian safety and this results in a mowed buffer of 2 to 3 feet of low vegetation, usually field grass. The short flood times do not seem to cause much erosion in these areas, especially when the vegetation is thick. As a side note, in some parks we have noticed erosion in planting areas where the grass and vegetation are not allowed to grow, such as around trees or light posts. The maintenance of the asphalt trail in the flood areas does not seem to be much different from the trails that are not in the flood zones. The same problems are seen on the trails regardless of the trail location. Spalding, sinkholes, and cracking of the trail are the most common problems, and occur as commonly on trails out of the flood zone as on trails in the flood zone. The most important factors in the longevity of the trail seem to be if the trail was properly installed and the grade of asphalt. We spend many times more hours on both litter and vegetation maintenance along trails than cleaning up after high water. Hope this helps, Steve Steve Martin Park and Facilities Manager City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 503-718-2583 steve @ tgard-or.gov Gary Pagenstecher From: Brian Wegener[bwegener8 @comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 8:37 AM To: Gary Pagenstecher Cc: 'Sue Beilke'; John Frewing; Dave Drescher; Brian Wegener; el.lindstrom @comcast.net; Paul H. Whitney Subject: Re: material for Monday PC hearing/Sensitive Lands Code Removal proposal Let's meet Friday at l0am. Some of the things I am looking for in the code change inspired by Metro's Green Tails book: 1. Avoidance standards. 2. Requirements for pervious materials on all trails. 3. Mitigation requirements. 4. No parallel paths in natural areas to minimize impacts. 5. Minimizing widths 6. Green maintenance practices. 7. Standards to keep pedestrians & bikes on trails. 8. Redirection of bicycle traffic away from natural areas to protect amphibians and reptiles - minimize road kill 9. Bicycle commuter corridors away from natural areas (ie the rail trail) 10. Standards for creek crossings to span flood plain. 11. Viewing stations for wildlife observation from a distance. 12. Trail standards to minimize destructive behavior (duck feeding - poopollution). This code change should improve Tigard's environmental standards for environmental protection, not give blanket approval for past destructive practices like putting paved paths below annual flood elevation. Phil's last staff report failed to investigate the legislative intent of the code prohibition of trails below annual flood elevation. Staff needs to correct this omission before this goes back to the planning commission. The last staff report denied the maintenance issues of trails below annual flood elevation. This also needs to be corrected before this goes back to the PC. Brian Wegener 503-620-7507 c: 503-936-7612 Gary Pagenstecher wrote: Sue, At your request, please find the attached Memorandum to the Planning Commission regarding DCA2008-00005. I am available to meet with you and others to discuss any issues you may have tomorrow morning or afternoon and Friday before 1pm. Gary Gary Pagenstecher, AICP Associate Planner City of Tigard Community Development 13125 SW Hall Blvd. 1 Gary Pagenstecher From: Doreen Laughlin Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 11:19 AM To: Gary Pagenstecher Subject: FW: Planning Commission -Trails below Annual Flood Level From: jfrewing [mailto:jfrewing @teleport.com] Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 10:25 AM To: Doreen Laughlin Subject: Planning Commission -Trails below Annual Flood Level Doreen, Please forward to the PC my current thoughts on the staff proposal to allow trails below annual flood levels. 1 I can't find any other jurisdiction in the Metro area which does this. It doesn't make safety or environmental sense. 2 If there must be ped/bike facilities which traverse these low lands,require that they always be on boardwalks/bridges which are at an elevation above the 100 year flood plain and have rails/fencing on both sides of the boardwalk sufficient to avoid dogs and kids jumping down from the boardwalk to the sensitive land areas. Thanks, John Frewing 1 Exhibit C April 6, 2009 Tigard Planning Commission Tigard, Oregon RE: Development Code Amendment(DCA)2008-00005/ Sensitive Lands Permit Requirements Dear Planning Commission Members: We are writing to comment for the second time on the City of Tigard's proposal to remove and/or change the wording of Section 18.775.070.B.5 of the Sensitive Lands Permit requirement which reads in part that"no pathway will be below the elevation of an average annual flood." Fans of Fanno Creek is a local advocacy group for Fanno Creek and its tributaries with many members who donate significant time and effort during the year to plant native vegetation and remove non-native species. While many of our members use trails for various reasons, we do not support any building of new trails that would in any way cause negative impacts to our natural resources. We believe that 18.775.070.B.5 is a necessary part of the code and should NOT be removed nor weakened(as the city's proposed options would) for a variety of reasons as we included in our comments in February. We add here to those 11 comments the following: #12. The city has come up with several options in regarding the this section of the code. #3, for example, would change the wording"where practicable". This totally negates the first part of the sentence, making the code so weak the city will use this wording whenever it desires to and hence build trails in areas that flood annually. We oppose this proposed change to the wording. Also, adding the caveat that there will be a requirement for a resources assessment is a moot point, as this is already required when anyone including the city wants to build a trail in a sensitive area including all areas that "flood annually". Please remember that we have rewritten our Comprehensive Plan, and under the Trails section we added wording that states that some of our natural areas shall not have trails and shall be protected for the sensitive, rare species that need these quiet undisturbed areas to survive and raise their young, etc. If we put trails in every open space, we will drive wildlife out of our city. Many of the trails we now have are failing because they were built right next to the stream and in the areas that flood annually. It will cost the city a great deal of money to restore the banks, etc. along Fanno Creek, and before we build any new trails we need to first take care of the old trails and make sure they are not causing adverse impacts to wildlife, water, etc. We therefore ask the Planning Commission to DENY the city's request to remove or change the wording of this section of the Sensitive Lands code. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Sue Beilke, Board member,Fans of Fanno Creek Exhibit D Background • On June 3,2008,Council approved Comprehensive Plan Urban Forestry Master Plan • Goal 2.2 Policy 11 of the Comprehensive Plan states,"The City shall develop and implement Mid plan Update a citywide Urban Forestry Management Master Plan." Timeline What is an Urban Forestry Master Plan? F ,--o1.What do we have? _. _.. •_ .�=._ti e 2.What do we want? r � a 3. How do we get what we want? What is an Urban Forestry Master Phase I Results (Project Launch) Plan? Ysslon: Tigard',urban forest rs volued and protected by City residents as a thriving smart onnected Comprehensive Plan ) ecosystem managed fa improve quality of life,increase commumtyIdentity and mdeomae oesrneek,economk,and ecological benefits' The purpose of the Urban Forestry Master Plan is to implement the goals and policies In the Urban Forestry section of the Tigard Comprehensive Plon,and to guide the Jutureof Tigard's urban forest by ,.� `I� Documenting past and present conditions of the urban forest b. providing recommendations and measurable goals that will improve urban forest Urban Forestry Master Plan p management; ry communitr/guty departments with d,an other,with other Jurisdictions,and wdh the • community's vision far trees in Tigard,and d. Providinga legislative resource for future pions,policies,and ordinances. Tree Code and Urban Forestry Programs �� 1 4/10/2009 Phase II Results Phase II Results (Define Current Conditions) (Define Current Conditions) • • Major Tasks: Tree Canopy Results: ;Q - J � 1. Tree Canopy Analysis . \.. • 2. Community Attitudes/Values Survey P(' • Pr 1-1), t. J iiii Phase II Results Phase II Results (Define Current Conditions) (Define Current Conditions) Tree Canopy Results: Tree Canopy Results: 50 35 45 I 30 40 Canopy 25 Coverage 20 Canopy 30 (%) 15 Coverage 25 (%) 20 •%Canopy(2007) 10 • I •%Canopy(2007) 15 10 0 a ,. 0 ,,¢`6a` b�` +et, ae�•a pr�i y..10.2 nwbwt w... •Tigard's total land area is Esc c P� 7556 acres(5448 private a- Ownanhlp• 2.108 public) zoning Classification Phase II Results Phase II Results (Define Current Conditions) (Define Current Conditions) Survey Results: Survey Results: Satisfaction With Tree Quantity and Quality Tree Regulations That limit Development Potential 100 60 90 50 SO 70 qp 60 % 50 r Very Satisfied % 30 •Somewhat 40 •Satisfied 20 •Strongly 30 20 10 10 0 0 *e....a.. 6...v,a. nw..,e.cn ,ma S,Gp,-.t semi .evr.. 2 4/10/2009 • Phase II Results Phase Ill Results (Define Current Conditions) (Data Analysis) Survey Results: internal Coordination Meetings were held between a range of City divisions: Should City Regulations Provide Sonic Level Of Protection For Large,Healthy Trees On All Current Developed Private Property? • Capital Construction&Transportation 80 • Current Planning, 70 • Development Review 60 • Information Technology % so • Public Works Administration • Parks d0 0 Somewhat 30 Strongly • Streets • Wastewater/Storm 20 ■ Water 10 0 Support Oppose Phase Ill Results Phase Ill Results (Data Analysis) (Data Analysis) Internal Coordination Stakeholders Meetings were with community stakeholders: • • 1St meeting: Entire group identified major Pac b NW Chapter • Oregon Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects coordination issues • Tualatin Riverkeepers • Tigard-Tualatin School District • Portland General Electric • • Follow-up meetings:Smaller groups met to Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce • Parks and Recreation Advisory Board identify potential solutions • Home Builder's Association • Clean Water Services • Oregon Department of Transportation • Tree Board Implementation Implementation Tigard's Urban Forestry Master Plan Implementation Matrix iDraft • The Tree Board will be overseeing the ✓f/1. j,//,/ implementation of code and programs changes identified in the implementation matrix as part of , their annual work program. • Every two years,Metro will update canopy maps so canopy changes can be tracked over time. '-'▪ WIa • The Urban Forestry Master Plan will be updated l I - 1•I I-771-I,.a - every 5-7 years so that it can be reevaluated and -r •- updated. Tigard Aanning Commission Ilitto 11 Call Hearing/Workshop Date: '-1 L109 Starting Time: 1 'O 3 COMMISSIONERS: Jodie Inman (President) Tom Anderson Rex Caffall Margaret Doherty Karen Fishel t/ Stuart Hasman Matthew Muldoon Jeremy Vermilyea David Walsh (Vice President) Timothy Gaschke (Alternate) STAFF PRESENT: Dick Bewersdorff ['lion Bunch iary Pagenstecher Greg Berry Cheryl Gaines John Floyd Jerree Lewis Duane Roberts Kim McMillan Sean Farrelly V Gus Duenas v Darren Wyss Carissa Collins Marissa Daniels ' odd Prager Doreen Laughlin