The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 10/30/2018 Fir, City of Tigard 34 Tigard Special Meeting - Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MEETING DATE AND October 30, 2018 - 6:30 p.m. TIME: MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 PUBLIC NOTICE: No public comment will be taken at the meeting. Times noted are estimated. Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-718-2419 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the following services: • Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). VIEW LIVE VIDEO STREAMING ONLINE: http://www.tigard-orgovicity_hall/council_meeting.php SEE ATTACHED AGENDA City of Tigard Tigard Special Meeting - Agenda TIGARD CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MEETING DATE AND October 30, 2018 - 6:30 p.m. TIME: MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard - Town Hall - 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 6:30 PM 1. SPECIAL MEETING A. Call to Order- City Council Special Meeting B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. BRIEFING ON THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR MAX LIGHT RAIL PROJECT'S COMPLIANCE WITH STATE-MANDATED LAND USE CRITERIA IN THE CITY OF TIGARD 6:30 p.m. estimated time Attachments Staff Report&Appendices •EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(4), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 3. NON AGENDA ITEMS 4. ADJOURNMENT 8:10 p.m. estimated time 2. AIS-3661 Special Meeting Meeting Date: 10/30/2018 Length (in minutes): 90 Minutes Agenda Title: Briefing on the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project's Compliance with State-Mandated Land Use Criteria in the City of Tigard Prepared For: Kenny Asher Submitted By: Kelly Burgoyne, Central Services Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Meeting Type: Special Staff Meeting Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Staff will present issues for council deliberation related to compliance of the proposed Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project with state-mandated land use criteria as applicable in the City of Tigard. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST No formal action is requested. This is an informational presentation. However, staff seeks council direction on the preparation of a resolution, which, by council vote on November 13, 2018, will officially determine City of Tigard's support for the Southwest Corridor (SWC) Light Rail project. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Southwest Corridor light rail project is nearing a final decision on its alignment— a decision that will be made by the Metro Council before the end of the year. The Tigard City Council is considering its support for the alignment, which had been recommended by a Project Steering committee on which Mayor Cook represented City of Tigard interests. At the time of the Mayor's vote to support the alignment, he notified the Steering Committee and project sponsors (TriMet and Metro) that the City Council had concerns about impacts from the recommended alignment. Staff wishes to brief the council on its concerns related to the alignment under the approval criteria established for Metro by the Land Conservation and Development Commission, as directed under law by the Oregon State Legislature. This briefing will help guide council's decision about supporting the light rail alignment, which council is expected to vote on in mid-November. A staff report is attached to this Agenda Item Summary. It discusses the law under which TriMet will apply, and Metro will decide the final alignment, along with the criteria by which such approval would be considered, and the City of Tigard's role in that process. Also included is the staff report on the alignment from March 2018 with an updated PowerPoint presentation and other supporting materials. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS 9/1/17 City Council Goal Update #4. Pursue Development of Light Rail Along the Southwest Corridor. •Advocate for Light Rail to come to Downtown Tigard •Support request to the State Legislature for $150M in state lottery funding for the Southwest Corridor Project. •Support legislation to grant the Metro Council authority to consolidate multijurisd.ictional land use actions involving the SW Corridor into a single decision and expedited land use appeal process. •Adopt a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) in 201 8 that advances Tigard's land use and transportation priorities: •Direct service to downtown Tigard •Vehicle and pedestrian crossing at Ash Avenue. •Development of three light rail stations including 1 downtown and 2 in the Tigard Triangle •Structured parking facilities in downtown, the Triangle, or both districts, to be made available for short-term public parking (non-commuters) •Implementation of Shared Investment Strategy projects that enhance the walkability and connectivity of the community near transit stations •Construction of affordable housing in the Triangle and downtown near transit stations, including replacement housing for "at risk" units due to SWC light rail construction concurrent with, or prior to, light rail construction •Mitigation and enhancement of sensitive lands, congested intersections, and other community assets due to light rail construction and operation. •Adoption of design standards and guidelines in TMC Title 18 to ensure that the quality of light rail components meet a high standard of urban design. •Effective outreach and communication with impacted neighborhoods. Environmental justice for low-income or non-English speaking residents for whom impacts are most disruptive. •Effective outreach and communication with impacted businesses. Economic development support for displaced or impacted Tigard businesses. •Execution of an intergovernmental agreement with TriMet for Services Related to Design Review, Permitting, Shared Parking and Facilitation of Affordable Housing Participation on a Sustainable City Year Program multi-jurisdictional team to support City of Tigard goals in the SWC. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION 07/19/11: Update on the Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan 12/13/11: Briefing on SW Corridor Plan Public Involvement and Messaging 11/20/12: SW Corridor Plan Update 02/19/13: SW Corridor Plan Update 05/21/13: SW Corridor Plan Update 06/25/13: Recommendation fo SW Corridor Plan Steering Committee 10/08/13: Resolution Endorsing the SW Corridor Plan and Shared Investment Strategy 02/18/14: SW Corridor Plan Public Input Update 02/10/15: Metro IGA for Planning and Public Involvement Work - SW Corridor Plan 07/21/15: Presentation on SW Corridor Planning Progress 09/01/15: SW Corridor/Downtown Zoom-In 06/28/16: Consideration of a Resolution Approving Ballot Title language for a November SW Corridor Ballot Measure 02/14/17: Discuss SW Corridor Land Use Final Order 03/20/18: Comprehensive Update on SWC Light Rail Planning Fiscal Impact Cost: Budgeted (yes or no): Where Budgeted (department/program): Additional Fiscal Notes: Attachments Staff Report&Appendices 1114 a " City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum To: Mayor Cook and Tigard City Council From: Southwest Corridor Project Team Leaders Re: Briefing on the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project's Compliance with State-Mandated Land Use Criteria in the City of Tigard Date: October 22,2018 Approach to this Update The SWC Light Rail Project has been in the planning stages for more than six years. During that time,the project Steering Committee has made a set of decisions narrowing the geography in which transit will be built,the type of transit service envisioned (i.e. light rail),and the related investments that will accompany the transit investment. The Steering Committee's most recent action was to recommend a locally preferred alternative ("Preferred Alternative") for the project alignment, thereby clearing the way for the Metro Council to make a final decision to approve the project improvements and their locations. Under state law,Metro's vote,which is expected to occur on or before December 10th,will adopt a"Land Use Final Order" ("LUFO") to fix the location of the project's largest elements—the tracks,stations,park and ride's and maintenance facilities. Once adopted,affected jurisdictions will be extraordinarily limited in their ability to adjust the alignment, or the location of any of these light rail improvements. For a full background on the SWC project,Tigard staff would direct council to the project library webpage at Metro's website https://www.oregonmetro.gov/public-projects/southwest-corridor- plan/project-library. Here Council can find the complete project history and key documentation, which, for brevity's sake, staff has chosen not to include or summarize in this staff report. Instead, staff is hoping to focus council attention on the legal and regulatory decision-making process in effect now,during the months of October,November and December 2018—a process the State of Oregon requires of the project sponsor,TriMet,and which includes actions available to the City of Tigard and other affected jurisdictions. Specifically, staff wishes to make council aware of the process by which the project alignment will be conclusively authorized,the criteria under which Metro may grant that authority,and concerns about the Preferred Alternative's compliance with those criteria. Both the staff report and the PowerPoint presentation that staff made to council six months ago can be found in Appendix 1. The issues and concerns that staff noted in the spring,shortly after the Initial Route Proposal was determined,are largely unchanged and worth revisiting. To assist in council's review, the PowerPoint presentation has been slightly modified to show progress that's Page 1 of 11 been made over the past six months. These status updates are easily tracked as they appear in red typeface in the PowerPoint document. The staff report from March is unedited;it is included as background and is almost entirely still relevant because the Steering Committee is recommending a Preferred Alternative that,in Tigard,is identical to the Initial Route Proposal. The intent is to keep tonight's written and spoken presentation as focused as possible so council can provide direction to staff on preparation of a resolution on the project to be considered on November 13`''. As such,this report contains four sections: - Section 1 explains the LUFO law and the city's relationship to it - Section 2 explains the LUFO criteria and the Preferred Alternative - Section 3 discusses concerns as to the Preferred Alternative's compliance with the LUFO criteria - Section 4 explains what the LUFO adoption means for the City of Tigard Section 1: What is the Land Use Final Order (LUFO) and Why Does it Matter? The LUFO is best understood as a special kind of land use approval,created by the Oregon legislature, to shift land use authority for light rail projects away from local governments to the Metro Regional government. The LUFO decides where the light rail improvements are to be located (i.e. tracks,stations,park and rides,maintenance facilities). The law was enacted because of a statewide interest in maximizing federal funding for the SWC light rail project. The law is premised on the idea that transferring land use authority for the project from local jurisdictions to the regional government enhances the project's competitiveness for federal funding. This approach ensures that the project has land use authority early,and entirely—something that other,competing projects from around the country cannot always claim. Some of the region's success in obtaining federal grants for prior light rail projects is certainly attributable to the state assembly's willingness to enact LUFO legislation for TriMet projects. The law itself,however,is not a blanket approval for TriMet to build light rail. The legislation describes a required process whereby TriMet applies to Metro for project approval—called an Order (the "Land Use Final Order"),which the Metro council would vote on in a public hearing. For the City of Tigard—a jurisdiction affected by this project,two questions are 1) how will Metro decide if it should approve the LUFO,and 2) what is the City of Tigard's role in the process? The LUFO law is written very precisely to limit changes to the project once the Order is adopted. This is important for council to understand. For example once the LUFO is issued,all affected jurisdictions are required to,over the life of the project,issue planning approvals,construction permits and other consents necessary for the project to be built in accordance with the Order. "Reasonable and necessary" conditions of approval are allowed,but not if they by themselves,or cumulatively,adversely impact the project's schedule or budget. After the LUFO is approved, TriMet will convene and staff a Steering Committee for the remainder of the project's life. Thereupon,the Steering Committee (as opposed to any local planning commission or city council) will determine if a permit condition of approval is reasonable and necessary. Steering committee determinations are not subject to review. If an affected jurisdiction delays a light rail permit,TriMet is entitled to a peremptory writ of mandamus to cause the permit to be issued. Page 2 of 11 In recognition of the inflexibility that necessarily accompanies the certainty provided by the LUFO, the legislation strives to conform,and not violate,Oregon statewide planning laws,principles and customs. One such principle is that the light rail project authorized by the LUFO implement,and not contradict,local land use plans and policies. The law states that the state's interest is not only to attract the largest possible federal grant for the SWC project,but also to"ensure that affected local governments will be able to implement significant parts of the comprehensive plans." And the process spelled out under LUFO,while different than local land use proceedings,was written by the legislature to be "equivalent in spirit and in substance to the land use procedures that otherwise would be applicable." So, for example,residents within TriMet's service area have a legal right to participate in the process. The same holds for affected cities,whose councils represent the residents so named. Finally,the LUFO legislation explains how Metro must conduct its process before the LUFO can be finalized. Metro will be required to make affirmative findings on 13 criteria that were approved by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC). Similar to local land use process, these findings must directly and specifically address the approval criteria. An appeals process is also described,which allows persons with standing to challenge Metro's decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals and,if necessary,to the Oregon Supreme Court. Section 2: Description of the LUFO Criteria and the Preferred Alternative The important thing to understand about the LUFO criteria established by LCDC is that they are based on statewide planning goals and comprehensive plan policies that arise in consideration of SWC light rail improvements and locations. The criteria are"standing in" for the land use procedures and approval criteria that the City of Tigard would apply if the same light rail project were to come directly to the City for land use approval. In other words,the criteria were drafted and approved because of their consistency with statewide planning goals and applicable acknowledged comprehensive plan policies,including those in the City of Tigard. TriMet,Metro, and the City testified in support of this process and the consistency of the 13 criteria with City of Tigard policies before LCDC back in September 2017. Staff has included the full set of criteria as Appendix 2. It is unnecessary to summarize all 13 of them in this staff report,however a few are noted because of their relevance to the council's current decision-making on the Preferred Alternative. Importantly,the first two criteria promote intergovernmental coordination and cooperation which reflect Statewide Planning Goal 2. Plans and actions by one government agency must be consistent and coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units. Citizens and affected governmental units must have an opportunity to review and comment on the plans of other government agencies. LUFO criteria 1 and 2,in reflecting these statewide goals,require that the SWC project improvements and their locations be decided at a public meeting where the public and affected local governments are entitled to submit testimony. These first two criteria will be met by Metro holding the LUFO hearing. The reason for holding the hearing,however,is so the Metro Council can accept City of Tigard testimony (and that of others) prior to taking action on the LUFO. Page 3 of ll Most of the rest of the criteria are fairly straightforward and staff views them as having been met by the Preferred Alternative. These include identification of impacts from noise;on wildlife and open spaces;on cultural and historic resources;and associated with stormwater runoff. Interestingly, Criteria 12 acknowledges that the SWC Plan (as distinct from the current SWC MAX light rail project) consider the full Southwest Corridor planning area,which includes the cities of King City and Sherwood. Criteria 12 states that when future decisions are made about extending light rail, plans that are in place at the time of those extensions,potentially in or affecting these other jurisdictions,will need to be applied to regional decision-making about the light rail extensions. Criteria 13 clarifies that the LUFO and its findings pertain only to the overall project alignment and location of major project improvements—not to the hundreds of ancillary facilities that will also be part of the project but which would not,on their own,necessitate a land use action by a local government. Two criteria have raised concerns among Tigard city staff and these are discussed in the next section. The following describes the overall alignment described by the Preferred Alternative,which TriMet has submitted to Metro for LUFO approval. In addition to the PowerPoint presentation attached as Appendix 1,a single graphic is attached as Appendix 3 showing the Preferred Alternative. TriMet has divided the project into three segments of similar length;Inner Southwest Portland, Outer Southwest Portland,and Tigard to Tualatin. The Inner Southwest Portland segment extends from SW 5th and SW Jackson in downtown Portland to north of the intersection of SW Barbur Boulevard and SW Brier Place. The Outer Southwest Portland segment goes from there to approximately SW 68th Parkway in Tigard. The Tigard segment begins there,with a park and ride and station in the vicinity of SW 68th Parkway,before turning to the south over Red Rock Creek and onto SW 70th in the north part of the Tigard Triangle. The alignment continues on 70th (which would require building a road there and acquiring more right-of-way—only partial right-of-way exists today) across Dartmouth on a structure (i.e. grade separated) to SW Elmhurst,where another station would be located. The alignment then turns to the west,crosses SW 72"d Ave. at grade,and then flies over Hwy 217 near Hermosa Way,landing near the wetlands behind the Knez Building Materials Company. From there it crosses Hunziker at grade and pulls into a station just east of Hall Boulevard in the segment between SW Scoffins and SW Commercial. A park and ride,bus transit center,and TriMet Operations and Maintenance Facility would be located here as well. From here the alignment heads southeastward along the east side of the WES tracks,on to a structure over Bonita with a station and park and ride,continuing in that direction crossing SW 72"d Ave. to another station and park and ride west of SW Sequoia Drive and in the vicinity of SW Upper Boones Ferry Road/SW Carmen Drive. It then continues over to I-5,crossing another set of tracks on a structure and then heading south,paralleling I-5 on its west side to the terminus station,park and ride,and bus transit center north of SW Lower Boones Ferry Road and east of SW 72nd Ave. east of Bridgeport Village. A park and ride is also planned for south of SW Lower Boones Ferry Road which would connect to the terminus station with an elevated walkway. This alignment is the result of many years of study and review. It balances dozens,if not hundreds, of variables related to transportation requirements and land use plans and policies. Those requirements and policies occur at the local,regional, state,and federal levels,and are further Page 4 of 11 influenced by a host of best-practice considerations,cost considerations,and federal grant competitiveness considerations. Tigard's mayor and Tigard staff have participated in the multi-year planning process that resulted in this alignment and,as previously noted, find that it is supportive of many city of Tigard comprehensive plan policies. In places along the Preferred Alternative alignment,however, including in the section east of Hall Boulevard, staff would like to highlight concerns that council could choose to raise to the Metro Council under the LUFO process. These concerns are briefly described in the following section,and will be more thoroughly presented to Council at the work session on October 30. Section 3: Does the Preferred Alternative Comply with the LUFO Criteria? Staff wishes to raise council attention to compliance concerns with two criteria: numbers 11 and 3. These are the same criteria that Mayor Cook shared with the Steering Committee back in early August when the Preferred Alternative recommendation was decided. (See Appendix 4.) Criterion 11 is the simpler of the two. It states in part: Consider a light rail route...in Tigard within an area identified in Tigard's High Capacity Land Use Plan that maintains Downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus... As described in Section 2,the Preferred Alternative places the downtown Tigard light rail station east of Hall Boulevard—that is,outside downtown Tigard. Hall Boulevard,at this location,is the eastern edge of the downtown district,defined by the City Center Urban Renewal District boundary, Town Center boundary, and the Mixed-Use Central Business District(MU-CBD) zone. For the purposes of TriMet's LUFO application,"station"is defined as including"...bus transfer platforms and transit centers;vendor facilities;and transit operations rooms." Under this definition,the Tigard Transit Center currently located in the downtown (on Commercial Street just south of Main), is Tigard's transit station. As proposed, this station would move across Hall Boulevard to accompany new light rail platforms and a proposed park and ride facility,leaving the WES rail stop as the only remaining element of Tigard's transit center in the downtown. Thus, the question of compliance with criterion 11 seems to staff to be rather straightforward: the preferred alternative either maintains downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus, or it doesn't. As to why this criterion matters in the city of Tigard, staff would offer a few considerations about the function and convenience of transit service in the downtown district. Over the past several years,Tigard has invested heavily in renewing the historic downtown area and in creating a more walkable environment. Located within downtown and only.23 mi from the intersection of Burnham and Main, the existing Tigard Transit Center can be accessed by foot in about 5 minutes. As proposed,the new light rail station and future Tigard Transit Center would be twice as far from Burnham and Main at.47 miles, doubling the walking time at over 10 minutes. Further,with a light rail station on the east side of Hall Boulevard,most pedestrian travel to and from downtown Tigard would take place on Commercial Street (as opposed to Burnham) —a street that has not received appropriate pedestrian-specific improvements to date. Page 5 of 11 In addition to simple distance and time measures, the siting of a new light rail station on the east side of Hall Boulevard creates new and complex barriers for pedestrians. Today,Hall Boulevard sees over 11,700 autos per day at the proposed light rail station. Not only will pedestrians have to walk further to and from downtown, they will now have a significant barrier in the required crossing of Hall Boulevard. The existing freight/WES rail crossing just southwest of the proposed station location adds additional traffic complexity as well,which is discussed further in the next section of this report. A proposed 300-space structured park and ride facility is to be sited adjacent to and southwest of the new light rail station with ingress and egress on Hall Boulevard.Vehicular access to and from the new park and ride facility will add more trips to an already congested area and roadway,and will create more potential conflict for pedestrian trips to and from the new light rail station. Finally,questions remain as to what the future of non-rail transit service looks like in and around downtown Tigard. With a proposed light rail station outside of the downtown area, how can non- rail transit continue to best serve downtown and surrounding areas?Additionally,how will WES service be integrated with the proposed light rail station on the east side of Hall Boulevard? Embedded in both questions should be consideration of how pedestrians and passengers will access and make transfers between bus stops,the light rail station,and WES station. Criterion 3 talks about routing the light rail in such a way that beneficial and adverse impacts are balanced for affected districts. Along parts of the alignment,especially through Tigard, the project has not yet identified impacts for staff to evaluate. This is because the Draft Environmental Impact Statement included multiple"design refinements."These were added because they allowed the project to avoid impacts discovered from DEIS alignment options but they themselves have not yet been studied for the impacts they create. (See Appendix 5). These design refinements (i.e. alignment shifts) will have their impacts studied in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Nonetheless, and in the absence of more study,staff wishes to bring certain expected impacts forward for council consideration,in light of the pending LUFO decision and LUFO Criterion 3, which states in part: Identibi economic, social, urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed use centers. Idenegv measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that could be imposed as conditions of approval... Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing: (1) The need for light rail proximi0 and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancing transit ridership (2) The likely contribution of light rail proximio and service to improved economic opportunities, to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety;and (3) The need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts and centers from identified adverse impacts Because the DEIS could not identify adverse impacts to segments of the alignment through Tigard that were not studied in the DEIS,it is left to city staff to attempt to do just that at the work session. Staff will be prepared to discuss the likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities,to development of an efficient and compact urban form,and to Page 6 of 11 improved safety. On the matter of providing light rail service to areas that can support transit ridership,staff sees no issues with the Preferred Alternative as proposed. Identification of Economic Impacts The Preferred Alternative through Tigard south of the Triangle follows pretty exactly Tigard's industrial zoning and its economic impacts to businesses,jobs,properties,and assessed value are summarized below.These impacts occur within a severely constrained industrial land supply without opportunity for future expansion within or outside city boundaries. The need to protect Tigard's industrially-zoned districts is documented in the Comprehensive Plan's 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis (BOA), an evaluation required under state law for communities to inventory employment lands as a basis for Economic Development policies. The result of Tigard's inventory is a situation called the Efficient Need Scenario. That scenario means the city of Tigard is deficient in vacant and redevelopable industrial-zoned property for the 20-year planning horizon,and therefore must focus city policy on the efficient redevelopment and utilization of its existing industrial lands. City of Tigard staff analyzed the potential economic impacts of the Preferred Alternative by identifying,to the best of its ability,anticipated full property acquisitions that would affect businesses located along the Preferred Alternative alignment.Based on Tigard's severely constrained industrial land supply,this analysis was further refined to identify impacts to firms located in the city's industrial zones. Analysis of the Preferred Alternative's anticipated impact to Tigard's industrial employment landscape revealed the following: • Number of displaced businesses (based on current businesses): 21 o 4.7%of total industrial firms in Tigard • Number of affected employees (based on current business license data): 573 o 7%of total industrial employment in Tigard • Total acreage of property acquisitions: 42.3 o 5.4%of Tigard's industrial lands inventory • Total taxable assessed value of property acquisitions: $19,060,920 o Annual property tax revenue impact(loss):$47,902 In summary,in its current configuration the Preferred Alternative would adversely impact Tigard's industrial employment landscape by further reducing the city's already constrained industrial land inventory and reducing the industrial workforce.Additionally,the Preferred Alternative would reduce Tigard's tax revenue base. The light rail route and its improvements are also,under criterion 3,expected to contribute to improved economic opportunities. These would be evaluated along the same measures as above— employment impacts (i.e. gains),wage impacts (i.e. gains),and fiscal impacts (i.e.gains). Staff is of the opinion that these mitigatory and even improved effects from current planned scenarios are Page 7 of 11 possible with the SWC project,but not assured. They are more likely to occur in the Tigard Triangle than in the mixed use and industrial districts downtown and south of downtown,and they will not, in any case,improve the city's industrial land inventory. It is up the policy-making bodies of the Tigard City Council and Metro Regional Council to determine if the known adverse economic impacts from the preferred alternative are of greater or lesser importance,in the city of Tigard,than the speculative beneficial impacts. Identification of Impacts to Urban Form The physical patterns and structures that make up an urban center are collectively referred to as its urban form. The plans and organizations that arise to respond to,and to improve that form,are other patterns that trace the evolution, and future direction, of a physical place. Downtown Tigard's urban form is informed by its: • historic commercial development pattern along Main Street; • historic transportation pattern,including the former railroad station,existing heavy rail line, and state highways that encircle it; • existing natural land forms,most notably Fanno Creek; • current land use vision and implementation strategies,including urban renewal;and • current business, service,and community groups,most notably the Tigard Downtown Alliance,Town Center Advisory Commission,Rotary Club of Tigard,and Tigard Chamber of Commerce. The community has identified Downtown Tigard as the heart of the city for several decades,and the many groups listed above have worked tirelessly on their own and with numerous city councils to maintain and improve it.The community has long embraced Fanno Creek as a defining element of downtown, struggled with energizing its historic Main Street since the construction of Pacific Highway,and learned to live with the physical barrier that the existing heavy rail line represents. There has not yet been a Tigard City Council,nor a business or community group,that has sought to significantly enlarge the downtown district. The many stakeholders and advocates that make up the downtown community have been trying,over decades,to enliven the already sizable acreage of the existing downtown district as it is. This is an important point because it reflects a very basic urban design principle,which is that every place needs a center, a heart,that is alive with people and energy. For Downtown Tigard,that place is centered around Fanno Creek,Main Street,and more recently,Burnham Street. These physical elements make up the bones of Downtown Tigard's urban form,along with the rail line that runs through it and other large streets that serve as edges or act as barriers. The Preferred Alternative's downtown station east of Hall Blvd and outside of Downtown Tigard confuses or possibly violates the most basic organizing principle for Downtown Tigard as the center of the community.That principle is to ensure that the center is clearly defined. The SWC downtown station location,certain to be intensely used by downtown employees,residents and visitors,will enlarge the city center to include an area that has never been a part of the center,nor which shares any formal attributes with the existing center. It risks creating a more decentralized, rather than a more compact,urban form. Moreover,it potentially undermines the place that is Page 8 of 11 downtown by dispersing the energy,investment,and physical legibility that the community has worked to develop over the past several decades. The area east of Hall Blvd has a very different urban form and a radically different land use vision than Downtown Tigard.This area is zoned for industrial use and consists of several large lots and buildings with no internal street grid or direct connection to Fanno Creek. Unlike the barrier it is in downtown,the heavy rail line provides desirable freight rail access for abutting industrial uses,and close proximity to arterial streets and freeways that allow freight transport of industrial goods to the region. Knitting a future light rail station at this location will require a complete re-imagining of this area by the community and the acceptance of further loss of industrial activity in close-in Tigard. The light rail route and its improvements are also,under criterion 3,expected to help the city develop an urban form that is efficient and compact. To the extent that light rail service all along the alignment in Tigard leads to redevelopment that intensifies the use of land, such as is expected in the Tigard Triangle,such a beneficial impact could be achieved. Staff would note that,as with economic impacts,these gains would need to be balanced against any land use inefficiencies caused by the preferred alternative,including those discussed above. Staff would also remind council that scale matters;the Metro Regional Council will make findings on criteria like this one based on impacts and benefits region-wide,whereas the proper purview of the Tigard City Council is to judge the balance of impacts from the preferred alternative within Tigard's city limits only. Identification of Traffic and Safety Impacts The project will have both positive and negative traffic and safety impacts to the Tigard network.A benefit of the project is it will add traffic signals at the intersections of 65th/Haines and Commercial/Hall. Both of these intersections should function better after light rail is built with the signals in place than they do under current traffic conditions today.Additionally, some existing vehicle trips may convert to transit trips,which will reduce demand on the network. There are also areas that may have a negative impact on traffic and safety in the Tigard network. The Preferred Alternative does not currently identify sufficient pedestrian and bicycle connectivity from the north side of 99W to the Park&Ride and Station at 68th/99W. The project team anticipates high pedestrian demand from this neighborhood to access the transit system and it will need to be supported with appropriate infrastructure. In the Downtown Tigard area,the proposed light rail crossing on Hunziker is in close proximity to the existing WES crossing on Hall/Commercial. Having two independent rail crossings in such close proximity creates additional complications and risk to ensure the roadway network and system can adequately accommodate the traffic implications of a dual demand (i.e. both trains at once) scenario. If both the LRT and WES arrive at the same time, or close,the roadway network may not be able to handle the demand to move cars away or incur delay from both transit lines. The Upper Boones Ferry LRT at-grade crossing is placed in a location of high demand and congestion.The additional delay from the crossing movement will increase congestion. The project team has additional concerns that the level of congestion in that area will make it difficult to find places to store vehicle queues away from the tracks when a transit vehicle needs to cross. In areas of extreme congestion,it can be difficult to find somewhere to clear vehicles to and make room (i.e. Page 9 of 11 not queue up over) the LRT tracks. The current analysis models include a 5-lane build out of Upper Boones Ferry Rd,an unfunded project in the City's TSP,and even with this additional capacity, there are still issues handling projected traffic with the LRT. The Bridgeport Village Park&Ride will have high levels of demand from transit riders.At its current level of design at 900 spaces,that will add a high level of additional trips in the AM and PM peak hours of people traveling to and leaving the Park and Ride.This will add additional congestion to surrounding roadways, such as 72nd and Durham,that are already experiencing high delay and traffic queues. Traffic and safety impacts such as these are the subject of exhaustive study in the environmental review processes and these studies are ongoing. The Final Environmental Impact Statement will kick off in the spring,during which time additional traffic modelling,impact discovery and mitigation selection will occur. The precise nature of these traffic and safety concerns,and their resolution,will not be known until long after the LUFO decision is made. Section 4: What Does Adoption of the LUFO Mean for the City of Tigard? Adoption of the LUFO requires that the city amend its plans and policies to be consistent with the Preferred Alignment,including the Comprehensive Plan,the Transportation System Plan,utility Master Plans,and all applicable land use Regulations.This will be a major undertaking both in terms of time and resources. Staff recommends that the work be divided into two phases,with the expectation that it will take approximately 1 —2 years to complete each phase and possibly longer if grant funding is sought.A rough outline of each phase is as follows. Most of the work will be related to the downtown and Hunziker Industrial Core districts,which are the areas whose existing plans and policies show the greatest inconsistency with the Preferred Alternative. Phase 1—Community Visioning and Analysis • Work with the community to develop a new land use vision for the downtown and Hunziker Industrial Core area.A key issue would be to determine what zoning to apply to the Hunziker Industrial Core area. Specifically, should the Town Center or MU-CBD zone boundary be expanded to include this area, or would a new zone or designation better serve the new vision? • Work with the community to draft development standards for this area consistent with the new vision. • Conduct a market analysis concurrent with the community visioning process to help develop and inform the land use scenarios under consideration. • Update the city's Economic Opportunities Analysis concurrent with the community visioning process to understand the economic impacts of the different land use scenarios under consideration. • Conduct a transportation impact study concurrent with the community visioning process to understand the transportation impacts of the different land use scenarios under consideration. If a different zone or regional designation is required to implement the new vision,work with Metro and the Oregon Department of Transportation to complete the necessary Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) analysis and identify any needed mitigations. Page 10 of 11 Phase 2—Public Hearings and Amendments • Complete the required legislative process to update the city's adopted plans and policies to reflect the new vision.This would likely include amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, Transportation System Plan,Land Use and Zoning Maps,and Economic Opportunities Analysis. • Work with the community to refine the development standards for this area. • Complete the required legislative process to amend the city's Community Development Code to adopt the new development standards. The long-term implications involve significant changes to the form and function of both Downtown Tigard and the Hunziker Industrial Core area. New light rail uses east of Hall Blvd in the form of a light rail station,parking structure,transit center,and operations and maintenance facility will supplant future industrial uses (and the associated tax base) and will change how the Hunziker Industrial Core is developed and accessed for decades to come. New light rail uses and future transit-oriented uses around the station area will alter the geographic,economic,and emotional boundaries of Downtown Tigard.The success of this station area for Tigard largely hinges on three things: (1) how well the station area is physically integrated into the existing downtown area, (2) how well future transit-oriented uses complement and support both Downtown Tigard and the station area,and(3) how well the station area contributes to the city's economic development goals. Conclusion The LUFO adoption step is the most critical local decision in the entire journey of a light rail planning project. It is the moment to ensure that the project is sited in a way that serves the transportation planning needs of the region without trampling the local plans and policies in the jurisdictions where it will be built. The Preferred Alternative in the Tigard segment predictably has both positive and negative features. It is the responsibility of the Tigard City Council to weigh these. Some are known today—others can only be guessed at. Some will be discovered within a few years; others will not be known for decades. All that is absolutely clear is that once the LUFO decision is finalized,the City of Tigard's ability to modify the project,or object to it,is curtailed. The state legislature designed the SWC decision-making process to take local comprehensive plan policies into account. Staff's aim is to help the Tigard council understand and follow through on this legislative intent as the Council best sees fit. Page 11 of 11 APPENDIX 1 AIS-3423 2. Workshop Meeting Meeting Date: 03/20/2018 Length (in minutes): 75 Minutes Agenda Title: Southwest Corridor Update and Discussion Prepared For: Kenny Asher, Community Development Submitted By: Doreen Laughlin, Community Development Item Type: Update, Discussion, Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Staff will provide a comprehensive update on recent planning for the proposed Southwest Corridor light rail project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION / ACTION REQUEST No action is requested. This is an informational presentation. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Overview Project Definition: The Southwest Corridor Plan is a comprehensive regional planning effort to address the impacts of future growth by connecting Portland, Tigard and Tualatin through safe and reliable transportation options. A key part of the plan is a proposed 12-mile MAX light rail line from Downtown Portland to Downtown Tigard and Bridgeport Village. Definition of Project-Related Terms and Acronyms SVC or Southwest Corridor. basically the Barbur Boulevard/Hwy 99 corridor between Portland and Sherwood including those two cities, Tigard, Tualatin, King City, Durham, and portions of unincorporated Washington County. DEIS or Draft Environmental Impact Statement: a federally required study that discloses the impacts and benefits of possible route options for light rail in the corridor. FEIS or Final Environmental Impact Statement: a study that will address the set of benefits, impacts and mitigations for those impacts for a final alignment once selected. IRP or Initial Route Proposal: An FTA-required, proposed light rail alignment, to be included in the DEIS for public comment and review. TPA or Locally Preferred Alternative: The final light rail route, recommended by the project Steering Committee, endorsed by participating governments, and adopted by the Metro Council. LUFO or Land Use Final Orden The statutory authority granted by Metro, under Oregon statute, to TriMet, to construct the project across multiple local land use authorities. TOD or Transit Oriented Development: Development that typically follows the opening of light rail, close to stations and characterized by a mixture of uses in single buildings and lower than typical parking ratios. CAC or Citizen Advisory Committee: A Metro-appointed committee of citizens from affected jurisdictions to review project information and make recommendations to the project Steering Committee on key decisions. FIA or Federal Transit Administration: The federal agency responsible for reviewing, rating, funding and overseeing the design, development, construction and operation of light rail projects nationwide. Project Schedule/Key Milestones May 2018: Publication of the DEIS, start of 45-day public comment period June 2018: Staff and Citizen Advisory Committee recommendations on the LPA July-September 2018: Steering Committee, Local Jurisdiction and TriMet LPA approvals; updates on project costs October 2018: Metro Council adoption of LPA and LUFO Winter 2018: Begin FEIS; Begin Project Development; Adoption of the LPA into the Regional Transportation Plan Spring 2019: Begin 30 percent design Linter 2019: Complete FEIS and all other federal environmental review 2020: Complete 30 percent design; finalize local funding, likely to include a regional funding measure in November 2021: Submit project for federal rating and apply for federal funding 2022: Execute Full Funding Grant Agreement with the FTA 2023: Begin construction 2027: Open for service Approach to this Update The SWC Project has been in the planning stages for more than six years. During that time, the project Steering Committee has made a set of decisions narrowing the geography in which transit will be built, the type of transit service envisioned (i.e. light rail), and the related investments that will accompany the transit investment. Rather than summarize this long history here, staff would refer council to the project library webpage at Metro's website which can be found at https://www.oregonmetro.gov/public-projects/southwest-corridor-plan/project-library. Staff's approach to this update is to provide council with basic observations related to the state of the project today from various professional orientations: Land Use, Urban Design, Community Engagement, Economic Development, etc. These observations will be keyed to an initial route proposal, shown in Attachment 1. The initial route proposal is the distillation of hundreds, if not thousands, of small decisions informed by information collected through the DEIS process, and input from the public including business and property owners. As such, it can be thought of as the project team's current best thinking about where the project could be located to achieve as many project goals as possible. It is not, however, a decision about where the project will be located, ultimately. That decision will incorporate feedback from the public review of the DEIS, along with input gathered from examination of the initial route proposal. Because of the preliminary nature of both the initial route proposal and the DEIS, staff has kept its analysis at a fairly high level. Much can still change in this project and many of its impacts, good and bad, are not yet understood, much less studied. However, the project has ripened to a point where council should feel confident examining the information provided and asking questions that will inform its vote later this year on a Locally Preferred Alternative. It might be that such questions define part of the work program for the project between now and then. Recent Project History: DEIS and its Relationship to the IRP Early planning stages resulted in six alignment options for DEIS study in Tigard, with key objectives being adequate service in the Tigard Triangle and Downtown, and continuation of the line south to the Bridgeport area. The DEIS studied each route option for potential impacts to the surrounding environment, businesses, traffic, properties, noise, safety and more. Potential impacts found throughout the DEIS process must be avoided, minimized or mitigated (in that order). The DEIS is currently under review by the FTA and is expected to be published for public review in early May. The document contains extensive research on possible project impacts; unfortunately, many of these impacts, once studied, suggest that segments of the alignment shift to different locations. These shifted segments will require the same kind of exhaustive study and this will happen in a Final Environmental Impact Statement study. Three of these "shifted" segments are in the City of Tigard. Once the DEIS is published, it will be available for agency and public review for 45 days. During this time anyone may comment on the findings, including the initial route proposal which includes the shifted segments. The City of Tigard will be formally commenting on the DEIS (and IRP) once it is officially published and available for review. Permitting Framework and Local Land Use Policy It is important to begin with the permitting framework through which light rail in Tigard would occur. The main players in this permitting framework operate at the local, regional, state, and federal levels. In rough chronological order, the roles of these players can be summarized as follows: •At the local level, Tigard's charter requires a public vote in order to support light rail or to amend its comprehensive plan or land use regulations to accommodate light rail. In 2016, voters approved a measure that allowed the city to support the Southwest Corridor light rail project and to amend some of its land use policies and regulations in response to this project. •At the state level, the legislature passed House Bill 3202 in 2017. This legislation gave Metro the authority to issue a Land Use Final Order (LUFO) for the SWC project. Consistent with other light rail projects, the LUFO will act as the regional land use approval for the project and will include a final approved alignment, otherwise known as the Locally Preferred Alignment or LPA. The LUFO prevents local jurisdictions from blocking the project's construction by withholding local land use approvals. Also consistent with other light rail projects, the LUFO allows local jurisdictions the right to condition the approval of individual elements of the project,within reason, to be consistent with local development and design standards. •At the federal level, the project is being evaluated for compliance with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) because it will be partially federally funded, and for cost effectiveness and transit competitiveness by the FTA under regulations associated with the New Starts program. •Regionally, the project is overseen by a Steering Committee comprised of all affected jurisdictions and ultimately approved by Metro through the LPA/LUFO public hearing process. Metro is also responsible for the environmental review process, and for ensuring that the results of that process are incorporated into the project through a Record of Decision that will be provided by the FTA (expected in late 2019). Once the project is approved by Metro, the city will be required to update its Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code to be consistent with the LPA, including the location of stations, park and ride facilities, and operation and maintenance sites. During this process, staff will likely make several recommendations to Council on ways to amend the city's development procedures and standards to ensure that the city's land use review process results in regional improvements that respects the city's land use vision, reflects its local character, and implements the city's strategic vision as much as possible within the constraints of LUFO. The stated purpose and need of the SWC project is grounded not just in transportation objectives, but in land use as well. It is to " connect Tualatin, downtown Tigard, Southwest Portland, and the region'.r central city with light rail... to improve mobility and create the conditions that will allow communities in the corridor to achieve their land use vision" It cannot be stated enough: The city's land use policies and regulations must be applied to this light rail proposal. In fact, two comprehensive plan policies specific to Downtown Tigard are included in the evaluation criteria that Metro must apply when making their LUFO decision. These two policies are as follows: •Downtown Tigard shall be the city's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service. •The City, in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure that Downtown Tigard is not dominated by park-and-ride activity. Other key city policies that have guided staff in its evaluation of project options include those related to focusing employment growth and high-density housing in the Tigard Triangle, Downtown Tigard, Washington Square, and along Pacific Highway; promoting the creation of a vibrant and active urban village in Downtown Tigard that is pedestrian-oriented and accessible by many modes of transportation; and promoting the efficient utilization of employment and industrial lands. These policies help explain why staff has maintained that: •Two stations are necessary to serve the Triangle given its size and poor walkability; •A station in Downtown Tigard is necessary for the city to achieve its longstanding land use vision for downtown; •The alignment along the existing railroad tracks south of downtown is preferred over the I-5 alternative. Land Use Evaluation The IRP proposes two stations in the Triangle. Exact station locations differ from those in the DEIS, but two stations are consistent with the city's land use policies and aspirations and the new proposed locations better serve households and businesses north of Pacific Highway. The northern station is located on the Triangle's northern edge, near Highway 99W and where 70th Ave would be (if it existed), and the second Triangle station is sited near a future 70th Ave and Elmhurst St. Neither of these locations have been adequately studied yet for impacts, but they make sense from both a land use and transportation point of view. Additionally, development of light rail along 70th Ave and Elmhurst St will likely benefit the Triangle in two ways. It will improve circulation in the Triangle for all modes of travel by completing or facilitating the completion of these two streets, both of which are unimproved or lack full right-of-way width along their lengths. It will also provide access to a number of unimproved properties, most notable of which is the 8-acre Oregon Education Association's property that spans Red Rock Creek. As the project progresses, staff will work closely with TriMet designers to ensure that the cross sections developed for these streets are safe, comfortable, and attractive for pedestrians and that the project provides the city with all needed right-of-way, or the means to obtain all needed right-of-way, if the project does not build the full street. The IRP proposes one station to the southeast of Downtown in the Hunziker Core Industrial Area. The IRP alignment and station locations were developed out of necessity due to high costs, slow travel times, and significant residential impacts associated with all the studied DEIS alignments and station locations. That being said, the downtown station location raises several local and regional land use concerns. The main one is its location outside of Downtown Tigard,which is a designated Metro 2040 Regional Town Center. Both Tigard and Metro have policy positions to support growth in the Town Center. As transit facilities are moved out of the downtown proper, it will be more difficult for the city to achieve its land use vision and effectively implement the Metro 2040 Growth Concept. Staff is considering an assortment of land use-related issues arising from the downtown station location. Council might also consider that the station location, as currently imagined, contravenes the city's core downtown policies and LUFO evaluation criteria. This location raises questions about the future of downtown generally and transit access and connectivity specifically. How will the removal of transit center activity from Main Street impact downtown? How can the barriers represented by Hall Blvd and the existing railroad tracks be overcome? How will WES riders connect to the larger transit system? Most importantly, how does this location support the city's goals to develop Downtown Tigard into a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community and connect it to the Tigard Triangle? More directly, the placement of the downtown station in the Hunziker Core Industrial Area impacts industrial (employment) lands, of which the city has an extremely limited supply. Any change to the city's policies to accommodate a station at this location will require a community planning process to potentially enlarge the downtown vision to include this area (thereby reducing the city's industrial land inventory) or reimagine this area as an employment-focused station area. TriMet has consultants at work now on these very questions. Staff will be reviewing that work in the coming months, and can share results with the council prior to its decision on the LPA. The IRP includes stations near the existing railroad tracks south of downtown near Bonita and Upper Boones. These locations were studied in the DEIS alignments and are consistent with the city's land use policies and aspirations. They serve a larger residential area and have fewer industrial impacts than the I-5 alignment. The IRP alignment may also provide location options for a new Tigard Public Works facility either through co-location at the TriMet Operations and Maintenance (0 & M) facility proposed in the Hunziker Core Industrial Area or through redevelopment of remnant parcels impacted by the project in this area. Both of these O&M facilities, TriMet's and potentially the city's, are potential assets to the city, if properly sized and sited. Urban Design Issues Urban design issues for the SWC generally concern station location, the design treatment of structures and reconstructed streets, and associated redevelopment potentials and impacts. City staff has spent considerable effort in the past year analyzing the possible station areas in the Triangle, along a future imagined 70th Avenue from Baylor to Beveland, and Downtown for the area around Ash Avenue and Commercial. As impacts have shifted, these route segments, new stations and park and ride (P&R) locations have appeared in the IRP at Pacific Hwy/68th Pkwy and Elmhurst/72nd. Although these two Triangle stations appear to serve a greater area with complementary walksheds, they have not otherwise received any urban design analysis. The IRP-proposed Downtown station location east of Hall, between Hunziker and the railroad, and adjacent to a proposed TriMet Operations and Maintenance yard, is a problematic urban design challenge. Transit Oriented Design (TOD) principles value multi-modal access, a mix of uses, and dense development to prioritize the pedestrian experience. This location suffers from lack of connectivity, separation from the mixed-use downtown zone, and marginal redevelopment potential. Although a station area east of Hall would be possible, it would require major re-thinking of adopted plan districts, zoning, and transportation to be successful. The location and design of P&R structures, design of grade-separated facilities such as bridge and retaining wall structures, design of trackways in urbanizing areas, and landscaping all have impacts and offer opportunities for good urban design. For example, a successful P&R facility downtown could be located adjacent to Hall to limit traffic impacts within the district, be incorporated within a larger mixed-use development plan to reduce its visual impacts on the public realm, and be programmed and incentivized to support transit ridership and patronage of downtown businesses. The design of SW 70th Avenue in the Triangle remains an important opportunity for the district. Staff envision a complete street, including light rail, that builds on the bookend proximity of two planned station areas. The street design should prioritize multi-modal access and linkages to regional bike and pedestrian trails. Additionally, staff is seeking new bike/ped access on structures over Hwy 217 and and Red Rock Creek; both should be expected to greatly contribute to the Triangle's design identity. As addressed above under the land use section, the city has some good general policies that support urban design principles for transit in Tigard. However, our existing regulatory tools to achieve good urban design are more or less limited to standards developed for the urbanizing mixed-use plan districts over the past 20 years and are not transit-specific. Once the LPA is selected, the design of these facilities will warrant significant attention to ensure they contribute positively to the public realm in support of pedestrian access, improved mobility and transit-oriented redevelopment. New policies and standards will be necessary to ensure these outcomes. Equity and Housing The SW Corridor project has the potential to disproportionally impact residents who are currently living in "naturally occurring affordable housing," i.e. market-rate housing that, because of age and relative lack of amenities, rents at lower than average rates. The siting of a light rail station near this type of housing often results in significantly higher rents and the displacement of residents —a market condition that has already let loose on Tigard and most of the Portland region both in station area communities and across cities at large. The construction of light rail facilities could also physically displace some residents. Tigard staff has been working to address these impacts through two Metro grant-funded projects. One project, in partnership with the City of Portland, is to develop a comprehensive SW Corridor Equitable Housing Strategy. This report, which is currently in discussion draft form, has recommendations with three goals: 1. Commit public resources to address near-term housing crisis and long-term needs 2. Prevent residential and cultural displacement 3. Increase choices for new homes for all household types and incomes One major strategy that Tigard has had success on moving forward is to encourage TriMet to make remnant parcels from the light rail project available for new affordable housing development. This would be accomplished through a Memorandum of Understanding between TriMet and several partnering jurisdictions, to clearly define housing goals and joint development opportunities that could take advantage of project-induced partnerships and/or redevelopment opportunities in connection with light rail construction. The other Tigard-specific equitable housing grant project includes working with Unite Oregon, a community based organization, to engage and inform existing Tigard affordable housing residents about the SW Corridor project. In addition to canvassing residents of downtown apartments, Unite Oregon has held two community meetings,with two additional meetings scheduled. The second part of the project will undertake predevelopment work on a possible new affordable housing site near a Tigard light rail station, however this work has been put on hold until the alignment and station locations are more precisely determined. The initial route proposal is a mixed bag when it comes to equity and housing. Fewer residents are at risk of being physically displaced from their homes as a result of not building the alignment directly into downtown on the Ash alignment (as was studied in the DEIS). However, the city had been working to identify remnant parcels with TriMet from an Ash alignment that could have been redeveloped as protected affordable housing, and the initial route proposal—by avoiding downtown— strands most of these opportunities. The concept of repurposing remnant parcels remains viable; the city and TriMet will work to identify locations, however they won't be in downtown (an attractive district for equitable development because of the availability of services), nor are they likely to be on multiple sites in close proximity to one another. The lack of a centrally located downtown light rail station could slow the development of new residential units,which works against the goal of new affordable housing. Business Outreach and Impacts The City held an informational meeting in May 2017 and invited all business owners within a 1/4 mile radius of all proposed line options. The event was well attended and since then, city staff(along with TriMet and Metro) have met with multiple business and property owners. These meetings afforded project staff the opportunity to share planning documents and drawings to show potential impacts, and to explain the Uniform Relocation Act, which TriMet will comply with when the time comes to purchase property for the project. The City has directly spoken to, or repeatedly sought to meet with, property and business owners who appeared to be potentially impacted by any the six DEIS alignment options. Strong opposition was registered by business owners on Beveland Street in the Tigard Triangle, as well as from the "Coalition for SW Max Railroad Option," which includes 12 members doing business adjacent to I-5. Other business who have voiced concern include: Summit Properties, TVT Die Casting (Tigard business for over 40 years), Woodcraft of Portland, The Ballroom Dance Company, Empire Batteries, and others. A list of some letters presented to the Steering Committee from Tigard business owners is included for Council reference as Attachment 2. A meeting for businesses and properties on all potential mitigation routes has been scheduled for March 22nd. A mailing was sent out on March 12th (the date the IRP was released) inviting those potentially impacted by the shifted segments to learn more about the process. Dates and times have been set aside to schedule one-on-one or group meetings. This process is set to begin presently as the IRP introduces new business impacts that are not yet well understood. A preliminary review of the IRP in the Hunziker Industrial Core alone shows a possible relocation of approximately 29 firms employing hundreds of workers. Freight access to existing firms along the alignment would also likely be impacted and needs significant study. An additional seven firms in the Tigard Triangle could also potentially be relocated by the IRP. Business impacts along the railroad south of Downtown Tigard are still under study. Additionally, the IRP could also result in the loss of industrial land, significantly reducing the city's already severely constrained industrial land supply. On the other hand, the City could consider creating an Employment-TOD district to make up for the loss of land with an increase in employment density. The reduction of industrial land in this area would cause the city to shelve the Hunziker Core Infrastructure Project, a City-led effort to encourage private sector development, business growth and increased employment in the Hunziker Industrial Core, which is just seeing its first success —the Wall Street extension project and Trammell Crowe industrial development. Total taxable assessed value of industrial property along the IRP exceeds $16 million. Loss of this land would reduce the City's property tax base, requiring the city to strategize ways to leverage light rail service to compensate for, or even improve, the effect of the project's fiscal impact. Transit Service and Access Staff have enlisted the help of a local transit planning firm (Jarrett Walker + Associates, or JWA) to evaluate possible changes to the existing local transit network, including changes to light rail and bus service, and how different station locations would affect Tigard residents' ability to access the rest of the region by transit. Equally important are questions of how effectively Tigard businesses will be able to attract employees, customers and visitors from around the region. Transit access measures how much of our region people can get to in a given amount of time. The IRP places the downtown station southeast of Hall, though exactly where is not known. As a rule, an 800 foot distance adds about three minutes of walking time. a [11 Three minutes is not much time.However,when Metro attempted to forecast ridership for this project,a difference of just 4 minutes in travel time on light rail was believed to change total ridership by more than 1,000.Small amounts of time do, theoretically,have an impact on travel,which add up when applied to large numbers of people. Nothing about the IRP station location would prevent TriMet from bringing bus stops close to a future light rail platform in the industrial area as there is enough space to stop local buses in a new transit center. However, in considering the exact location of future bus stops, Tigard should consider that bus stops are most preferable when on the street, yet still very close to light rail platforms. For example, high-ridership bus lines run north of Tigard on Greenburg Road and south of Tigard on Hall Blvd could conceivably stop in a safe place near the intersection of Hall & Commercial without deviating into and out of a transit center. This matters because deviations cost riders time, lengthen bus routes, cost more to operate, and require extra driveway and turn-around space. The IRP also ensures that people transferring between light rail and WES will have a lengthy walk. It might also increase the pressure on TriMet and the City of Tigard to deviate bus lines in order to get close to both the WES platform and the new light rail station. This would contribute to slower travel by bus, and higher bus operating costs. Tigard should keep in mind, as future light rail stations are planned, that if buses cannot easily stop on the street, or make turns both into and out of station driveways on Hall Blvd., transit trips will be longer (as people ride a bus in circles); and it will cost TriMet time, and therefore operating budget, that could otherwise be spent on higher frequencies or other improvements. At first glance, the IRP could require deviations of bus lines, though with good design and engineering that might not be necessary. If connections among local buses and light rail are quick and easy near future light rail station locations, the major difference in transit access to consider will be the additional walking time required to reach the station. Traffic, Transportation and Infrastructure Led by PW/Engineering, a team of Tigard staff have reviewed the multiple (possible) traffic, transportation and infrastructure impacts related to the SWC project. Interestingly, although the project will travel through Tigard for several miles, almost none of it is planned to make use of existing city rights-of-way. This peculiarity results in traffic impacts that are somewhat smaller, and more difficult to assess early, than in a similar project or project segment (like the SWC through Portland which makes extensive use the public right-of-way). Infrastructure impacts (and possible improvements) to the city's sewer, water and stormwater systems are minimally covered in this briefing. It should be noted that technical traffic analysis has only been done for the DEIS alignment. However traffic and transportation (especially active transportation) observations, especially related to the initial route proposal, are as follows: •Northern Triangle Station area (at Highway 99 east of 68th Parkway with 400-space Park & Ride) •Initial traffic analysis does not indicate traffic issues due to the capacity of Highway 99 at this location. •The station will serve a pedestrian population north of Highway 99. •The rail line will be elevated is it goes south over 68th Parkway—no traffic impacts to 68th Parkway and Highway 99 intersection. •70th Avenue •As the rail moves southerly along the 70th Avenue alignment it will cross over Red Rock Creek and environmental impacts will need to be addressed. The structure may span the creek, but could impact the vegetated corridor with structural supports. This is an opportunity for upgrading and enhancing the vegetated corridor. •There are opportunities along 70th Avenue to create a bike route through the Triangle that connects with the trail from Lake Oswego. •Staff has spent time with our project partners discussing what type of street the future 70th Avenue should be (e.g. one-way, festival, pedestrian and bike only). These discussions have not advanced beyond brainstorming stage. Staff has continued to push to ensure that 70th Avenue is developed as a "complete street" not just a rail route. •The rail line will be elevated as it crosses Dartmouth Street and staff has continued to champion an elevated, safe pedestrian crossing at this location, which could include bikes. •Southern Triangle Station area (Elmhurst east of 70th Avenue) •This station provides good coverage of the Triangle in concert with the Highway 99 station. •This station provides an opportunity to improve Elmhurst Street, which is currently partially improved. •SW 72nd Avenue Crossing •The rail line will cross 72nd Avenue at grade. •This signalized crossing may have impacts on the other intersections north and south of this crossing (Dartmouth/72nd and Beveland/72nd). The signals at these intersections will need to be upgraded and synchronized with the rail crossing. •Highway 217 Crossing •The current proposal for the elevated crossing of Highway 217 includes rail only. •Staff continues to see this crossing as an important bike and pedestrian connection between the Triangle and Downtown. •Staff also considers this crossing an opportunity for some creative design, making the crossing a feature in Tigard. •The crossing will impact the wetlands adjacent to Highway 217. The magnitude of impact will depend on the type and length of structure to be constructed. Again, staff sees this an opportunity for upgrading and enhancing this natural area. •Downtown Stations •The analysis of the initial route proposal and the downtown station options do not include the Ash Avenue crossing. The Ash Avenue crossing would be a Tigard project, funded by Tigard. •Downtown Station (east of Hall Boulevard in the Hunziker Industrial Area) •The rail line will cross Hunziker at grade and there may be traffic impacts to the Hall Boulevard/Hunziker intersection affecting signal timing. •An OMF (Operations & Maintenance Facility) is proposed at this location (south of Hunziker). The OMF will generate additional workforce trips into and out of the site. •The bus terminal and park& ride structure would be located at this site. Traffic impacts are not yet known. •A new Commercial Street extension and pedestrian connections would be necessary to make this site function with the WES line. This is a lengthy walk for people connecting on foot between WES and MAX. •A thoughtful intersection design of Hall/Commercial will need to make the crossing safe and attractive for pedestrians. •The IRP does not seem to necessitate the realignment of the Scoffins/Hall/Hunziiker intersection, which, if completed, would eliminate one signal and improve traffic flow on Hall. •As the station would be located on the east side of Hall Boulevard, there is no light rail crossing of Hall Boulevard. •This station location would also include a relocated transit center and 350-space park & ride parking garage. •Rail Corridor •The SWC rail would parallel the existing WES and PWRR lines leaving downtown heading towards Tualatin. •The rail corridor crosses Bonita Road, 72nd Avenue and Upper Boones Ferry Road (see more discussion below) •Bonita Road Station (elevated) •The crossing (following the rail corridor) and station are elevated, so there will be limited or no traffic impacts. •There may be a small surface parking lot. •Impacts to the adjacent vegetated corridor will need to be studied and enhanced as part of the project. •Pedestrian connections may be needed to west of the station to serve the residential community. •The modeling indicates this station attracts riders from Lake Oswego east of the Interstate 5. •The rail crosses 72nd at grade. No major traffic issues are expected due to excess capacity in the system at this location. •Upper Boones Ferry Road Station and At-Grade Crossing •Tigard and Washington County staff are examining the assumptions and results of the traffic modeling in this area and believe more refinement is needed. The modeling currently assumes five-lane widening of Upper Boones Ferry Road, which is in the TSP, but a funding source has not been identified. •Mitigation measures such as creating a grade-separated crossing of Upper Boones may be needed. •The station will have a small surface parking lot and will serve the professional business park and other employers in the area, as well as Lake Oswego residents on the east side of Carmen Drive. •Bridgeport Station •While most of this station is south of the Tigard city limits, the access is in Tigard. •Staff will be working with Metro on modeling the impacts to the Durham/72nd intersection. The intersection may require signal upgrades. •Pedestrian connections from the station to Bridgeport Village will need to be enhanced as pedestrians attempt to cross 72nd Avenue. Community Engagement The community engagement team has been regularly meeting with business, property owners, underserved communities, and additional stakeholders since the Tigard vote passed in November 2016. This work will continue, and even intensify, in 2018. A project kick-off event in February 2017 attracted roughly 50 people in attendance. Since then, the city has worked with Metro and TriMet to produce newsletters, public comment maps, events and other outreach opportunities for members of the public—many of whom are not directly impacted by proposed alignments. Staff has received and reviewed comments from a Metro-sponsored online public comment tool, and from the Community Advisory Committee (CAC). In both venues, the community spoke strongly in favor of through-service using the Ash Avenue downtown station location and continuing south adjacent along the railroad to Bridgeport. The CAC chose this option while asking for mitigation to avoid Beveland businesses. As previously described, both the Beveland business impacts and the Ash Avenue residential impacts are partially to explain why the IRP shows segments of the alignment shifting away from these areas. Community engagement workshops have been scheduled for various community groups and stakeholders this spring. These events will focus on how to read, remark and be persuasive when commenting on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Workshops are scheduled for Tigard residents, business and property owners who might be impacted, as well as portions of Tigard's underserved community including St. Anthony's Church. The community engagement team is also the lead on business and property owner outreach, and works as a partner on affordable housing programs. OTHER ALTERNATIVES N/A COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES, APPROVED MASTER PLANS 9/1/17 City Council Goal Update #4. Pursue Development of Light Rail Along the Southwest Corridor. •Advocate for Light Rail to come to Downtown Tigard •Support request to the State Legislature for $150M in state lottery funding for the Southwest Corridor Project. •Support legislation to grant the Metro Council authority to consolidate multijurisdictional land use actions involving the SW Corridor into a single decision and expedited land use appeal process. •Adopt a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) in 2018 that advances Tigard's land use and transportation priorities: •Direct service to downtown Tigard •Vehicle and pedestrian crossing at Ash Avenue •Development of three light rail stations including l downtown and 2 in the Tigard Triangle •Structured parking facilities in downtown, the Triangle, or both districts, to be made available for short-term public parking (non-commuters) •Implementation of Shared Investment Strategy projects that enhance the walkability and connectivity of the community near transit stations •Construction of affordable housing in the Triangle and downtown near transit stations, including replacement housing for "at risk" units due to SWC light rail construction concurrent with, or prior to, light rail construction •Mitigation and enhancement of sensitive lands, congested intersections, and other community assets due to light rail construction and operation. •Adoption of design standards and guidelines in TMC Title 18 to ensure that the quality of light rail components meet a high standard of urban design. •Effective outreach and communication with impacted neighborhoods. Environmental justice for low-income or non-English speaking residents for whom impacts are most disruptive. •Effective outreach and communication with impacted businesses. Economic development support for displaced or impacted Tigard businesses. •Execution of an intergovernmental agreement with TriMet for Services Related to Design Review, Permitting, Shared Parking and Facilitation of Affordable Housing o Participation on a Sustainable City Year Program multi-jurisdictional team to support City of Tigard goals in the SWC. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION 07/19/11: High-Capacity Transit Land Use Plan Update 12/13/11: Update on the Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan 12/20/11: Briefing on SW Corridor Plan Public Involvement and Messaging 11/20/12: SW Corridor Plan Update 02/19/13: SW Corridor Plan Update 05/21/13: SW Corridor Plan Update 06/25/13: Recommendation to SW Corridor Plan Steering Committee 10/08/13: Resolution Endorsing the SW Corridor Plan and Shared Investment Strategy 02/18/14: SW Corridor Plan Public Input Update 02/10/15: Metro IGA for Planning and Public Involvement Work - SW Corridor Plan 07/21/15: Presentation on SW Corridor Planning Progress 09/01/15: SW Corridor/Downtown Zoom-In 06/28/16: Consideration of a Resolution Approving Ballot Title language for a November SW Corridor Ballot Measure 02/14/17: Discuss SW Corridor Land Use Final Order Attachments Attachment 1. Initial Route Proposal Attachment 2.Public input Attachment 3.SWC Timeline PowerPoint CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done III TIGARD Southwest Corridor Project Tigard Team Update Presented to City Council I March 20, 2018 Updates for October 30, 2018 in red C I 'I ( ) 1 1 I ( J ;A R 1) The purpose of the Southwest Corridor light rail project is to directly connect Tualatin, downtown Tigard, Southwest Portland, and the region's central city with light rail, high quality transit and appropriate community investments in a congested corridor to improve mobility and create the conditions that will allow communities in the corridor to achieve their land use vision . CITY OF TIGARD • SWC or Southwest Corridor: basically the Barbur • LPA or Locally Preferred Alternative: The final Boulevard/Hwy 99 corridor between Portland and light rail route, recommended by the project Sherwood including those two cities, Tigard, Steering Committee, endorsed by participating Tualatin, King City, Durham, and portions of governments, and adopted by the Metro Council. unincorporated Washington County. • LUFO or Land Use Final Order: The statutory • DEIS or Draft Environmental Impact Statement: a authority granted by Metro, under Oregon federally required study that discloses the statute, to TriMet, to construct the project across impacts and benefits of possible route options for multiple local land use authorities. light rail in the corridor. • TOD or Transit Oriented Development: • FEIS or Final Environmental Impact Statement: a Development that typically follows the opening of study that will address the set of benefits, light rail, close to stations and characterized by a impacts and mitigations for those impacts for a mixture of uses in single buildings and lower than final alignment once selected. typical parking ratios. • IRP or Initial Route Proposal: An FTA-required, • CAC or Citizen Advisory Committee: A Metro- proposed light rail alignment, to be included in appointed committee of citizens from affected the DEIS for public comment and review. jurisdictions to review project information and make recommendations to the project Steering Committee on key decisions. • FTA or Federal Transit Administration: The federal agency responsible for reviewing, rating, funding and overseeing the design, development, construction and operation of light rail projects nationwide. CITY OF TIGARD Southwest Corridor light rail schedule 11/27/17 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Environmental Review Draft Public and Advanced Design & Engineering agency review • Funding Preferred alternative Construction selected Regional funding vote Federal funding Opening Schedule is subject to change. agreement CITY OF TIGARD Mgrch 2018 s erten 1-5 41 Initial Route crossings • „or0' Proposal (IRP) , 0 I •.. Preferred urzzaA . DOWN' tifsh on 70th c avoid Alternative i . .. rft.000:::•.: . impacts on Ash ' ••0 ', ' , 'avoid[wards on Beveland .4/ 1.4e KRUSE WAY shor on 1,5- crossings-'— for _.? adjacent R oeto railroad 6,ladocAnt to 1-5 h103111,:2122 222 # r (south side) ......EfIS opl4rn 0 on nth 2 $d ...700.4.0.•, a, 5tallon,M1t, ==111 Proposed route. parK yla NM on Ash " 'on'ittov an Modification MAUS£ BR!DGEP OE- s orAy VILLAGE 0 DEIS option it,df,,,>t 0 Station to ra tfroacf 1. Station with HU 0,4CKA i) park and ride DOWNTOWN t TUALATIN DOWNICW4 ita.Ant. CITY OF TIGARD PERMITTING FRAMEWORK L o c a I • Tigard (local land use authority) • Washington County Re lona • TriMet • Metro (regional land use authority) State • Oregon Legislature • Land Conservation and Development Commission Fe era • Federal Transit Administration • National Environmental Protection Act CITY OF TIGARD LOCAL LAND USE POLICY FRAMEWORK "maintain z �1a� `focus employment Downtown as the •eVe�sve growth and high- coo, city's primary transit °`�' .,,•,.p density housing in � center" '"`` the Triangle and �'� Downtown" "ensure that 4 " ` ' ,`A 24 Downtown is not ,---. ,'��` v , dominated by park- `{ and-ride activity. "promote the efficient utilization of employment and industrial lands" CITY OF TIGARD mr LAND USE on 70th impact s ._ •O on Ash r avoid impacts on Beveland BUSINESS IMPACTS $ ,,RUSE to railroad URBAN DESIGN _ Proposed route ModNication BRIOGtr":`-' Viltnc Q DEIS option • Station S EQUITY AND HOUSING o Station with park and ride oownTowN TUALATIN TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ITY OF TIGARD LAND USE Promising Direction ... Provides improved circulation and access in Triangle Minimizes park & ride impacts in Triangle 1 Minimizes industrial impacts south of downtown CITY O I' 'I' I G ,A R I) LAND USE Questions & Concerns... Status as of 10/30/18 / How will the downtown station / Unresolved. City and TriMet have support the city's land use vision discussed redevelopment and the Metro 2040 Growth scenarios but this question is Concept? open. Will the downtown station and / Unresolved. City has requested other light rail improvements help TriMet consider helping with joint "unlock" the employment development scenarios, potential of the industrial lands in Employment TOD district this area or will a different land facilitation and mitigation of OMF use vision be needed? impacts. TriMet has new design consultant team onboard. CITYi , , 1, 7 A:, ' iRD 1. ,. I'41, :. 1_1 7,19 IOU R-2 i limy 7/.1 )-- ...., -7 - _ lit::''' g 1 MUR-1 _ o. 4- , I f Portland R-12 et 0, 0, , 1 R-25\. 0) ee, .., UE '3 tt.—25 (P D) ee ,T'JL.iI , . 'N-",-, -.1r,. i--. , 0 tu ,Prat 4,2*;.." IVIELROSE SI V. 7,..44,4,i,' ...._ N R-4.5 __ Lake V 4,MU E (PD) .! _, ..iz_i sPD) .. ,',., i Ir‘....., , Oswego VAT-1 (PD) 1 ‘1 '''' si ''s Pn f7 .14 , . R-4.5 KRUSE p7 I 151 WAY 2 iiii., • , '..I Ci4A) ' :It; ME A nriiNS RD f 1 ' ..1' 0 1 -- • , , C I '1' Y , , ( ) 1- T I G A R D r4 1 ,010C-11.1ov.P I TO, NW Y L I WO ---- ill."- 111 0 S gi,0 I cr Portland I cr) 0 , C cn I -4S, 7 MOU T I-I S. ' I 1 . •e-,4'1 C, \ cn 127000 ow MN 0 c 44 14 ....•001 a 5- IR'.7- Ss, -p•,. c, 6 G., 1 a 0 s Po 4:3 fill'il' N , ‘ Tigat d ' MELROSE ST CI: • . % Lake • Oswego lb No. (44 c, sw mcooNALrr sr INIr .., t: Pi RUSE WAY 44 MLADOVVS pc, li 3: rr, lir 1 4.. ... I +1.., ,.. -AL „ -.152,-I,ep`e* ,, I,,',,,y 11. 1% . %., ..._,,.. ,,,,..„--1,7,., ...„.,., -., , , , p 4,-, . 44 ::444":1"1'.. tir,L----- ,1-• ,,,c,,,„,.,,,,...- . , ,,•-f-,,--„,,,, , ' '''''t 4(34ril 3*' X it - "---' -t '--,--.- --- #,...=-‘. 4 -,, .......,„:,..,,„ • = ,`,9kI''Z'''' ,.;•:.' ,'-'-: ‘ ,t 4`','' 4 - '-61•Ni'j 4 /4. LI IT41' 9''M OA ANko:,... ,,A,,, 11 II i g s : • 1.,: ic,,,, „ ,,,,,,•,,, _ .\ y, ...,10. ,c;ia -iiisfiiidL7. 171:11. :,-,-- .*\)2,,ktk,,,N4.,-, ill'i'd''11 4 ?'';”:i"i-`',' „.., , -4 i„.,,...L .. i , .. Rh lig lit, -.7.. .,,,' ---;_ 7. 1, ,,ss'\ . .,4' , f,:: 4 ' -191Vi 1 ' 4‘.N H • ill 1 -t. AIL 11;•14 -7.1 i l'-1 11' ,. ihs , ii.t-Tux-i-ri-ti , ,),„1.• _,,,...,,_ gm AI ,I• 1.1,,,,,„"wo k.„ .. 1-- - '..< ,-,50. 4,--:..,,,,,,,, ,, ....... , 4-1 1 • d - 1f . ,,,i. 21, , ri••• , 1,7'.74 p , .• „,. _,,,,,Ni ... ...... ,..... \--,:- .;I ...%,10,, . IL y.....,.:. .. ,„ o. ,- -Y . '-'2;-:-.' ? ,:i!ELITTL-L"---: ::_,,71:-,::-_,,77, ' )4111,,A14444 riT: ,..1.....,....N:0‘,....t 'ilitteil •*.0 sit& zi=4,„ ''''M t Arl ti g TT aas . ,.._ . :7---ii"- -alki, ,, ;/,`4 -->-;;J•-'-'s '' (44,IS! ' ' 1 ,.. =`-`-' - ' 01.04 , ,14 ,914` e5" **46.‘. 0-: ?*4 .,... N. • •• ._,,,.1'.."E' --= ' ' '4, _ , „is: H s IIIII _,. ' , j :------ , ,..! V:111.11111111111i 1 ....--- 111114P oft. ill --- . t , . ... . ., 4,91 o --,M ,N•li 4ft MIN MIMI MI e.. tr. . • ... _ .., ,_.... - ii121 - ii 14 . . rit na -- La_1117)1411416 ....) Riollit„.4Gy ..... 1 - t) •44,N, .4614111. Mb Ii ,7,i, \ go 2 unt" v . ....„:„ .,4 ..,-,.. (7: ''' \I •>1.1 ' ---. lir • I al.. t ' .._ ais istsiN •••• ' t 11, ,\\.• • ' i ._Ttr. r ') Elel i .,N„„„x' ` •- ' &.- - 44.f I mi 4- ... . ... '4 N, CITY O F TIGARD Hunziker Industrial Core: M. .,.,, pr y , '. r = Infrastructure for Employment Lands ti ''';'.,i -8).,' -IP 'w . . -filk, ,\,,,,z.„-, Hunriker Industria!Core <'...,0,' �J ;4...:'4 y, 736 arn;n1utK.d.c>cd P,., 1p p Q .1/,j " - r , a - , e , ''ice `� .. e ort f *" , _l.+, 4„�.. t* 4 Os., lb' .'...!.. ., .ca= ' ri rte,, �. a i 'Y . .��..p• iiiiiit7 fin.:, w„ ft, , sr- 0, ,* r-�r �„ 1 al ' %,:.. aJ, y, , C�',�a�, ��j. r � ally' of { i A �A p r r F►_ 1 y� 0 ,r, 3 ,,;: """rF �` a ru µ Y M �•. ,, ` ; . 18•acre Trammell Crow Property ' Proposed Development MRAnri'aYhlaak ' 725.000 square feet d' r+n. ..- €strmated SI2 mdhon r+rvettmcm „ Illi -�� ,t.nw..,r.wsurte.. � ...... � NA ; IEi4 'Wall Street Intrastru 4, ,..pvoposad Roads Road 5 3.803,000 Ihws`.•18.68noo6u.Poo.. ."'.✓ Water$ 660000 t1,.,'',.,it., ..n, Storm 5 767,875 ,r M !1 f r ':` ;,�, Sewer$ 193.950 '” ' J.LI - s TOTAL SS5 million ,. , � +'"- "�•e' •, b ,•,,�:: TM9. 4 _ ._._._ :• x. FI Ids Haverty.Site welts inaastrimnaIh.weaallR ,'; C ! ,9`,' CITY OF TIGARD BUSINESS IMPACTS .•- 0 1...' Promising Direction ... r Tigard Triangle ••. 7 firms U. Potential for increased Hunziker Core employment density KRUSE 29 firms WAY through redevelopment o of underutilized land \ , ( Employment Transit- °�, Railroad Oriented Development information BRIDGEPORT unavailable VILLAGE Q district) . DOWNTOWN TUALATIN CITY OF TIC NRD BUSINESS IMPACTS Questions and Concerns... Status as of 10/30/18 ► Loss of firms / employees / 21 (4.7%) / 573 (7%) Industrial Loss of industrial land / 42 acres (5.4%) Tax base reduction / $19,060,920 ($47,902 tax rev) Jeopardizes Hunziker Core / HCIS is made obsolete by the Infrastructure Strategy preferred alternative. Light rail tracks and OMF siting prohibits street connectivity and limits redevelopment potential . CITY OF TIGARD TRANSIT ACCESS • Light rail • Time spent alignment walking, waiting, and riding • Station locations • Directness of travel on rail, buses • Changes to bus lines Ease of transfers I T Y 0 F TTGARD shorten I-5 TRANSIT ACCESS crossings o • Promising Direction ... D01MNT0,4a TWAT'. 14m41110 avoid • impacts '...0 avoid impacts on Ash ",;w No branching onBeveland KRUSE / Downtown serviceWAY 0 adjacent to railroad 0 ) mom Proposed route Modification BRIDGED vnu CO ••••. DEIS option • Station Q Station with park and ride DOWNTOWN TUALATIN CITY OF TIG ARD TRANSIT ACCESS Questions & Concerns... Status as of 10/30/18 Downtown station location 1 Downtown station location ► Bus routes? ► Bus routing on downtown streets will change and are tbd. WES/LRT ► Walking time? connections are not significant. / Ease of transfers? ► Walking time increases users accessing LRT from downtown and neighborhoods across Hwy 99. ► TBD. Ease of transfer will depend largely on quality of pedestrian environment, roadway and rail crossings (barriers), station design, and wayfinding. Bus-to-LRT may be prioritized over other modes. (: I 1 O 1IIGARD URBAN DESIGN COMPONENTS OF TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT -Walkable design-pedestrian as the highest priority -Train station as prominent feature of town center -Public square fronting train station -A regional node containing a mixture of uses -High density, walkable district within 10-minute walk -Collector support transit systems including buses, etc -Designed to include the easy use of bicycles/scooters -Reduced and managed parking inside 10-minute walk -Specialized retail at stations serving commuters CITY OF TIGARD URBAN DESIGN Preferred Design of Rail Station Site For Maximum Ridership and Pedestrian Connections CONVENTIONAL LAYOUT PREFERRED LAYOUT I 111111 NM in III INN lie sw IIIII 1111 1111 1111 in 111111111 r 1 Pedestn- Flow Bus Loop .�.�� Civic Plata�f -- -' r.a l Sta Rail Station I II 111 NM kn. - IPedestrian , CITY OF TIGARD URBAN DESIGN Promising Direction .. . Placemaking opportunities in the Triangle on new 70th Avenue and with introduction of new, prominent structures CITY O F TIGARD URBAN DESIGN Questions & Concerns.. . Status as of 10/30/18 / Design treatment/budget for / Unresolved. No additional all structures (e.g. parking budget or design work since structures, retaining walls, March on these large-scale bridges, O&M facilities, new improvements. transit center, support buildings) / Station area development ► Unresolved. City has near the downtown station presented questions and 1 Transit "experience" for concerns to TriMet. people considering downtown / Unresolved. City has as a future residence or presented questions and business location concerns to TriMet. C I T Y OF TIGARD EQUITY AND HOUSING Promising Direction .. . Initial route proposal without station in downtown core would result in fewer residents physically displaced SW Corridor Equitable Housing Strategy has recommendations to address market displacement of residents of "naturally occurring affordable housing" CITY OF TIGARD EQUITY AND HOUSING Questions & Concerns.. . Status as of 10/30/18 / Initial route proposal would not / MOU executed to facilitate the create opportunity for developing development of 150-250 new units protected affordable housing on of affordable housing in Tigard. TriMet owned remnant parcels in Additional collaboration on the downtown core preservation and affordability. / Station outside of downtown core could result in less transit oriented / SW Corridor Equitable Housing housing development where city Strategy acknowledged by Tigard City Council on July 24th . Portland wants it City Council adopted October 4th ► Downtown's many transit ► Convenience of downtown transit dependent residents, could have service is still unknown; fixed rail less convenient service service is a likely benefit; access to the service could be problematic. C I 'I' Y O I,' T 1G A RD TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE shorten 1-5 crossings • 0 217 4 DOWNTON''' on 70th c r'la TIGARI � avoid e•• .� -...: a Asimpah •P avoid impacts _ on Beveland \\O, P`� w `� KRUSEon 4,3'' a? S WAY QG 44.:: adjacent 2, R to railroad "s.). o ; Tigard ) • BRIDGEP( •, VILLA& 0 DOWNTOWN TUALATIN C 1 "1' V' O 1 , 1 1 ( J R 1) TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE Promising Direction .. . Possible Station adjacent to 99W and 68th Parkway provides opportunity to connect with more riders Opportunity to partner with TriMet to find location for new Tigard Public Works facility CITY OF TIGARD TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE Questions & Concerns... Status as of 10/30/18 / Hwy 217 cross-over should ► Not included in the Project. include at least bike and pedestrian facilities / Mixed. Signalization should / Downtown Tigard station help. New at-grade crossing of needs to mitigate traffic and safety impacts on Hall Blvd. Hunizker will not. / Upper Boones Ferry Road crossing traffic impacts need / Project is still sorting this out. mitigation and determine who Possibility to avoid the area or pays cross it on structure. Impacts not yet fully studied. CITY OF TIGARD .._ .ar rtab•S.CNa n 4Y.Y:% kceaN .\:an.aq ha" ': u. ,fQp:. t.-,: ..-,:". COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT N \ I Outreach Activity in Tigard 0 2017 1 February - SW Corridor Kick-Off Event #444,--1 ; .. / Spring - Mailer to those along the alignment ► a and mail-route 4 / r ► May - Business Outreach and Presentation IL I . Breakfast May-September - Tabling at local events 1 / s May-December — One-on-one meetings g z9 property u with local businesses andowners i along the route options (: I 'U ' O 'I' I G \ R I) COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 1 February — Housing, Transit and ► July — DEIS Workshops You at St. Anthony's / Housing, Transit, and You 1 March - Business Outreach and Public Testimony at St. Anthony's Presentation Breakfast (possible Tigard/Tualatin Open House mitigations) / Steering Committee Public 1 April — "Housing, Transit and You" Hearing Groups, CPOs, Boards and at St. Anthony's Committees 1 Spring - Mailer to those along the / Metro Staff Public Hearing alignment and mail-route ► Fall — Mailer to properties along ► May-December — One-on-one the alignment and mail-route meetings with local businesses and property owners along the route options . ^"'m"... ^a difir $my ., . ,, ,...,.. . xvw P 7 ,... .4 _ 1 t uwel.c t sonimorrr �' 14, em ^ l. i k ryy` ` k m ' Y RmakI � R +I ^ is. .f ,, \tit, ,, _ y . 1, , i '' " w." 1 dl 4 . r s':Yl '{ ' ! 'j'. 1 APPENDIX 2 BEFORE THE LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON IN THE MATTER OF CRITERIA ) FOR LAND USE DECISIONS ) REGARDING THE SOUTHWEST ) LCDC Order 001887 CORRIDOR MAX LIGHT RAIL ) PROJECT IN THE PORTLAND ) METRO REGION ) This matter came before the Land Conservation and Development Commission(the commission) on September 22, 2017,pursuant to Section 4 of House Bill 3202 enacted by the 2017 Legislature(HB 3202). The commission having fully considered the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project criteria, timely comments, and reports of the Department of Land Conservation and Development(the department), now enters the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order of the Commission set forth below. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The 79th Legislative Assembly enacted HB 3202,relating to the siting of the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project in the Portland Metro region. On August 15, 2017, Governor Kate Brown signed HB 3202 and, subject to the emergency clause in Section 15, it is in effect. 2. Section 4 of HB 3202 directs the commission to establish criteria to be used by the Metro Council in approving a land use final order for a Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project to be located in the cities of Portland, Tigard, and Tualatin and Multnomah and Washington Counties. Remaining decisions concern the light rail route, stations,park- and-ride lots, maintenance facilities and highway improvements for the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project, including their locations. 3. Paragraphs (b) and(c)of subsection(8) of Section 4 of HB 3202 require the commission to base the criteria on "statewide planning goals and plan policies that are relevant to decisions regarding the project improvements and their locations." Subsection(4)of section 2 of HB 3202 makes a legislative finding that using the criteria will be "equivalent in spirit and substance to the land use procedures that otherwise would be applicable." 4. TriMet prepared and submitted proposed criteria to the commission by letter dated September 1,2017. The submittal from TriMet explained how the criteria reflect statewide land use goals and applicable acknowledged local comprehensive plan policies. LCDC Order 001887 Page 2 of 15 5. The department reviewed the proposed criteria and prepared a report to the commission dated September 14, 2017, which recommended a set of criteria similar to criteria proposed by TriMet, and described the modifications. 6. The commission conducted a public hearing on September 22, 2017. The City of Tigard, the City of Portland, and the Multnomah Neighborhood Association(MNA) submitted written testimony prior to the meeting. The commission received oral testimony from Mark Greenfield on behalf of TriMet and from Roger Alfred on behalf of Metro. 7. The written testimony from the City of Tigard generally supported the criteria presented in the September 14,2017 staff report, and requested minor modifications to Criteria(3) and(11). The commission considered the requests and approved the minor modifications for the reasons set forth in the Conclusions of Law section below. 8. The written testimony from MNA provided background information on the adopted Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, and on how MNA has objections to the middle housing amendment adopted as part of that plan. The testimony raised three points relevant to the proposed criteria. First, the testimony expressed a preference for stronger protection for single-family housing in the"inner neighborhood". Second,the testimony expressed a desire to balance redevelopment with impacts to congestion. Third, the testimony objected to using the adopted,but not yet acknowledged, Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan as a basis for the criteria because the plan is still under review by the department which includes consideration of the objections to the plan MNA has filed with the depaitiuent. The testimony also proposed a new criterion(3), and requested modification to criterion(3)(A). The commission did not accept submittal of the new criterion(3), and did not approve the modification to Criterion(3)(A) for the reasons set forth in the Conclusions of Law section below. 9. The written testimony from the City of Portland supported the criteria presented in the staff report. The testimony also explained the 2035 Comprehensive Plan was used to prepare the proposed criteria because it has been adopted by the city, and the city anticipates that the plan will be in effect by the time that the criteria are used to evaluate a land use final order. The testimony also provided policies from the acknowledged 1980 Comprehensive Plan, which is currently in effect. The testimony demonstrated that the proposed criteria also reflect policies from the 1980 plan. The testimony did not request any modifications to the criteria. 10. The oral testimony for TriMet explained the criteria originally proposed by TriMet, supported the modified criteria presented in the staff report, and supported the modifications proposed by the City of Tigard. The oral testimony for Metro explained the broader process within which the land use final order will occur, supported the criteria presented in the staff report, and supported the modifications proposed by the City of Tigard. 11. The commission, finding the staff report and submitted testimony adequate as evidence that the 13 criteria reasonably reflect the statewide land use planning goals and plan LCDC Order 001887 Page 3 of 15 policies that are relevant to decisions regarding the project improvements and their locations,unanimously passed a motion to"establish the criteria in Attachment A of the staff report with the addition of the City of Tigard's clarifying language in their letter, dated September 21,2017, and direct the department to prepare and execute an order implementing the commission's decision."Commissioners Cribbins, Lamb, Lidz, McArthur, and Morrow voted aye. Commissioners Macpherson and Eberwein were excused. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW HB 3202, section 4(8)(c)requires the commission to provide a brief statement explaining the criteria. The following conclusions of law address how the individual criterion reasonably reflect both statewide land use planning goals and plan policies that are relevant to decisions regarding the SW Corridor MAX Light Rail Project improvements and their locations. Criterion (1) Coordinate with and provide an opportunity for TriMet, the Oregon Department of Transportation and the affected local governments to submit testimony on the light rail route, light rail stations,park-and-ride lots, vehicle maintenance facilities, and the highway improvements, including their locations,proposed to be included in the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project(Project). Criterion (2) Hold a public hearing to provide an opportunity for the public to submit testimony on the light rail and highway improvements, including their locations,proposed to be included in the Project. Rationale: Criteria(1) and(2)above are procedural and, similar to the local comprehensive plan policies,promote intergovernmental coordination and cooperation. Criterion(1)reflects Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use Planning, Part I, which requires city, county, state, federal agency and special districts plans and actions related to land use to be consistent and coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units. Criterion(2) also reflects Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use Planning, Part I which requires opportunities for review and comment by citizens and affected governmental units during preparation, review and revision of plans and implementation ordinances. Criterion(2)provides an opportunity for citizen participation and information that enables citizens to identify and comprehend the issues related to the Project. Criterion (3) Identify economic, social, urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed-use centers. Identify measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that LCDC Order 001887 Page 4 of 15 could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. (NEPA), or, if reasonable and necessary, by affected local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. (A) Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing (1) the need for light rail proximity and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancing transit ridership; (2) the likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities, to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety;and (3) the need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts, and centers from identified adverse impacts. (B) Provide for highway improvements, including their locations, balancing the need to improve the highway system with the need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts, and centers from the identified adverse impacts. Rationale: The commission received written testimony from the City of Tigard requesting modifications within criterion (3)to add "districts, and centers" following"neighborhoods" in (3)(A)(3)and(3)(B). The commission determined that the request was a minor clarification to a criterion previously submitted by TriMet, and therefore included the request in its deliberation. The commission received oral testimony from TriMet and Metro supporting the request. The department also supported the request. The commission determined that the clarification improved criterion(3)because it made it clear that all types of urban areas should be protected from adverse impacts, and not just residential neighborhoods. The commission therefore approved the request. The commission received written testimony from the MNA proposing a new criterion to replace criterion(3).The department received the MNA letter on September 22, 2017, which was after the statutory deadline for submitting proposed criteria(September 10, 2017); therefore the commission was legally precluded from consideration of the proposed criterion. The commission also concludes that the text proposed by MNA for criterion(3) does not address statewide planning goals and plan policies. Instead, it makes a factual statement about a federal requirement to balance adverse impacts with beneficial impacts. The proposed text includes a list of six very general of impacts that could be considered. The proposed text would not provide any mechanism for the Metro Council to determine whether a proposed land use final order met the criterion or not. Therefore the text would not have been useable as a criterion even if it had been received prior to the deadline for proposing criteria. The commission did consider written testimony from MNA that proposed a minor modification to criterion(3)(A)(2)to remove the phrase "development of an efficient and compact urban form." The commission did not approve this request because the phrase reflects a fundamental objective of Statewide Planning Goal 14: efficient use of land. LCDC Order 001887 Page 5 of 15 Criterion(3), as approved by the commission,reflects statewide planning goals and local plan policies listed below by topic. Economic: Criterion(3)reflects the statewide and local requirements and policies listed below by including consideration of economic impacts. These plans and policies primarily consider beneficial impact from additional transportation options that increase the economic opportunities for residents and businesses along the corridor. The final three policies consider adverse impacts that may occur from construction of new transportation facilities. Statewide Planning Goal 9, Economic Development "provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens." Oregon Transportation Planning Rules, OAR 660-012-0030(1)(c) Transportation plans must identify transportation needs to"support industrial and commercial development planned for pursuant to OAR chapter 660, division 9 and Goal 9 (Economic Development)." Oregon Transportation Plan, Goal 3,Policy 3.3 "It is the policy of the State of Oregon to provide transportation improvements to support downtowns and to coordinate transportation and economic development strategies." Oregon Public Transportation Plan,Goal 1,Policy 1C: Economic Prosperity "The public transportation system should strengthen economic opportunities by providing travel options that increase access to jobs." Oregon Highway Plan Policy 1B: Land Use and Transportation "State and local government must work together to provide safe and efficient roads for livability and economic viability for all citizens... "It is the policy of the State of Oregon to coordinate land use and transportation decisions to efficiently use public infrastructure investments to... "Enhance livability and economic competitiveness" Metro Regional Framework Plan, Chapter 2 Transportation, Goal 2: Sustain Economic Competitiveness and Prosperity "Multi-modal transportation infrastructure and services support the region's well- being and a diverse, innovative, sustainable and growing regional and state economy." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Goal 8.B: Multiple benefits "Public facility and service investments ... support economic prosperity," Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan,Goal 9.G: Opportunities for prosperity "The transportation system supports a strong and diverse economy, enhances the competitiveness of the city and region... by providing... multimodal access to employment areas." Portland 1980 Comprehensive Plan,Policy 5.4 Transportation System. "Promote a multi-modal regional transportation system that stimulates and supports long term economic development and business investment." LCDC Order 001887 Page 6 of 15 Tigard 2027 Goal 12.2, Policy 2. "The City shall manage the transportation system to support desired economic development activities." Oregon Transportation Planning Rules, OAR 660-012-0035(3)(c) "The transportation system shall minimize adverse economic... consequences." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan,Policy 2.4 Eliminate burdens "Ensure plans and investments eliminate associated disproportionate burdens (e.g. adverse environmental, economic, or community impacts) for communities of color, low-income populations, and other underserved or under-represented groups impacted by the decision." Portland 1980 Comprehensive Plan,Policy 5.2 Business Development, Objective C "Advocate with Metro, Tri-Met, and other agencies conducting regional planning to consider economic concerns in their land use and transportation planning activities." Social: Criterion(3)reflects statewide and local requirements and policies listed below by including consideration of social impacts. Oregon Transportation Planning Rules, OAR 660-012-0035(3)(c) "The transportation system shall minimize adverse ... social ... consequences." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Goal 2.B: Social justice and equity "The City of Portland seeks social justice by expanding choice and opportunity for all community members. ...The City actively works to improve its planning and investment-related decisions to achieve equitable distribution of burdens and benefits and address past injustices." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Goal 3.A: A city designed for people "public investments reduce disparities and encourage social interaction to create a healthy connected city." Portland 1980 Comprehensive Plan. Policy 3.2 Social Conditions. "Provide and coordinate programs to promote neighborhood interest, concern and security and to minimize the social impact of land use decisions." Urban form: Transportation investment decisions can have a significant impact on urban form because the proximity and level of service of light rail transit affects the amount of development that will occur in specific areas. The following goals and policies require or promote consideration of these impacts and are reflected in criterion(3). Statewide Planning Goal 14 "to ensure efficient use of land" Statewide Planning Goal 14, Guideline A.4. "Comprehensive plans and implementing measures for land inside urban growth boundaries should encourage the efficient use of land and the development of livable communities." LCDC Order 001887 Page 7 of 15 Oregon Transportation Planning Rules, OAR 660-012-0000(3)(c) "Within metropolitan areas, coordinated land use and transportation plans are intended to improve livability and accessibility by promoting changes in the transportation system and land use patterns." Oregon Public Transportation Plan, Goal 1,Policy 1D "The public transportation system and local land use planning should be complementary and coordinated. Public transportation should be both responsive to and facilitate implementation of land use laws." Metro Regional Framework Plan Chapter 2 Transportation, Objective 1.1 Compact Urban Form and Design "Use transportation investments to focus growth in and provide multi-modal access to 2040 Target Areas and ensure that development in 2040 Target Areas is consistent with and supports the transportation investments." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 3.15 "Encourage public and private investment in infrastructure, economic development and community services in centers to ensure that all centers will support the populations they serve." Portland 1980 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 6.17 Coordinate Land Use and Transportation "Implement the Comprehensive Plan Map and the 2040 Growth Concept through long-range transportation and land use planning and the development of efficient and effective transportation projects and programs." Portland 1980 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 5.4 Transportation System, Objective B "Use transportation system improvements as a catalyst for attracting industrial and employment development." Safety: Criterion(3)reflects a focus on safety that is fundamental in state goals. Statewide Planning Goal 12: Transportation "To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." Oregon Transportation Plan, Goal 5: Safety and Security "To plan,build, operate and maintain the transportation system so that it is safe and secure." Safety is also prominent in local plan policies. There are roughly 40 references to safety in the plan policies submitted by TriMet. Examples include: Oregon Highway Plan Policy 1B: Land Use and Transportation "coordinate land use and transportation decisions to efficiently use public infrastructure investments to maintain the mobility and safety of the highway system" Metro Regional Framework Plan, Chapter 2 Transportation, Goal 5: Enhance Safety and Security "Multi-modal transportation infrastructure and services are safe and secure for the public and goods movement." LCDC Order 001887 Page 8 of 15 Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Goal 9.A: Safety "The City achieves the standard of zero traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries." Tualatin Development Code Chapter 11: Transportation, Section 11.610 Transportation Goals and Objectives. (4)(b) "Create a variety of safe options for transportation needs including bicycles, pedestrians, transit, freight, and motor vehicles" Tigard 2027, Goal 12.4. "Maintain and improve transportation system safety" Traffic: A balanced multimodal transportation system can reduce the adverse impacts of traffic because people riding light rail transit can avoid traffic, and can avoid contributing to traffic. The following goals and policies require or promote consideration of that impact, and are reflected in criterion(3). Statewide Planning Goal 12, Transportation "A transportation plan shall... (4) avoid principal reliance upon any one mode of transportation;" Oregon Transportation Planning Rules, OAR 660-012-0000(2) "avoid the air pollution, traffic and livability problems faced by other large urban areas of the country through measures designed to increase transportation choices" Oregon Public Transportation Plan,Goal 1 Purpose of the Public Transportation System, Policy 1E: Reduce Highway Demand "The public transportation system, especially in urbanized areas and large cities, should function as an integral component of and reduce pressure on the overall transportation system." Portland, Southwest Community Plan Vision, Policies and Objectives - Transportation "Provide a balanced,multimodal transportation system in Southwest Portland that encourages increases in transit use and pedestrian accessibility and connectivity, discourages non-local traffic in residential areas, manages congestion..." Criterion (4) Identify adverse noise impacts and identify measures to reduce noise impacts that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary, by affected local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. Rationale: Light rail transit can create noise impacts including vibration and wheel squeal. Highway improvements can change traffic volumes and create noise from internal combustion engines and from tires on the roadways. Criterion(4)reflects Statewide Planning Goal 6, "Air, Water and Land Resource Quality,"which includes noise in the definition of"waste and process LCDC Order 001887 Page 9 of 15 discharges"that must not be allowed to degrade the environment. Criterion (4) also reflects local plan policies related to noise, examples of which are listed. Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 4.33 Off-site impacts "Limit and mitigate public health impacts, such as... noise... that public facilities, land uses, or development may have on adjacent residential or institutional uses" Tualatin Development Code, Chapter 05: Residential Planning Growth, Section 5.030 General Objectives(15) "Protect adjacent land uses from noise impacts by adopting industrial noise standards." Criterion (5) Identify Project improvements in areas subject to natural hazards (including landslide areas, areas of severe erosion potential, areas subject to earthquake damage and lands within the 100 year floodplain)and demonstrate that adverse impacts to persons or property can be reduced or mitigated through design or construction techniques that could be imposed during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary, by local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. Rationale: Criterion(5)reflects Statewide Planning Goal 7, "Areas Subject to Natural Hazards," which is intended to"reduce risk to people and property from natural hazards." Goal 7 lists six categories of hazards that local governments must address: floods, landslides, earthquakes, tsunamis, coastal erosion, and wildfires. Three of these(floods, landslides and earthquakes) are relevant in the SW Corridor, and are therefore listed in the criterion. Criterion(5) also reflects local plan policies,examples of which are listed below. Metro Regional Framework Plan,Chapter 2 Transportation, Objective 5.3 Terrorism, Natural Disasters and Hazardous Material Incidents "Reduce vulnerability of the public, goods movement and critical transportation infrastructure to... natural disasters" Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Goal 8.C: Reliability and resiliency "Public facilities and services are reliable, able to withstand or recover from catastrophic natural and manmade events" Tigard 2027, Goal 7.1, Policy 4 "The City shall design and construct public facilities to withstand hazardous events" Tualatin Development Code, Chapter 04: Community Growth, Section 4.050 General Growth, Objective (12) "Adopt measures protecting life and property from natural hazards such as flooding, high groundwater, weak foundation soils and steep slopes." Criterion (6) Identify adverse impacts on significant fish and wildlife, scenic and open space, riparian, wetland, and park and recreational areas that are protected in acknowledged local LCDC Order 001887 Page 10 of 15 comprehensive plans or functional plans and, where adverse impacts cannot practicably be avoided, encourage the conservation of natural resources by demonstrating that there are measures to reduce or mitigate impacts that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary, by local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. Rationale: Criterion(6)reflects Statewide Planning Goal 5, "Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces"which requires local governments to inventory a wide range of resources,and then adopt policies and regulations that balance development with conservation of these resources. Criterion (6) also reflects plan policies (examples listed below)that address those resources. Oregon Public Transportation Plan, Goal 1, Policy 1 B: Environmental Protection "The public transportation system should be designed... [to] lessen... impact on... the natural environment" Metro Regional Framework Plan, Chapter 2 Transportation, Objective 6.1 Natural Environment "Avoid or minimize undesirable impacts on fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, wildlife corridors, significant flora and open spaces." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan,Policy 7.23 Impact evaluation "Evaluate the potential adverse impacts of proposed development on significant natural resources, their functions, and the ecosystem services they provide to inform and guide development design and mitigation" Tigard 2027 Goal 12.1 "Policy 7. The City shall strive to protect the natural environment from impacts derived from transportation facilities. "Policy 8. The City shall mitigate impacts to the natural environment associated with proposed transportation construction or reconstruction projects." Tualatin Development Code Chapter 11: Transportation, Section 11.610 Transportation Goals and Objectives, Goal 6: Health/Environment, Objective(e2 "Consider positive and negative effects of potential solutions on the natural environment(including wetlands and habitat areas)." Criterion (7) Identify adverse impacts associated with stormwater runoff and demonstrate that there are measures to provide adequate stormwater drainage retention or removal and protect water quality that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary, by local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. Rationale: Criterion(7)reflects Statewide Planning Goal 6, "Air, Water and Land Resource Quality"which requires local governments to maintain and improve water quality. Constructing light rail transit and highway improvements can increase impervious surface,which can increase LCDC Order 001887 Page 11 of 15 the quantity of stormwater runoff and increase the pollution in that stormwater. Criterion(6) also reflects plan policies(examples listed below)that address those impacts. Oregon Public Transportation Plan,Goal 1, Policy 1B: Environmental Protection "The public transportation system should be designed... [to] lessen... impact on... water quality" Metro Regional Framework Plan,Chapter 2 Transportation, Objective 6.3 Water Quality and Quantity "Protect the region's water quality and natural stream flows." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 8.42 Stormwater management function "Improve rights-of-way to integrate green infrastructure and other stormwater management facilities to meet... environmental objectives." Tigard 2027 Goal 6.2,Policy 3. "The City shall encourage the use of low impact development practices that reduce stormwater impacts from new and existing development." Tualatin Development Code Chapter 14: Drainage Plan and Surface Water Management, Section 14.040, Objective(3) "Reduce sediment and other pollutants reaching the public storm and surface water system... manage surface water runoff and improve surface water quality." Criterion (8) Identify adverse impacts on significant historic and cultural resources protected in acknowledged comprehensive plans and, where adverse impacts cannot practicably be avoided, identify local, state or federal review processes that are available to address and to reduce adverse impacts to the affected resources. Rationale: Criterion(8)reflects Statewide Planning Goal 5, "Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces"which requires local governments to inventory cultural areas and historic resources, and then adopt policies and regulations that balance development with conservation of these resources. Criterion(6) also reflects plan policies(examples listed below) that address those resources. Portland 2035, Policy 4.28 "Identify,protect, and encourage the use and rehabilitation of historic resources in centers and corridors" Tualatin Development Code, Section 16.030(14) "Review the impacts on landmarks when public improvement projects are proposed." Tigard 2027, Goal 5.2 "Promote the preservation and protection of historically and culturally significant resources." LCDC Order 001887 Page 12 of 15 Criterion (9) Identify general or anticipated impacts on air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy usage from project improvements that would help meet state, regional, and local reduction goals. Rationale: Criterion(9)reflects two statewide planning goals: Statewide Planning Goal 6, Air,Water and Land Resource Quality "To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources" Statewide Planning Goal 13, Energy Conservation "To conserve energy" Greenhouse gases as a specific category of air pollution are not listed separately in the Statewide Planning Goals. The legislature has,however, enacted a goal specifically for greenhouse gases. ORS 468A.205(c) "By 2050, achieve greenhouse gas levels that are at least 75 percent below 1990 levels." The commission has adopted administrative rules in OAR chapter 660, division 44 that translate the general legislative goal into specific targets for reductions in emissions per capita from passenger vehicles in the Portland metropolitan area. The target for the year 2035 is a 20 percent reduction, and for the 2050, a 35 percent reduction. Criterion(9)reflects both the broad statewide pollution goals and specific greenhouse gas targets. Criterion(9) also reflects general policies adopted by the Oregon Transportation Commission, and specific strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Oregon Transportation Plan, Goal 4 Sustainability, Policy 4.1, Strategy 4.1.2 "Encourage the development and use of technologies that reduce greenhouse gases." Oregon Public Transportation Plan, Goal 1, Purpose of the Public Transportation System, Policy 1B: Environmental Protection "The public transportation system should... lessen the transportation system's impact on air and water quality, the natural environment and energy consumption." Oregon Statewide Transportation Strategy, Strategy 9—Intracity Transit Growth and Improvements "9.7 Increasing transit service within MPO areas." The administrative rules in division 44 also created a process for Metro to adopt a scenario plan that is projected to meet the reduction target. Metro carried out a cooperative process and adopted a preferred land use and transportation scenario as part of the regional framework plan and the regional growth concept. Increasing transit, especially high capacity transit such as light rail, is a key component of the preferred scenario. Criterion(9)reflects this local planning work. LCDC Order 001887 Page 13 of 15 Criterion(9) also reflect local plan policies that address pollution, greenhouse gases, and energy, as shown in the examples listed below. Metro Regional Transportation Plan,Objective 6.5 "Reduce transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions." Metro Regional Framework Plan,Chapter 2 Transportation, Goal 4: Emphasize Effective and Efficient Management of the Transportation System "Existing and future multi-modal transportation infrastructure and services are well-managed to... address air quality and greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals." Portland 2035 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 4.69 Reduce carbon emissions "Encourage a development pattern that minimizes carbon emissions from building and transportation energy use." Tigard 2027, Goal 13.1, Policy 1 "promote the reduction of energy consumption associated with vehicle miles travelled through... public transit that is reliable, connected, and efficient" Tualatin Development Code, Chapter 11: Transportation, Section 11.610, Goal 6, Objective(d) "Consider air quality effects of potential transportation solutions." Criterion (10) Consider a light rail route connecting Portland's Central City with Southwest Portland neighborhoods along or near the Barbur Boulevard corridor. Rationale: Criterion(10)reflects local plan policies in the Barbur Concept Plan adopted by the Portland City Council in 2013. The plan identifies how investment in transit along Barbur Boulevard would achieve community aspirations for a more walkable, vibrant Barbur Boulevard. The plan classifies Barbur Boulevard as a Major Transit Priority Street and identifies locations for transit stops. Criterion (11) Consider a light rail route in Tualatin within an area identified as a Transit Ready Place, and in Tigard within an area identified in Tigard's High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan that maintains Downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus, and that does not cause light rail related park-and-ride activity to dominate the downtown area. Rationale: The commission received testimony from the City of Tigard requesting that the phrase "maintains Downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus"be added to this criterion, and rearranging the order of elements of the criterion to accommodate the addition. The commission received oral testimony from TriMet and Metro supporting the request. The department also supported the request. The commission determined that the addition improved criterion(11)because it added an important policy from the Tigard High Capacity Land Use Plan. The commission therefore approved the request. LCDC Order 001887 Page 14 of 15 Criterion(11), as approved by the commission, reflects policies in local plans. Tualatin adopted the Linking Tualatin Plan, which identifies seven "Transit Ready Places." Tigard adopted the Tigard High Capacity Transit and Land Use Plan, which identifies Downtown Tigard as an area with current conditions ready for high capacity transit. Two comprehensive plan policies addressing transit in Downtown Tigard are listed below. Tigard 2027, Goal 15.1, Policy 2. "The downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus transit service and supporting land uses." Tigard 2027, Goal 15.1, Policy 3 "The City, in conjunction with TriMet, shall plan for and manage transit user parking to ensure the downtown is not dominated by 'park and ride' activity." Criterion (12) If future phases or extensions are proposed, then consider light rail routes as identified in applicable plans and policies of affected local governments in effect at that time. Rationale: HB 3202 defines "Project"broadly, and would allow the Metro Council to adopt land use final orders for future phases of the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project: HB 3202, Section 1, Subsection(14) "`Project' means the portion of the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project within Metro's urban growth boundary. `Project' includes: ... "(b)All phases and extensions of the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project" The overall Southwest Corridor Plan(as distinct from the current MAX light rail project) considers a broader corridor that includes additional cities(Durham, King City and Sherwood). If future extensions are proposed, there may be specific geographic policies that would be applicable to that extension. Those policies may not be captured in criteria(10)and(11)because these criteria are based on the light rail routes currently under consideration in Portland,Tigard and Tualatin. This additional criterion reasonably reflects the relevant statewide land use planning goals and plan policies because it would apply the relevant plans and policies at the time of a future extension. Criterion (13) Identify the major elements of the Project improvements; however, the Land Use Final Order and findings addressing these criteria need not identify all of the ancillary facilities as defined in House Bill 3202 enacted by the Oregon State Legislature in 2017. Rationale: Criterion(13)reasonably reflects the relevant statewide land use planning goals and plan policies because the statewide goals and local policies are not intended to make every local decision a land use decision. Many of the items listed in the definition of"ancillary facilities" could be designed and constructed without a land use action by the local government. The intent of HB 3202 is to provide a regional process for the land use decision on the overall alignment, LCDC Order 001887 Page 15 of 15 not to apply land use decision making processes to minor elements that would not otherwise require land use approval. ORDER OF THE COMMISSION The criteria in Attachment A are hereby adopted. DATED THIS 2nd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017. FOR THE COMMISSION: Jim Rue,Direeto Department of Land Conservation and Development You may be entitled to judicial review of this order. Judicial review may be obtained by filing a petition for review with the State Court Administrator within seven days from the service of this order. Judicial review is pursuant to Section 5 of HB 3202. Attachments: Attachment A: Criteria for a Land Use Final Order Attachment B: House Bill 3202 (2017) LCDC Order 001887 Page 1 of 3 Attachment A Criteria for a Land Use Final Order to be used by the Metro Council in Making Decisions on the Project Improvements for the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project Definitions: The definitions in Section 1 of House Bill 3202 enacted by the Oregon State Legislature in 2017 apply within these criteria. When adopting a Land Use Final Order for the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project, the Metro Council shall: (1) Coordinate with and provide an opportunity for TriMet, the Oregon Department of Transportation and the affected local governments to submit testimony on the light rail route, light rail stations,park-and-ride lots, vehicle maintenance facilities, and the highway improvements, including their locations,proposed to be included in the Southwest Corridor MAX Light Rail Project(Project). (2) Hold a public hearing to provide an opportunity for the public to submit testimony on the light rail and highway improvements, including their locations,proposed to be included in the Project. (3) Identify economic, social,urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed-use centers. Identify measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. (NEPA), or, if reasonable and necessary,by affected local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. (A) Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing (1) the need for light rail proximity and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancing transit ridership; (2) the likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities,to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety; and (3) the need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts, and centers from identified adverse impacts. LCDC Order 001887 Page 2 of 3 Attachment A (B) Provide for highway improvements, including their locations,balancing the need to improve the highway system with the need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts, and centers from the identified adverse impacts. (4) Identify adverse noise impacts and identify measures to reduce noise impacts that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary,by affected local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. (5) Identify Project improvements in areas subject to natural hazards(including landslide areas, areas of severe erosion potential, areas subject to earthquake damage and lands within the 100-year floodplain) and demonstrate that adverse impacts to persons or property can be reduced or mitigated through design or construction techniques that could be imposed during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary,by local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. (6) Identify adverse impacts on significant fish and wildlife, scenic and open space,riparian, wetland, and park and recreational areas that are protected in acknowledged local comprehensive plans or functional plans and,where adverse impacts cannot practicably be avoided, encourage the conservation of natural resources by demonstrating that there are measures to reduce or mitigate impacts that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary,by local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. (7) Identify adverse impacts associated with stormwater runoff and demonstrate that there are measures to provide adequate stormwater drainage retention or removal and protect water quality that could be imposed as conditions of approval during processes required by NEPA or, if reasonable and necessary,by local governments during the local development approval and permitting processes. (8) Identify adverse impacts on significant historic and cultural resources protected in acknowledged comprehensive plans and, where adverse impacts cannot practicably be avoided, identify local, state or federal review processes that are available to address and to reduce adverse impacts to the affected resources. (9) Identify general or anticipated impacts on air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy usage from project improvements that would help meet state, regional, and local reduction goals. (10) Consider a light rail route connecting Portland's Central City with Southwest Portland neighborhoods along or near the Barbur Boulevard corridor. (11) Consider a light rail route in Tualatin within an area identified as a Transit Ready Place, and in Tigard within an area identified in Tigard's High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan LCDC Order 001887 Page 3 of 3 Attachment A that maintains downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus, and that does not cause light rail related park-and-ride activity to dominate the downtown area. (12) If future phases or extensions are proposed,then consider light rail routes as identified in applicable plans and policies of affected local governments in effect at that time. (13) Identify the major elements of the Project improvements; however, the Land Use Final Order and findings addressing these criteria need not identify all of the ancillary facilities as defined in House Bill 3202 enacted by the Oregon State Legislature in 2017. APPENDIX 3 Dowrtorrn Preferred Alternative: Steering ` °"'"",i Committee Recommendation --`M`!'$ '° • Marquam i Hill • . PORTLAND South Waterfront .....14Hamilton i 8EAVERTON 1 The =o Woods Hillsdale y Q - cz 0.112.4140,, Multnomah �,•�'Custer 7 z,� Village e�'' ' ,~ .19th Se!itivood ta J r r . e e , t a " 30th 5 r. Barbur TC a s # �:1"''"��Two options for ,' Crossroads further study i, s c g I' 53rd .' 68th�,,.� Tigard I Sy ti-ar,ia Triangle I Downtown Elmhurst ' ---- <[ Tigard'€ .� Hall 2, LAKE OSWEGO 5' \ Kruse "A4sr rdn BWay �,ti Bonita ,.• H Lake TIGARD a � Grove Upper Boones Light Rail Project Ferry \ ----- Alignment • Station / 0 Station with park and ride Briooeport / village Bridgeport Existing Transit •_•.. MAX Light Rail ILL-ill,,R[.., Z; •- •• WES Commuter Rail T U A L A T I N •- Portland Streetcar •- Portland Aerial Tram A. Downtown N 1 mile Tualatin APPENDIX 4 IITIGARD City of Tigard August 9, 2018 Re: Adoption of a SW Corridor Preferred Alternative Dear Fellow Members of the Southwest Corridor Steering Committee: On behalf of the City of Tigard,it is an honor to stand alongside you in support of the Southwest Corridor light rail project. As I cast my vote for the preferred alternative today,I also want to clarify Tigard's current position on the project. Although I represent my city on this committee, I am one of five voting members of the Tigard City Council and it is that council's approval,more than mine, which this project must secure. The project documentation we have before us does not yet resolve concerns that Tigard has raised through the environmental review and initial route proposal processes. Prior to the final Metro vote on the LUFO,Tigard will be participating in additional discussions to guide work plans and remedy these concerns. Presently,Tigard has questions about the project's compliance with LUFO Criteria Three and Eleven as adopted by LCDC under HB 3202. Criterion number three is about balancing economic and other factors when considering the siting of light rail facilities. Criterion number eleven states that the light rail route must maintain downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for all rail and bus facilities. Tigard also wishes to raise a concern about the completeness of the Proposed Recommendations of the LUFO Steering Committee. Specifically the mapping does not yet show highway improvements on Hall Boulevard, nor does it show city-owned properties in our downtown as potentially becoming part of the light rail project. Tigard wishes to preserve these concerns by identifying them today. In the spirit of collaboration that has brought us to this project milestone, I look forward to continued discussions and amendments toward a final LUFO application that meets the needs of all project partners. Respectfully yours, cd„ John L. Cook,Mayor City of Tigard cc: Shelby Rihala, City Attorney 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard, Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov APPENDIX 5 :1114 TIC;ARD City of Tigard July 30,2018 Chris Ford,Project Manager Metro 600 NE Grand Ave. Portland,OR 97232-2736 Re: City of Tigard Comment on the Southwest Corridor DEIS Dear Mr. Ford: Thank you for documenting the City of Tigards'comments on the recently published Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) for the Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project.You and your team are to be commended on producing such a comprehensive report and the City of Tigard,as a participating agency,values your management of the process. This letter supplements City of Tigard comments provided via the Metro-provided spreadsheet. The content of this letter highlights the city's most important impact and mitigation concerns,and in some cases,repeats what you will find in our spreadsheet comments. An overall category of city concern is the relative dearth of impact and mitigation description for the refinements that are proposed as part of the Initial Route Proposal. As there are several design refinements proposed for Section C (Refinements 4,5,and 6),the City of Tigard is especially sensitive to the fact that as yet we neither have useful information about the extent of the impacts nor their associated mitigation possibilities. If these refinements are carried forward as a Preferred Alternative,please be prepared for the city,along with our business partners and public,to closely monitor the discovered impacts and strongly advocate for appropriate mitigations for those impacts. Of particular note are the property and business impacts yet to be identified or studied. When combined with impacts to the dozens of businesses and hundreds of jobs(more than 500 by our read) described in the DEIS in locations outside the refinement areas,we are convinced that the project's economic impact on Tigard will be significant. We request that mitigation measures address not only the displacement and relocation of individual businesses,but also the economic impact on the city itself. As we have seen in previous light rail construction projects,businesses can and do relocate to strong and well-suited locations,but often, for a variety of reasons,outside of their original jurisdiction. The loss of employment and tax base within the City of Tigard must therefore be considered and mitigated. Tigard is primarily a residential city;the loss of industrial land and business has a disproportionately negative effect on Tigard's tax base. We do not agree,therefore,with the statement in section 4.3.2 that the"property 13125 SW Hall Blvd. • Tigard,Oregon 97223 • 503.639.4171 TTY Relay: 503.684.2772 • www.tigard-or.gov tax revenue impact(loss)would be negligible to the budget of each local jurisdiction"and ask that the FEIS methodology and impact analysis be constructed to assure us that the tax revenue loss to the City of Tigard is not understated. We also ask that in the Final Environmental Impact Study(FEIS),the project include a mitigation for the Minimum Operable Segment(MOS) to the Tigard Transit Center that does not impact traffic on Hall Boulevard or naturally occurring affordable housing on Ash Avenue. Both of these impacts are described in Alternatives Cl and C2, and C3 and C4 respectively. The City of Tigard asks that the project study an alternative that places a downtown station within downtown Tigard proper,crossing Hall Boulevard on structure and situating a station south and west of the existing railroad tracks. The city believes that such an option would show a net benefit on both transportation and economic measures and unlike Refinement 6,achieves consistency with the citys' goals and plans for downtown. In a full-build scenario,the City of Tigard requests mitigation for an undisclosed land use impact related to the location of the downtown-serving station described in Refinement 6. According to the DEIS, `Long-tear impacts can...occnr if the transportation improvements are not consistent with the,goals of existing plans and policies."(Section 4.2,page 9). The transportation improvements described by Refinement 6 are not supported by existing plans and policies_ The city anticipates that comprehensive plan policies and possibly zoning map and text changes will be desired to allow future land uses to complement the proposed transportation improvements—land uses that are prohibited under current regulations. This impact should be examined in the FEIS and the light rail project should include the cost of recommended comprehensive plan and community development code updates as mitigation for land use impacts. In either an MOS or full-build scenario,the City of Tigard is requesting TriMet sponsor a joint development project proposal under which private investment will create an economic and transit benefit for the region,along with a new source of operating revenue for TriMet. The city requests that the FEIS be scoped to include properties and impacts associated with the joint development proposal. This should include an expansion of the downtown Tigard Park and Ride parking structure from 300 spaces to 600 spaces,with the additional spaces designated to support the joint development project. FTA guidance states that,to the extent information about joint development is known and reasonably foreseen,the joint development impacts should be studied in the NEPA evaluation of the larger FTA-assisted project(i.e. the SWC Light Rail Project). Lastly,the city would like to make sure some high-level transportation concerns are on the record. Regarding roadway impacts,the city requests that several areas receive additional study,including Highway 99 around 68''',Hall Boulevard around Hunziker,and Upper Booties Ferry Road near 72'. Regarding active transportation impacts,the city requests that Station Area Access Improvement Options for Segment C (Figure A-32)are fully reviewed and updated in coordination with city staff to optimi?e access for pedestrians and cyclists to all Tigard stations,with special regard for improving active transportation access for Tigard's low and moderate-income residents. With regard to public transportation impacts,the city is extremely interested in understanding changes in the bus network that will accompany new light rail service,as these will impact the operating cost of bus service,connections for bus and WES passengers,and changes to bus traffic on city streets. Tigard requests that TriMet commence planning for bus routes,stops and layover facilities earlier than in past projects as all of these will factor into project-related street and intersection design decisions,as well as level-of-service impacts for Tigard transit users. As I have said, this letter is not an exhaustive list of City of Tigard concerns,but rather underscores our interest in some of the largest issues we face as the project moves into the FEIS and Project Development phases. Again, on behalf of the City of Tigard,please accept my congratulations on successfully reaching this key milestone in the Southwest Corridor planning process. Kind Regar Kenny Asher Community Development Director City of Tigard Cc: Mayor John Cook Marty Wine,City Manager Shelby Rihalla,City Attorney CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done z TIGARD § C'ID4E/3 Southwest Corridor Project 1.1.1,:Z a � A� Work Session v1w Presented to City Council I October 30, 2018 CITY OF TIGARD OAK ST Figure 1.10 a ��41, 2 =t. PALATINE ST PINE ST BARBUR BLVD UµwV """" 0,0E\ CAPITOL HSV JW Q SPRUCE ST ,,,:// ' ., . ' i*, - 1#1 i Pfl *7. / . = - sem aV ... ;;-.:1.1..-__ g st „+'P aL;Rla x ,a - - STfPHfNSONS- 0SXea� IFSSER W PV S�pPO tip "L `___�., -e„. 64. S < PAIL AY CT 1f ATLANTA ST -.- HAINES ST ,pt �r. 5. P. o BAYLOR ST b i1 GU NTHER LN iiiiii _ i 1r; 1 it ' ih_litt,' ,t4k b 1:.r.3 SOU'HVIFW ST �I F,- CLINTON ST a+ e C Southwest Corridor Land Use Final Order Boundary Map 0 250 500 feet n Recommendation of the LUFO Steering Committee 111 l! Boundaries Potential Light Rail Alignment and Stations tri ii.' Light Rail Route - Alignment P"� I•111 Light Rail Station Station Platform -III Park-and-Ride Lot Iv [' -�� Highway Improvement �\l 8/15/2018 CITY OF TIGARD Figure 1.11 PFAFFLF ST L 94 ,S`4' Al LAN TA ST O'C'S`C,N�V BAYLOR ST Q CLINTON ST 1.... DAPTMOUTH 5T 4 n �---- - -- - FL MH UP ST ST NfRMOS0 WAY c O tit FRANKLIN ST BEVELAND PD Q GONIAGA ST tn E.' ylts ^ BVHL .s. kF 0 R Np HAMPTON ST Southwest Corridor Land Use Final Order Boundary Map Recommendation of the LUFO Steering Committee o 250 soo feet fj 11 Boundaries Potential Light Rail Alignment and Stations A ir Light Rail Route Alignment r'41 111 Light Rail Station Station Platform nod Operations and Maintenance Facility Highway Improvement �+ CITY OF TIGARD Figure 1.12 z QPM,. GARD- NS 44 e a.� �P 'CO kNOLL pR •'t s c 0 47 kIA f.,,,,, 0 / • ,PSE '1ii 3'661.N.. Pf, 6 i'N.6\4.ikt'►tii i.' 1�1+►i.t \ %A11,,.S' 6 66 I \\ \ 6t6\x '..1 ‘ .I 611 . DNTikER AD eGRHHAM 51 .1. �~ t .. .. s L O ix� 4k 3P. v`StA Lo ' 9. %xk % OMARA ST \\ r \ a a o u 0 Southwest Corridor Land Use Final Order Boundary Map 0 250 500 feet Recommendation of the LUFO Steering Committee L1 [t Boundaries Potential Light Rail Alignment and Stations Ami Light Rail Route Alignment ri..41 Al Light Rail Station Station Platform ri RP Park-and-Ride Lot Existing Transit Is" Operations and Maintenance Facility ;,{: WES Commuter Rail R\i Mg Highway Improvement IL8/15/2018 .- = CI) CO= NINNik < / I C NJ — / (D .-, / ---.. ; "-- ,... A , i .. wr.A HiCULAR , '\-\ "' E N TRANCE / I CROSSING ACCESS WAY / S ''' ,.--. 414, N / N ".. NZ‘ Aer\/ \ ..• \ ,....er ( i f , /...T. \\ (111110 MAINTENANCE ' i (),Q FACILITY -7 11 cs, r \ \ OA, „,........ cl .111114 \ 1 , , „ 0 , / Li„x 1/4r C- % 1 CITY OF TIGARD Figure 1.13 \ a 54A T., JP J % r xi% CHERRY DR SANDBU RD ST IV #' TECH CENTER DR i O x 1 ' LANDMARK LN D 2 V �V, O AS c FA/vivo cnrrx on '' r 4, 04.(> # of gpRSLEY LN m c 5 r_.' ".•'-' Q r 3 NAME LOOP BON ITA RD F MARNCS 0 C LEISER LN R a Z 's ' 'L4 nd 3 a WEBBFR LN R u C m a aCONUTE ST 4. m Y O n i tt VIOLA ST HAN SEN 1N S 4. 0 Southwest Corridor Land Use Final Order Boundary Map I 0 250 500 feet Recommendation of the LUFO Steering Committee II Boundaries Potential Light Rail Alignment and Stations it irmi Light Rail Route Alignment r. Light Rail Station Station Platform r.4 Park-and-Ride Lot Existing Transit [e." WESCommuterRail a - ,i 8/15/2018 CITY OF TIGARD Figure 1.14 i d CARDINAL LN } 4 Gei, r C _ I a REDWOOD LM 4 A z o o W ASHFORD ST P KABLE EN LV9'tt ,EL i + c ++ j Ti ONNAFr ¢� a S{E ¢Ry �E O0 ¢E 1 "0 J¢ - 0 SEVILLE AVE BOND ST C 1 p+ A AIDER STn + ,_ OL sy.th : 'ry, S NI' JE �P 1 DVgy4� �a t PO �� 1i fro yn -.--- Southwest Corridor Land Use Final Order Boundary Map F I 0 250 500feet Recommendation of the LUFO Steering Committee i1 II Boundaries Potential Light Rail Alignment and Stations iiia /:IM Light Rail Route — Alignment .':a Light Rail Station f' Station Platform r Park-and-Ride Lot Existing Transit [4, I WES Commuter Rall 1.i II 8/15/20 18 CITY OF TIGARD Figure 1.15 ,� �p P� / y4 C E�'EpP 1:f F C TJT .-x IC SEP JQ a' ! t , ROSEWOOD ST AFTON LN 04,4,,,,444 no BRADBURY OT 4 4 C h Q r FINDLAY RD . JW RIV ENDrIL OR P v Al;') 4.C 0 c E LOWER BOONES FERRY RD N ..., tACt 1,11:';# 4. y, k „ :'-' r BRIO6EPORT° tp,P 0 Southwest Corridor Land Use Final Order Boundary Map I 0 250 500 feet n Recommendation of the[UFO Steering Committee SA lI Boundaries Potential Light Rail Alignment and Stations ill .r Light Rail Route - Alignment p,, • Light Rail Station NM Station Platform % lira Park-and-Ride lot Existing Transit [4, --f"--.--f"--.-.f + WES Commuter Rail ii 14 8/1512018 ( ( ) ( , i ) LAND USE FINAL ORDER "equivalent in spirit and in substance to the land use procedures that otherwise would be applicable ." CITY OF TIGARD 1. Coordinate and include 7. Identify and mitigate 2. Hold a public hearing stormwater impacts 3. Balance and mitigate 8. Identify and reduce impacts social, urban form, to historic and cultural economic, traffic and resources safety impacts 9. Identify impacts on air 4. Identify and mitigate quality noise impacts 10. Connect Barbur Blvd 5. Identify and mitigate neighborhoods natural hazard risks 11. Maintain downtown Tigard 6. Identify and mitigate as transit center natural resource 12. Use then-current land use impacts plans in future phases 13. Only major elements CITY OF TIGARD Criteria 11: Consider a light rail route in Tualatin within an area identified as a Transit Ready Place, and in Tigard within an area identified in Tigard's High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan that maintains downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus, and that does not cause light rail related park-and-ride activity to dominate the downtown area. CITY OF TIGARD Criteria 3: Identify economic, social, urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed use centers. Identify measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that could be imposed as conditions of approval... Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing: • The need for light rail proximity and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancing transit ridership • The likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities, to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety; and • The need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts and centers from identified adverse impacts C O 1 TIGARD Criterion 11: Dave Roth, Senior Transportation Planner Criterion 3: Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner (Economic Impacts): Dylan Dekay-Bemis, Economic Development Coordinator (Urban Form Impacts): Susan Shanks, Senior Planner (Traffic & Safety): Tegan Enloe, Senior Project Engineer ( ' 1 T Y ( ) 1i , '1 1 ( ; \ R 1) .... ...J 4.... :- ' CA 4.' G - •C` 40 , ..... \ V. t 0 el' s. t• • ...--e . O., . .,,,f'''''' • 4, p / , n ....1 ({:e' 1, 61, le .,. r,,, "r . Si. 9, /1 , 4, 0 41 <",, "0 s, 0, 1 00, 144,... c., 0 t C\ ... , . , 'A TIGARD , PINS* ' , Dog Park, r- Faun() ..... ' e Creek Park ..r. ••;,. i . i. , .. CITY 0 F TIGARD \H\ „ '‘2\ fr4 4 4. t P TfGARD oise crreLi Deg Park Canna c Creek Park C I '1' l- O I ; TIGARD `� 4 tea.... Qq i _y Z As :.0. n o, l.././...,:44 SIr 9 yA9 5 f,>tJ Fs 'tr_: RC) Pose IT NALt. Deg Park F N e k P .. Creek Park 1y r.t p T.go,d CITY O I ; 'I' I G A R D Criteria 3: Identify economic, social, urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed use centers. Identify measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that could be imposed as conditions of approval... Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing: • The need for light rail proximity and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancing transit ridership • The likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities, to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety; and • The need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts and centers from identified adverse impacts CITY OF TIGARD �b m. , n „ `f „, 4,44 ''r ,4 6$thSt tion ;iw `�T� a � t . �*� a^ r' m�= t _4: ,-ri' 'lc �kaS 'ti' � �r � . y mK ', � �.r y�wzA" �n"^.�r , .j.,.;.4 wt 4'4... a ",�^L +..''f ,y1 .�?� ,�!« - ; / ' �° ". 4r, x. . t� . •xw"""gx t V" . e"blxi'P- , ,-- xar 3'"'. f 3vr ymm ° , _ s '-''''.1 El Station YwTtiom- ... , 4:''11.1'1 y, ,„ .:..,,,.,,,; ..i.:.,:. r 4 3 , F '',�., ' ''' ,",,r,',:, }x"�.r yy fa� ,� td.d �" t" w�ti,,,-,„..7.,,, d... ,,, w,.;,,,- � r9 ,dYa � n.�"eSJ- t �r 4 A' a + .. • q '-!,; ? 4 -Q .rft + .„•,...'• L. Mn 1 A f, 1,i" , ;cfis y 4 ,.Ait i ' '4, ai , ,, ,-.«ms tstation # ' Bonia t. � „ . . . �,a ;04,1 to ill.: ,�- M w s ppe Bo.ne F r legend fr ; St•. tion,- . Preferred Alternative Stations Preferred Alternative(PA) . � �, ,. . Industrial Zones ' ' r r �,O&M Facility �. � F ' w 0 ,. Bridgeport Station "' CITY O 1'' T I G ;A R I) Summary of Economic Impacts — Industrial Land Segment Businesses Employees Acres Downtown / Hunziker Core 14 488 22.7 O&M Facility 3 61 16. 1 South of Downtown 4 45 3.5 Total 21 594 42.3 4.7% of industrial 7% of industrial 5.4% of industrial firms in Tigard employees in Tigard land inventory C I T Y 0 F 'I' I G A R I) Industrial Land = 785 acres . . ..,:,...1.. 7:7 �.. . f OOPRw)1,,,,, w4r ,•,,r ..w rJ,y.•r r.T. .,, Ugend mr,..r,-., C. 7pvc City Bcu,ary ... ,µ. ri Inaanw Zcres sy ........ ^.t e., + • ri� M / n., ti { my ,q • a vx ., own ry n... ii,' .... .w. �... .rvr�, ♦ », wr9.wQ .r,... .....n. r ''z CITY O F TIGARD Tigard's 2011 Economic Opportunities Analysis determined an Efficient Land Need Scenario for industrial lands: • - . , 0' 6 p A, Air Inventory is deficient in vacant and redevelopable industrial-zoned land. .. ,"c , ..Vim; Comp Plan policies focus on efficient 1. —, development, redevelopment and utilization of its existing vacant and ' underutilized industrial lands. -° ' ;u +p 4 ,,k it iRssY 1 Industrial Zones ° .. Vt, . i .Ar CITY OF TIG A RD Hunziker Core Infrastructure Strategy _ * :41' l' -.lit - -. ; 4.4-, 4, rt+:: j \111.''''" Nit tia e /sr f, ,, fes,/ 4." :. _:A-#t , . t. .t, .n „ , V N /R� # ifr a r ', . € �. r i41 M 'Lexie t.tr. ' , irk. t NK rt..p .lki,.tni»uplb±n. ! 1rt :v# '. .7 ♦RttYrk .. r 5:I 4 „F, 4 `4 . n„ Wall Street y i .n< ik �,. Improvement \ t,-tum Project •• ..�� ,.., 4 '.0......1/4.4.4 Ia,tootot.aia • ,r Ropavcd hoods / p.;e. l,r ,..xl .sdoniata;.rn tarc.�mtt r . 4 - ./ Ill 114 i 1 ILI Fields►ropeny Site Specitx Mtra.r.rc-4:i F•isMf/1110 - ''_' i#, r` +°,..♦ Tigard.Oregon + * i ... CITY OF TIGARD Hunziker Core Infrastructure Strategy i V, 94, - - - ' i ♦' � r F if g4 . a { -,� 41 A .1117f,4.-.,, 111!I i1a .{ #- ,tt u tk "4"...."'..?1 16-acre , i TM , O&M Facility . ii. r . ,.. _ -81. i, .# .. ,.. Iwo.IOA,reitl 4•441.1444 bup4po 044444 is Mk Hatk=sa4ti4Y1 Nr+ - . \\, .444.44.4...:. - Proposc4 ttoad.. *.3',` °! 11,X..vast krl44saia6.c 1 IX e.ptt e, . III • a 114 ; \.,.,. MK‘,L.a4at=rac u '1 R -. eids P Irty.SRC Sp-N►4c. tnhastrumae F n_ncc Pa I . ., Tigard,Oregon ! ''•` ' - CITY OF TIG ARD Hunziker Industrial Core: ,,,,.. .. Infrastructure for Employment Lands Hunirker Industnal Core ,,..., .- •,. ::: :, ,, ,r , , . .. , . ,,,7 •,. - ..., .... - 1‘, • — ' - ':tie, 16-acre ,, , , , 111.acre Trammell Crow Property O&M facility (. ' I/ . Proposed Development : 225,000 square feet . Estimated 522 milloon investment Rail Switchme , Yard '',,,,; • . , ' . ...-...:,,,,,,--...... Wall Street Infrastructure Road 5 3,803.000 Water 5 660,000 Storm 5 767,825 '''''' Sewer 5 291.950 TOTAL$5.5 million ' CITY O F 'I' I ( ; R. I) Criteria 3: Identify economic, social, urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed use centers. Identify measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that could be imposed as conditions of approval... Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing: e nic eu jor rigrit rail proximity and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancina transit ridership • The likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities, to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety; and • The need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts and centers from identified adverse impacts A AA ArACAMAAAAA i MA ,, . Ar, , rA A‘ AA" ; ; -', Avelvair ms - 4 AA„.:_• :..;a „.„..-;,',':'ED :, :,,: ,..,e3 "%':..-'-':::::.:1':.El •,. WI IIIP 6, ir ,,,„0 .6 i 1 Is r.e ‘; 1, ; 1 A ArArAVA Ar4 4,* ,.7 .i.-A Ar . AA" -:, * r* *Ap , A , $ Ar 1 A, AA.r.,,,,'",A,...' ,,,, „ 4,. ...:,''-:':: -ID ._ — _,- -a 111 , „„...... * ' A A A ,.. 1 ' ,' '.* ''' ',4„. ,. to A. ,0A,,,,,,,,o' 4,,,, * :'".„ cg 1 „t 1,6, ' , ''', - 4' ,t "A ;;',.+:1,*r'.'..-A a , e 4 A all”' Witil !A , , ,.., . . 1. ,..,,...„,..,/ 4 0. IP ...,. , , 1 „,,,,,,,, ...„ ..., „.8c6ilAtv*M$ . A" * a.%4A0APY A e.rr: , 0 CS,WrINAll ArS : 13 ,,,: -,-,..:113 „.,...,- t TO *. 7 it.,,4 AAAA1A,Aqi PAS , "444•14 MS 4.4 $4, —a'r —_ ,A M$ „ f, piii • • - * * * i+ A 011 1.100i *'`'. soaroad pasodoid stmioid waun) sD,31oid paoldwco -p.Akunsolumo8 anieum/pados{aroal ley lemakaa.,kiecon ki pa4sut JO A.,1 pawn)suafoxf sasearways motaq dam ar4138**114,*A.411.1Eldie....**NLOW),34114.3)4(.10 Na..10j&VIVI}pue SIMI al.f:pamudde 5.1400,pegu gaw;..; ,9 A tj un.laJo pal AL1 deri bon v amlnj I luasaad lsed qemauas uegin ialuaD 43 CIIIVD II JO Ail D CITY OF TIGARD ,'„tort/4lap by}iFard br anon (j y G, City Center Urban Renewal:Past,Present&Future ?t++ M 2036 rryprd voters approved the toots and furdtng for the CayCenterUrban Renewal Plan.t he interactive map bNew bw showcases projects funded by or Inspired by urban renal that have helped revitalize Downtown Tigard. Completed Projects Current Projects Proposed Projects ��, zoom to• „ a }I M a Aa1°.0 77:ltr1.. - T 1 g,11teWr1♦N +' SW lb !W HA ty(fR St � 1 � it r , t 1 r ,�� E f� .* e�L+ SW Plh Aa 41 L L l h I �1 L n Q+ IP ftp ',.ft 5,0N SW t4tN tuN 3! - x r, r e. r w g r' © ::.. r a t..- — A(IOW 1]SW MA1HSRINt t' ,s5,1,01.•4Lr'R oAk tybV JN !1 ye,+Il✓ sIY + Ml•4 > ” �t sW e.t,MrURs]3i: � a ✓ a w © Er + . M tpY ct AN k +0"'RM9SOWAY � b � Na, x �N S m p t`,4 4(:Ry(.4fk7 1 Ntunr FL•tw.wAY(►wlrt w G i i t !W alVrt AN4 ort w - 9W,ON JA CA Br r 1i4IiN a p MC'N r�tEN - "..° x �N Nri e' S • 3W VAMP tONS1 of ^ ii 11• 10 i 1•,r 5 Ac ., T4` le 9W YARN$51 ry s 3 ARM IT a4 y M Ti gardV Y ` .4t, a SW .,. ,,,o, 2t-tf,Cy V - A M W FIR 3 9 x ? ` as a v A0A 'A®h • �" 4 9i! 9i x s db i� p �`� lW QMARA St �., i C et0,- 1•.P q*tir SO vss-'. bM» a J SW SAM% V, !w Epwawocra s 1 R .4 l''''' 1 r+ +YW r a C n ',y x lis vmvwo 004 s a - v a ; xfi.0.41 MA Y o , K fr a,�t' tl pit,fi1 * o- ,i. ';',,,,,,'o 15 6WM9n Mfi M1 tti*NV t- Ph d 0 N04 WAV;M4 Y S i.. i Q* s X9tltiX VJVPHJ. O kr), "4. na. o,,dIWW 51N 4Q 41* 5 C A ir*i*i...a {0001,:04 %J ra ri 48 a E Pr#A ii; 00 J Cyy X,N d �r I S cd f ' iy., i+v 1 1 '4. eT " ,,.no. t1'�r ; 'Jyy$kr,l qX� *.F03Nl+ ' -Stb• ,. n,.F fi+ ..J+: r.. s 0s:10.4:0<“1.0 N 40% ".. 4S W:,y NF'i"b Mffi r t5 Mp17WS "', , sa © © o or .0 ,,, t5 VI ar � z r K .F t t 4*0"AMI,i,S. z ' 1'tri,t„NS a fnr 4d T 01 Ni$ Wt CM11 a { Pj" .d� t * + YiN+�w` "C..e,: CITY OF TIGARD Criteria 3: Identify economic, social, urban form, safety and traffic impacts in affected residential neighborhoods, commercial districts, industrial districts, and mixed use centers. Identify measures that could increase beneficial impacts or reduce adverse impacts, and that could be imposed as conditions of approval... Provide for a light rail route, stations, lots and maintenance facilities, including their locations, balancing: • The need for light rail proximity and service to present or planned residential, employment and recreational areas that are capable of enhancing transit ridership • The likely contribution of light rail proximity and service to improved economic opportunities, to development of an efficient and compact urban form, and to improved safety; and • The need to protect affected neighborhoods, districts and centers from identified adverse impacts CITY (JF "l' I G A RD ii Potential Beneficial Impacts: Improved operations with the addition of traffic signals : at: • SW 65th Ave/SW Haines .'- St `` a; a is t �: b ), • SW Hall Blvd/SW Commercial St 1 , ,k. . . Potential for less vehicle trips on the network " ,,-''' , * n„, / , Pte' ,, ,r'- 4, / , _ .,. /2/ ,, , ,, , CITY OF TIGARD Potential Adverse Impacts: N P i:: Need to better understand °r y° { pedestrian and bicycle r YP H art, access to planned station at ,ti / .....,.: "§; �' G.,Vin. Pacific Hwy and SW 68th Pkwy. i o o x ' ij , /-,A CITY OF TIGARD Potential Adverse Impacts: Both the WES and proposed LRT tracks will be in very ,.„ o Kaez • Wetland close proximity. This can o �_•, create issues when both trains cross at once. • • mti S`A 0 • 0 Jim Griffith Memorial Skate Park Potso Dog Park CITY OF TIGARD Potential Adverse Impacts: The proposed alignment :..„ crosses both 72nd Ave and LT I Carman Dr in close oil ii,. • proximity in an area that . - . experiences high levels of , existing and projected ., 1 ' . .. future congestion. kii Arrgtery .. -0a,,:arr!._ ,".• ?,. •C'‘," ", 0, Elementary At'fy • ,-, C x tt St CITY OF TIGARD LUFO Criterion 3 Balancing of TRAFFIC &SAFETY impacts MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH Tigard Comp Plan Policy Goal 12.1, Policy 1 The City shall plan for a transportation system that meets current community needs and anticipated growth and development Goal 12.1, Policy 3 The City shall maintain and enhance transportation functionality by emphasizing multi-modal travel options for all types of land uses Goal 12.1, Policy 4 The City shall promote land uses and transportation investments that promote balanced transportation options. Goal 12.1, Policy 9 The City shall coordinate with private and public developers to provide access via a safe, efficient, and balanced transportation system. Goal 12.2, Policy The City shall strive to increase non-single occupant vehicle mode shares 10 through vehicle trip reduction strategies, such as those outlined in the Regional Transportation Plan. Goal 12.2, Policy The City shall design the transportation system to provide connectivity 11 between Metro designated centers, corridors, employment and industrial areas. Goal 12.3, Policy 2 The City shall engage with regional partners to support development of High Capacity Transit serving the Tigard. Goal 12.4, Policy 2 The City shall coordinate with appropriate agencies to provide safe, secure, connected, and desirable pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit facilities. AN MOU COULD HELP SATISFY THIS CRITERION CITY OF TIGARD LUFO Criterion 3 Balancing of TRAFFIC & SAFETY impacts MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH Tigard Comp Goal 12.4, Policy 6 I he City shall include safety mitigation as a priority criterion in making Plan Policy transportation investments. Goal 12.5, Policy 1 The City shall coordinate and cooperate with adjacent agencies and service providers—including Metro,TriMet, ODOT, Washington County, and neighboring cities—when appropriate,to develop transportation projects which benefit the region as a whole, in addition to the City of Tigard .Jodi 12.5, Policy The City shall coordinate with TriMet, and/or any other transit providers serving Tigard,to improve transit service to, from, through, and within Tigard. Goal 12.6, Policy The City shall seek opportunities for transportation investments that support transportation goals of efficiency, multi-modal access, and safety AN MOU COULD HELP SATISFY THIS CRITERION CITY OF TIGARD LUFO Criterion 3 Balancing of URBAN FORM impacts MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH Tigard Comp Plan Policy Goal 2.1, Policy 5 The City promote intense urban level development in Metro-designateu Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial areas. Goal 9.1, Policy 5 The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial land' Goal 9.1, Policy 6 The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro-designated Employment and Industrial Areas. Goal 9.3, Policy 1 The City shall focus a significant portion of future employment growth and high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center; Regional Center(Washington Square); High Capacity Transit Corridor (Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. Goal 14.3, Policy 1 The City shall support regional and state growth management decisions, while promoting policy that supports cities as the best building blocks of an efficient, stable, and compact urban region. Goal 15.1 The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live, work, play, and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard. City Center Urban Goal 2 Capitalize on Commuter i..... . no Creek as catalysts for future Renewal Plan Policy investment and development AN MOU COULD HELP SATISFY THIS CRITERION CITY OF TIGARD LU FO Criterion 3 Balancing of ECONOMIC impacts MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH Tigard Comp Plan Policy Goal 2.1, Policy 5. fhe City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro- designated Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial are,,: Goal 2.1, Police The City shall require new development, including public infrastructure, to 23. minimize conflicts by addressing the need for compatibility between it and adjacent existing and future land uses. Goal 9.1, Policy 5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands. Goal 9.1, Policy 6. The City shall promote actions that result in greater, more efficient, utilization of its Metro-designated Employment and Industrial Areas. Goal 9.1, Policy 9 The City shall strongly represent its interests at the regional, state, and federal levels to acquire transportation funding, including truck and rail freight movement needed to support existing business activity, attract new business, and improve general transportation mobility throughout the community. Goal 9.1, Policy The City shall strongly support, as essential to the region's economic future, 10. the development of efficient regional multi-modal transportation systems throughout the Portland Metropolitan area. goal 9.1, Policy ; ne City shall develop industry clusters by encouraging the retention, 11. expansion, and recruitment of industries that already have a presence in Tigard. AN MOU COULD HELP SATISFY THIS CRITERION CITY OF TIGARD LUFO Criterion 3 Balancing of ECONOMIC impacts MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH Tigard Comp Goal 9.3, Policy 1. The City shall focu gnificant portion of future employment growth and Plan Policy high-density housing development in its Metro-designated Town Center; Regional Center(Washington Square); High Capacity Transit Corridor(Hwy 99W); and the Tigard Triangle. Goal 12.1, Polity i. The City shall plan for a transportation system that meets current community needs and anticipated growth and development. Goal 12.2, Policy 2. The City shall manage the transportation system to support desired economic development activities. Goal 12.2, Policy 11. The City shall design the transportation system to provide connectivity between Metro designated centers,corridors,employment and industrial areas. City Center Goal 2, Objective 2A. Support the development of transit-oriented residential,commercial, Urban Renewal employment and recreation uses in the Central Business District that will Plan benefit from and support commuter rail. Tigard Triangle Goal 2. Provide a safe and effective multimodal transportation network that provides Urban Renewal access to,from, and within the Area and supports mixed use and pedestrian- Plan oriented development. AN MOU COULD HELP SATISFY THIS CRITERION CITY OF TIGARD LU FO Criterion 11 Maintain Downtown Tigard as the city's primary transit center for rail and bus MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH Tigard Comp Plan Policy Goal 15." Downtown shall be Tigard's primary transit center for rail and bus service AN MOU COULD HELP SATISFY THIS CRITERION ITY OF TIGARD Draft MOU with TriMet For council consideration on 11/13 Number of stations and locations Hall Boulevard redesign (at downtown station location) ► Shared use agreement for downtown parking structure Future discussion on design and location of downtown station in an "MOS" scenario ► Cooperation on an Ash Avenue crossing CITY OF TIGARD Draft MOU with TriMet For council consideration on 11/13 Study and cooperation on active transportation connection between Triangle and downtown Cooperation to preserve and develop affordable housing Future agreement for scoping and budgeting city staffing on the project CITY OF TIGARD Resolution Options for Council For Council consideration on 11/13 Resolution to support Resolution to oppose Resolution to request Metro remand TriMet's application LITY OF TIGARD LUFO Amendment Process from House Bill 3202 If the Project Steering Committee determines to site an improvement outside the locations established in the LUFO (requires NEPA clearance to do this) If after the FTA grant is awarded, the Steering Committee chooses to drop elements due to insufficient funds The LUFO will be made consistent with the FFGA CITY C) F 1' I C3 i'\_ R ID •,,,,,-. ,. ... . 'i''' .* 1.,','.*,;, ,,,',', •:','''•,r,' ‘'' . -' :'`.''''',?',,-0 . •'ri .,-,-tt;it.,"7„..; f •-sl'ffi-:,,,..- -,,,, ,:::•-• . '..ir.1.iri iit" ..H...,,11).,A '' • f : —- 1,,,i '''' '.- ', ,. '.. 4' ,,- Alf •'''if- 10K'ir;;".'!'.011 .-:..i . ' ;..-,:.fr,..-—.,..'_, ; — ,.*. . ti -,'..-..-0•0).41t7.- 1 ig ',:i i _ ' . .,,, $), I 1 '',. i I ..4) .1't-..,_--.:-- - ' .;;Ii•',4-; t t,!‘ -7 , '''' A:.''' -.1 1 1. ,1, f Os' i, '.\ •;.'./.'.',4....., Amlimiger Ai. _ :1,.....ii, . ,.3.1),,.., , ..... . , - - ... It. ' ' .4 4 4,“ ..... • , 17 MAX . .... ... -- ., ... ... . -- ,:-- ...._ ..__ .... .._......... ..._____ ... .________ .,. .. . . ,,,... ,... _... ,... , -, . . . Input from Council President Jason Snider Selection Process for Appointed City Councilor in 2019 SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR Process Overview: l/. �li S ' G ATE OF MEETING) - 12/3 - Open process and notify community through broad and frequent communication - 12/27 at noon — Deadline for candidates to submit completed applications - 12/27 by 6pm — Staff provide copies of all materials to 2019 council members - 1/8 Business Meeting— Council deliberates and identifies 3-4 finalists - 1/9-1/14 — Mayor/City Manager conduct reference checks on finalists - 1/10— Each council member provides the City Manager one question for the 1/15 interviews City Manager will compile onto one interview sheet - 1/15 Council conducts 30 minute interviews with each finalist, discusses reference check findings, and selects final candidate Application Details: - Please attach a comprehensive and up-to-date resume that includes professional work experience, civic involvement, and volunteer activities. - Please provide the names, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses of three professional references that can speak to your abilities to effectively i) analyze data, ii) make complex decisions, and iii) communicate well in high-stress situations. Screening Essay Questions: 1. Please describe how you would complement the diversity of thought and perspectives of the newly formed 2019 Tigard City Council? Please support your responses with specific examples and evidence. (max 500 words) 2. Most would agree that Measures 5 and 50 (from the 1990s) are causing many unintended consequences in Oregon. From your perspective, what are the current impacts of Measures 5 and 50, what actions would you recommend to the state legislature to correct the problems, and what is your rationale for each recommendation? (max 750 words) January 15th Interview Structure: - 5 minutes for follow-up on submitted answers and resume - 5 minutes for each council member to ask one question (20 minutes total) - 5 minutes for the candidate to ask the council questions