The URL can be used to link to this page

City Council Packet - 06/08/2021 III " City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting —Agenda TIGARD c TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD &TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE AND TIME: June 8,2021 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session 7:00 p.m. Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: Remote participation only. See PUBLIC NOTICE below. PUBLIC NOTICE: In accordance with the City of Tigard's Emergency Declaration related to COVID-19 and Oregon House Bill 4212, this will be a virtual meeting where Council and staff will participate remotely. There will be no in-person public testimony during this meeting. How to comment: •Written public comment may be submitted electronically at www.tigard-or.gov/Comments. All comments must be submitted before noon on the day of the meeting. •If you prefer to call in,please call 503-966-4101 when instructed to be placed in the queue. We ask that you plan on limiting your testimony to three minutes. SEE ATTACHED AGENDA VIEW LIVESTREAM ONLINE: http://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/council meeting.php CABLE VIEWERS: City Council business meetings may be shown live on Channel 28. The meeting will be rebroadcast at the following times on Channel 28: Thursday 6:00 p.m. Sunday 11:00 a.m. Friday 10:00 p.m. Monday 6:00 a.m. " City of Tigard Tigard Business Meeting —Agenda TIGARD TIGARD CITY COUNCIL, LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD & TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DATE AND TIME: June 8, 2021 - 6:30 p.m. Study Session and 7:00 Business Meeting MEETING LOCATION: Remote participation only. 6:30 PM •STUDY SESSION A. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE USE OF GAS POWERED LEAF BLOWERS 6:30 p.m. estimated time B. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 6:50 p.m. estimated time 7:00 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Pledge of Allegiance D. Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items 2. PUBLIC COMMENT A. Follow-up to Previous Public Comment B. Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce C. Public Comment—Written D. Public Comment—Phone-In 3. CONSENT AGENDA: (Local Contract Review Board) The Consent Agenda is used for routine items including council meeting minutes and approval of contracts or intergovernmental agreements. Information on each item is available on the city's website in the packet for this meeting. These items may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Council members may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. A. LOCAL CONTRACT REVIEW BOARD: CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR PAVEMENT REHABILITATION •Consent Agenda-Items Removed for Separate Discussion:Any items requested to be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will be considered immediately after the Council/Town Center Development Agency has voted on those items which do not need discussion. 4. APPOINT AISHIKI NAG TO YOUTH CITY COUNCILOR POSITION EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2021 7:05 p.m. estimated time 5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDULE FOR FY 2021-22 7:10 p.m. estimated time 6. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF TIGARD PROVIDES SERICES QUALIFYING FOR STATE SHARED REVENUES 7:20 p.m. estimated time 7. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUE SHARING 7:25 p.m. estimated time 8. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE BUDGET,MAKING APPROPRIATIONS,DECLARING THE AD VALOREM TAX LEVY AND CLASSIFYING THE LEVY AS PROVIDED 7:30 p.m. estimated time 9. TCDA PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE FY 2022 BUDGET WITH ADJUSTMENTS,MAKE APPROPRIATIONS,IMPOSE AND CATEGORIZE TAXES 7:45 p.m. estimated time 10. RECEIVE FINAL BRIEFING ON CONCEPT PLAN FOR RIVER TERRACE 7:55 p.m. estimated time 11. NON-AGENDA ITEMS 12. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 13. 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. 14. ADJOURNMENT 9:00 p.m. estimated time AIS-4646 A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes):20 Minutes Agenda Title: Discussion Regarding the Use of Gas Powered Leaf Blowers Prepared For: Kathy Nyland, City Management Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Mtg- Study Sess. Public Hearing: No Publication Date: Information ISSUE Over the years, community members have contacted the City of Tigard about this topic. In 2020 the city council received two requests to ban the use of gas powered leaf blowers because of noise and environmental concerns. Those concerns have prompted the need for a further conversation.The team is seeking guidance which could range from gathering more information about the issue or researching policy options and possibilities. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST The team is seeking guidance from Council and will respond accordingly to their directive. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The first request to ban the use of gas powered leaf blowers cited the City of Portland's successful action. Research on the Portland plan revealed it would only apply to the gas-powered blowers owned by the city for use by the fire,parks, transportation,water and environmental services departments. Portland's plan to ban gas-powered blowers by 2021 is tied to their goal to be 100% fueled by renewable energy by 2050. The Portland ban will not apply to privately owned devices. If council wishes to proceed,guidance regarding parameters would be useful. Example,is the preference to ban city use? Or a public/private ban? Should we grandfather in existing equipment?Would future purposes not be gas-powered?As Council is deliberating,these are the parameters the team is seeking so we can be responsive and provide the best infomration for future decisions. Public Works has tested out various manufacturers models and purchased one that Parks staff will try out long-term to address environmental and noise concerns. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could determine which options to explore,if any. They could also take no action and allow Tigard departments and residents to continuing using gas powered leaf blowers. COUNCIL GOALS, POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS Council has recently adopted their 2021-2022 goals which include creating a Community Resiliency plan which includes climate action. DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION This will be the first time City Council has discussed a possible ban on the use of gas powered leaf blowers. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Information: No financial impact for collecting data for a proposed ban. If Council wished to look at a citywide ban, should staff research include funding to assist landscapers and homeowners with replacing gas powered devices with electric? Attachments No file(s)attached. Carol Krager From: Steve Rymer Sent: Tuesday,June 8, 2021 11:23 AM SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET To: Shelby Rihala; Kathy Nyland; Carol Krager FOR 6 _ -.1'1;7( Subject: Study Session Walk On Item Attachments: DRAFT 1-205 Fed Logo Letter.docx (DATE OF MEETING) 5'7Lt?4 Se'ss i ot) HI Councilors... At the beginning of the Study Session,the Mayor will request Council support of the attached letter related to federal funding for the 205 bottleneck project...please let me know if you have any questions. Carol, please also include in your 2pm email...thanks Steve Steve Rymer I City Manager a City of Tigard I City Management 'PI Direct: 503.718.2486 Cell: 503.312.8785 TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, OR 97223 1 www.tiaard-or.aov DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules"City General Records Retention Schedule." 1 DRAFT [LOGOS] WE SUPPORT FEDERAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS IN THE 1-205 BOTTLENECK PROJECT We are requesting the Oregon Congressional Delegation's full support to prioritize federal funding to seismically retrofit and widen the 1-205 Abernethy Bridge over the Willamette River. Acting today ensures this project of regional and national significance can begin construction as early as 2022, and potentially removes the need to explicitly toll the bridge to fund construction. The Abernethy Bridge is in need of vital seismic repairs and serves as a strategic link for freight transportation on the national interstate system providing a wide array of economic benefits to Clackamas County, the region, the State of Oregon, and the nation as a whole. The proposed project will widen the 1-205 Abernethy Bridge with an additional through-lane in each direction, eliminating a freight bottleneck on the 1-205 corridor. Serving both Oregon and Washington residents and businesses, 1-205 is predominantly six lanes for most of its 37-mile length. However, its southern-most section, which includes the Abernethy Bridge, reduces to only four lanes, creating bottleneck congestion in peak hours for commuters and freight users. This project will provide enhanced freight mobility that will benefit the entire northwest. 1-205 connects advanced manufacturing, high tech, forestry, agricultural, and distribution/shipping businesses in Clackamas County, Portland, and the Willamette Valley with major import-export facilities such as the Port of Portland, the Portland International Airport, and the Port of Tacoma. Improvements of the bottleneck at the 1-205 Abernethy Bridge will benefit the businesses and their employees who depend on reliable movement of products to these freight facilities who do their part to strengthen the economy of Oregon and the Pacific Northwest. Federal funding today can advance construction on the 1-205 Abernethy Bridge and move the project to construction in early 2022. We are counting on your support for a project that will strategically enhance regional seismic stability and provide significant benefits to local and regional commuters, economic development, and West Coast freight mobility. We urge you to support this project, and thank you for your consideration of this request. SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET FOR (DATE OF MEETING) City Council Update June 8,2021 ✓�A9 /7llG� l�� "2 A9 Chamber Update Leadership Tigard Today the Leadership Tigard class met to learn about public safety and judicial day. The class heard organizations like Tigard Police Department,TVF&R, Emergency Management for Washington County& Tigard,TriMet and the Washington County District Attorney. Leadership Tigard graduation is June 15 and will be live streamed at 5:20 on the Leadership Tigard Facebook page. Education,Advocacy, &Building a Strong Local Economy Government Affairs& Public Policy Meeting—Thursday,June 17 at 1:30 p.m.. Tigard Restaurant Month—June 2021—Pick up or download a Tigard restaurant passport at a participating restaurant or download a copy from the website. Learn more at www.TigardChamber.org. Workforce Development Job Fair with Tigard Tualatin School District—May 26—Very Successful! It was very well attended by students and businesses. Networking/Visibility Good Morning Tigard(GMT),Thursday A.M. Networking 7:30 a.m.—Weekly 6/10—Ziply Fiber, 6/17—Tigard Chamber of Commerce,7/1—In-Person GMT,7/8—Pacific Residential Mortgage. In-Person Good Morning Tigard—Starting June 17,we will be transitioning to alternating weeks for in- person and virtual networking. Networking will begin at 7:30 a.m..Covid-19 safety procedures will be in place like large venue space,comfort level stickers,face coverings and more. Tigard Chamber of Commerce Annual Meeting—6/24 from 8 a.m.to 9:30 a.m..—Zoom Join us as we take a look at the last year and look towards the future of the Tigard Chamber of Commerce.We will also be voting in new board members. Details at http://business.tigardchamber.org/events/calendar) Tigard Farmers Market Update The Tigard Farmers Market is open! We are looking for vendors that sell soap,dairy, breads and specialty foods. New vendors attending the market weekly. TDA Downtown Updates Art Walk 2021 is being planned for early July of 2021.This year's programing will be a mixture of safe in- person and online components.We encourage the community to come out and support the businesses. Find us on Facebook at exploredowntowntigard and at www.exploredowntowntigard.com. Follow us on Twitter @Tigarddowntown and on Instagram at downtowntigard TIGARD Leadership Tigard., Building L.,do,.G,..ng Cwnmuniry. - AIS-4655 3.A. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length(in minutes): Consent Item Agenda Title: LCRB: Consider Approval of Contract for Pavement Management Program-Pavement Rehabilitation. Prepared For: Jamie Greenberg Submitted By: Carol Krager, Central Services Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Consent Agenda- LCRB Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Local Contract Review Board may award a contract for the Summer 2021 Pavement Management Program Pavement Rehabilitation (Overlay) construction project to Baker Rock Crushing Co,. Inc. dba Baker Rock Resources. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Contract team recommends the Local Contract Review Board award a contract for the Summer 2021 Pavement Management Program-Pavement Rehabilitation construction project to Baker Rock Crushing Co,. Inc. dba Baker Rock Resources for$986,854 and authorize the City Manager to take the necessary steps to execute the contract. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The annual Pavement Management Program (PMP) protects the city's investment in street infrastructure. The program typically includes a combination of minor maintenance projects (slurry seal applications) and major maintenance and rehabilitation projects (pavement overlays). In a pavement overlay project, the pavement on a street has deteriorated due to traffic usage and weather, and is at the point where pavement repairs and overlays are necessary to avoid further deterioration and return the street to a good condition. Work under the project will include: •Construction of asphaltic concrete inlays and overlays •Asphalt concrete removal (grinding) and repair •Applying sealant along pavement edges and joints •Temporary signage,protection, and traffic control •Striping and pavement marking •Construction of concrete curbs and ramps •Performance of additional and incidental work as called for by the specifications and plans. •The city issued an Invitation to Bid for the project in April with notice published in the Daily Journal of Commerce. Upon closing, the city received responses from six contractors: •Baker Rock Crushing Co,Inc. - $986,854 •S-2 Contractors Inc- $1,025,113 •Knife River Corporation- $1,028,491 •Pacific Excavation- $1,045,000 •Brix Paving NW Inc- $1,068,281 •Kodiak Pacific Construction - $1,316,000 •Engineer's Estimate-$926,878 The Contracts team has reviewed the bids and determined that Baker Rock Crushing Co,Inc dba Baker Rock Resources has submitted the lowest reasonable bid. Baker Rock Crushing Co, Inc has no State of Oregon Contractor Construction Board violations and is not on the Bureau of Labor and Industries ineligible list. Accordingly,it is recommend an award for the city's pavement rehabilitation contract to Baker Rock Crushing Co, Inc in the amount of$986,854. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The Local Contract Review Board could opt to not approve this potential award and direct staff to resolicit for the work. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS N/A DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION This is the first time the Local Contract Review Board has discussed this particular contract. Fiscal Impact Cost: $986,854 Budgeted (yes or no): yes Where Budgeted (department/program): Street Maintenance Fund Additional Fiscal Notes: The proposed contract is for$986,854.Appropriations totaling$2.74 million in projects are in the approved FY 2022 budget for various Pavement Management Program projects including this one. Attachments No file(s)attached AIS-4615 4, Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Appoint Aishiki Nag to Youth City Councilor Position Effective 7/1/21 Prepared For: Joanne Bengtson Submitted By: Joanne Bengtson, City Management Item Type: Motion Requested Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing No Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Tigard City Council has the opportunity to appoint the next Youth City Councilor to serve from July 1, 2021 to June 30,2022. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Approve this appointment. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY •Following a successful second year as part of the Tigard City Council, the Youth City Councilor position will continue for another 1-year term. Mayor Snider sought applications from eligible students who reside within Tigard City Limits until the close of day May 16, 2021. Interviews were conducted on May 27, 2021 by a panel consisting of Mayor Snider, Council President Lueb and Youth Councilor Calderon. The aim of the program is to advise the City Council on community issues from a youth perspective, increase student participation in local government and provide input on issues of importance to Tigard youth. To be considered, a student must be a resident of Tigard at the end of their sophomore or junior year of high school and attend a public or private school (Tigard High School,Westview High,Muslim Educational Trust,Jesuit,St. Mary's of the Valley, etc.)where they have and maintain,passing grades in their classes. The youth city councilor is invited to participate in all City Council activities outside of regularly scheduled council meetings (National Night Out,Meet& Greets,Holiday Tree Lighting Ceremony, etc.) as long as the activity does not interfere with school commitments. The successful youth city councilor will sit with the City Council at meetings and comply with council rules of procedure and conduct themselves in a professional manner. The youth city councilor must be able to commit to attending regular meetings of the City Council (1st,2nd, 3rd and 4th Tuesday of each month at 6:30 p.m.—either remotely or in-person at City Hall when Council transitions out of virtual meetings in accordance with Covid-19 precautions) but will not attend executive sessions or be given confidential information for executive sessions. Mayor Snider said, 'We've received outstanding applications from students since this position was created,making it a very competitive interview and selection process. I'm looking forward to the next year and the viewpoints our next Youth City Councilor will bring to council discussions and deliberations. Our current Youth City Councilor,Emilio Calderon,has added greatly to discussions about clean energy, communication during Covid and what makes a great community." •Executive Assistant Bengtson will schedule a city department orientation and complete onboarding for July 1 official start. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council could decide not to appoint a youth councilor this year or reopen the process. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION This is the third year of the program. Council appointed created the role with Resolution 19-13 on April 2, 2019. The first Youth Councilor (Turley) was appointed 6/25/19. The current Youth Councilor (Calderon)was appointed 6/9/20. The next Youth Councilor (Nag) could be appointed June 8,2021. Fiscal Impact Cost: 2500. Budgeted (yes or no): yes Where Budgeted (department/program): 100-0500 Additional Fiscal Notes: The Youth City Councilor serves without pay but may be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in the performance of their duties when such expenses have been authorized in advance. National Conference (ex: NLC in Washington,DC) travel/training expenses $2,500 Attachments Aishiki Nay Application 2021 YOUTH CITY COUNCILOR APPLICATION Aishild Nag,Tigard High School Previous Community Involvement: I'm currently involved with some local organizing 501(c)3s. I'm an intern at the Oregon League of Conservation Voters and volunteered at phone banking events. I finished the 2020 Fall Cohort for Next Up and am currently part of their Youth Action Team. I was a forum moderator for the Next Up School Board Candidate Event and on an endorsement committee. I am also on a robotics team,where I worked on leading multiple outreach events,like organizing a food drive and gratitude drive for doctors. Other Relevant Information: I've worked on writing testimony (testified in favor of SB 776), and I'm passionate about youth engagement in civics. Recently I was working on making a voters guide for the 2021 School Board elections for the students at TTSD to make informed decisions, as well as making a video to promote voter registration with my friend. I am also working on doing lit drops with candidates from the THPRD,Ashley Hartmeir-Prigg, and Ugonna Enyinnaya. I have also participated in letter-writing campaigns! Heard about the program through Instagram! Yes,I can attend the meetings! (No conflicts!) Why I'm Interested in the Position: I'm interested in serving the city as the next Youth City Council because I'm interested in representing the Tigard Students. As the city councilor,I would have the job to represent the student's needs and voice their opinions accordingly. I want to advocate for my peers and hopefully use my position to help my community. I want to also help vulnerable communities in Tigard get the help they need, to help make this city as equitable as possible. Another one of the reasons I'm interested in running for this position is because I have always had a love for politics and weaving in youth participation. I have plans to continue working with more organizations and plan for applying for a fellowship for Done Waiting this summer to continue to solidify my understanding, and better myself as an ally. It's always been a dream of mine to run for office someday, and opportunities like this help better myself to represent a wider range of people. How I plan on representing the youth: I plan on representing the Tigard youth in a fair and equitable way. I am currently working on a School Board Voters guide that is a collection of survey responses from the candidates. I asked my peers and used my Instagram platform as a way of collecting questions that the students were concerned about and sent out the questionnaire. I'm also using my ties with the Tigard ASB to lead a push to have 16 and 17-year-olds to pre- register to vote, and 18-year-olds register for the May elections. Using my platform on social media,as well as my ties to the Tigard ASB I can effectively collect popular opinion from the youth of Tigard. I would simply serve as a vessel for public opinion, and highlight the voices of underrepresented communities such as BIPOC and LGBTQIA+ youth. I have always been an advocate for youth participation in politics and I will continue holding surveys on popular topics, as well as holding elected representatives accountable for their word. I plan on using my platform to fill in students and families with major changes in city policy and advocate for progressive policies, such as more mental health resources and a push for clean energy. I want to also lead more youth-concerned projects, that would give more teenagers a leadership role in making their community a better place. If given the opportunity to partake in the City Council,I will come prepared with facts and testimonies from students and have a youth-centered agenda. Pick one thing the City of Tigard is responsible for that you would like to change: (A) One of the things in Tigard that I would want to change is having more youth participation and drive youth turnout in local elections, as well as general and midterms. (B) Youth civic engagement is important because many of the decisions being voted on are issued that will directly affect them. Historically youth turnout has been low, especially in marginalized communities, and oftentimes there is miscommunications and disinformation that may confuse people. Having transparent and accessible information about elections and civic opportunities is important. (C) One plan I have to drive youth voters is having more voter registration drives. The City could host an event to send a team to talk to the high school students and register students to preregister or register to vote. One of the ways we can easily make this happen is to work with NextUp Oregon Action Fund and ask some of their volunteers to help with the event as well. They are known to host voter registration drives in high school, so this is a feasible goal! Making the information clear and accessible to all people is another issue that we can try and fix. We can try and include ASL interpreters or closed captioning to all of the recorded or live meetings available to the public. Having important newsletters be available in multiple languages will open up the reach to the community as well, and it can help drive engagement. AIS-4634 5. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: Consider a Resolution Adopting the Master Fees and Charges Schedule for FY 2021-22 Prepared For: Jared Isaksen Submitted By: Liz Lutz, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The City Council may hold an Informational Public Hearing to consider a resolution to adopt the City's Master Fees and Charges Schedule for FY 2022 by replacing Resolution 20-32 and subsequent amendments. As part of the annual budget process, the City Council has the opportunity to adjust fees and charges related to city services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST The team recommends that City Council approve the resolution adopting the City's Master Fees and Charges Schedule for FY 2022. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Every fiscal year, a revised Master Fees and Charges Schedule is submitted to the City Council,as directed by TMC 3.32.050, for approval along with the citywide operating budget. The attached schedule includes fee updates for most departments as several fees are adjusted annually using applicable indices. Also attached,please find the FY 2022 Master Fees and Charges Summary of Changes Report,which serves as a crosswalk of the proposed changes to the fees and charges;the basis of the change; the authority for proposing the change; and where that change can be found in the actual schedule. Key Changes: •Water Utility Rate increases are based on the Resolution 21-14. •Rate increases for the Business License Fee, Franchise&ROW Usage Fee, and Tigard Sanitary Sewer Surcharge are based on CPI-U West,which was 1.7%. These rates are not compounded with postponed rate increases in FY 2021 •Certain fees and charges are driven by specific industry indices and,as such,if those indices are high, then those fees and charges will increase higher than standard cost of living increases. Below are indices higher than 3% and impacted fees and charges •Seattle Construction Cost Index (CCI) —6.62% *Development Planning Fees and Charges •Fire Service Connection Fee •Tigard Sanitary Sewer Surcharges •Parks SDC •Water SDC •Transportation SDC •Street Maintenance Fee—SMF is based on 2-yr Rolling Average (4.13%) •Oregon Monthly Asphalt Cement Material Price Index (OMACMP)—5.35% •Transportation SDC OTHER ALTERNATIVES The City Council may choose to alter only fees that are set by other agencies or reevaluate the adjustment index for fees that have an annual adjustment formula. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES,MASTER PLANS The fees and charges help fund council strategies,including the City's Strategic Plan. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments FY22 Fees and Charges Resolution Exhibit A Master Fees and Charges FY22 Summary of Changes to Fees and Charges CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE CITYWIDE MASTER FEES AND CHARGES SCHEDUI F WHICH WAS ADOPTED UNDER RESOLUTION NO 20-32. WHEREAS,the City of Tigard has a Master Fees and Charges Schedule that was adopted during the last budget hearing as Resolution 20-32;and WHEREAS,city staff has reviewed fees and services provided; and WHEREAS,city staff has proposed new fees and changes to certain fees to recover costs or due to previously approved annual adjustment formulas; and WHEREAS,the city's Master Fees and Charges Schedule include fees and charges set by other agencies;and WHEREAS,Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 3.32.050 requires that the City Council review fees and charges annually NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The fees and charges for the City of Tigard are enumerated and set as shown in the attached schedule (Exhibit A). SECTION 2: City staff is authorized to make updates to the Master Fees and Charges Schedule (Exhibit A) when fees and charges that are set by other agencies become available. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective July 1,2021 and implemented as soon as administratively practicable. PASSED: This day of 2021. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.21- Page 1 co) (14 Z K O n ( 1\\U i-0 Cff) Alfif T . 2 R° cm x N N t �` Gr N M _ I c v N n N ►.; CD arl Ciel tt fri P °1i t !lat."*>: 2 z HH rt ›.., ., F . . g ,„ tii .4 DI O.a � p � n . � n 40HUp P,' n• n n y o n co cA 0 0 4 n .e P O co co G ''0 0. n '�rC g Pc p- CD Ct. n t7nom, 1 ,. il i Z Z x 0 6' 1 G n ' o n ,a o h x 0' n r. n n g' nat .4 • ¢ `� n a' n w m o t' rro c .., rte, 1. CD nL7 p� p ' G fit' , n . CD F,.j n n rd 'P' 0 N Pi M To n m O a. n by '-h 5 rr 5' co 1. n n p W n a 0 © ►+ a: '5 '' ' Ro V ag s ' a H+ S. y . o co 0 M m `4 N O Q.`d r41 n 1-1 O. 0 rnt 0 0n n P.,Q - n n � 00 in �r, n n o O d n "a n a5. o v ' ay n ooQ oV DD F. ro n Nm N pO 17's Cfn p Q 00 n y 77 C HI O. n I4I i 0• CL ZN64 s�H Ou C ,, W Cn Cn O n 0' �' n cob co .O O n 0 0 0 0 r� 0 0 0 O n• nO \ Po 0 a hi°' o 5' ° li CD C n n a n � � . N N N N N N \ N NN ..--, .- -, Oo Oo 00 co o0 op • 00 co •A n \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ N N N N N N N N N.) N N O co co co co O O O co O O O co 0 0 0 Ib co .-- co co O so O O co co 00 00 J 00 00 00 2 x G re M a � 7a0Tz 5 Ft » C gv,0 K o O al ca 0 o a'it °,dm a.cm ca No0 00 oxcr co � a� xN . o CDC7. w .,dya. dC et 0 o a. �e s wd• my I. oCD 0 m CD to $,a CM a C + . CD ' w ?t w 3 CD & `4 g. N y N a a `4 O + + Pi g o co Cr nt0 40 #5 n n M p. C O O to (�, cn O to LV b O O O O O dq ^, O (p rt O 0 0 0 0 Cn O O O O O O TJ cn 9 , y CD 'V q7'O'V'G'C y t\h w AD eco a O rt g + 0 w w n v� 'CrCA• co 'V C moi PD HI rt P.1 CO K. to rr G w O G n, O o y N r�r a- "�h y • o n + + 5 R w �. y 0° o rt y .C- n O C 0 h to w a M 0 -1 N -1 --.1 --1 --.1 -1 ---1J -1 --1 C. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .-, -.1 i--, - .-, .-, -, .+ .+ .-a .-, fD Na N .-, - N N N N .-, .-a N N Na N N .-, co co V 'O co co co co 'O s.0 O O O O O '3 >V 1-L O ,. ,O 1-, O O O V Vr co co .- co .-, V to N.) so .-, -1 J to V '0 -1 --.1U' Oo .A V rte•. d 1 n xi n rt• 0 * *pyo$ * 00 ro nt7to co 0 A• C a. ti. r fD 0 R Q g. ii to s w w 0 0 X y on • m C OO i 0. Lk. UQ? A CD 64. ti *,' M ‘i y' */3 bS t 4a9 b3 1.4. to 0\ Ll, b$ N #19 tt b4 W W (n W O O Wi W Cn �l �o y b • a a B - • m w rot T y N 5, CI CI .. CD .. CD Cf, E. E. o res n ZCD 0 . fD N N 0 0 • CD CD CD tb y Ol n j' N I •-' N --' -1 - N N .—••—, U'.) f- ' - Na N.) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N 0 00 0 :--' r•' 00 00 0 2 n IR C° I . GZ � c E. m CD U CJ y "0 * � ten » �' OC RI G CD o a fD a 0t `G sY' G r". D .P O K O O �'. n y C n 1-.1 O TJ co co In o g a- co Igi cp ON 0. tii C ro `S7 cb 'G a� Oco) G▪ lel gyp ' t. 0 Cn co N CD co -' CJ' re • Ln co co co co �a• `��' w Q o ▪ Q7 0 0 0 0 CD 0 CD0 La '�� [j • a S� y Hi O r�"'i n• a Vl a a c co co Vi ay 74 14 ril .z C y co �� Cr n O {nD = O �7 0" to1 co • p '3 nco 0 M 'II n WPS CD n �0,-,' c y' z7 W O ti. y .o n -, o co co n C. c.s fD'FP O 4, C. '4 a C -t O 'n0 ~w 0' n n n b a DD n w r a to `< a ro Q' 0. N Q \ n fD a N "ll CA w ' n 0. a aa co n . C CD .-e CD p CIA L n 44 n ON r� " �R taq s/f tog t9 AS #4 bH kA y O oo .t A #H N CD !D N V 'V VO CO 00 -4 -4 N 44 b'i • bS 0 CO ? W ON Lu Coas (Ji W 00 so In 0--0 0 • 0 c.4.. 0 O Cr) co ao N J V Vu Oo N VI N 00 -4 0 0 O 'TJ 'tt 'LJ 'L3 "d "d '7 y p co rns .ns .nt �t .ns n O O a .-• SCD yRy ..-c •-• D a S9 N W 1,) Ft .S • .wt K O. OJ ( o o N I. p, G O a iz a ,-• CD n CD • a C n 0 . o 1 I,.., ,p .1 N .-+ N i-. _..--11...11 ::-.21 <1 N\ \ \ \ N) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ r", \ \ \ N) N) N) N N N) N N) .-• O 0 CO 0 O 0 CO 0 0 0 CO CO O 0 0 O N N N) 0 0o N CO 00 CO 1.-• - r 1-- 1-+ J 1 Ii ix is n n 0 nr * * Cl) cn '- Z Z Z C.7 m tai . 0 ao M ' to in po AD - i ro ro * * * w w w 4 M a CD 1[--D--11 rn� 1-71 res n rt * Cl) Cl) Cl) * 0 CD V y• A * i*(• * * a ti• o y a ,, � g.^p@ � � 5.I2'a 5.6) 8.^ y 'a -01 ; .. ro a o 5' 0 R. 0 5' 8 0 5' `�' IV ro w -- 4 co w n i-o. .-*, w ro H ,-n n m .1 I I n ..I '-n N w 1-3 hh H '*, .+ ro a• O x 0 N rwi p y w N w w *s w w m �7 O v " O m " O " �•' O n co a. ` E �' S' g 2 co 5' 1. ' S' g e 5' 5' g o ` D°4. `I Q- R. 0 d p- n G0(- Q- G0 0 0`0� 0- 0 ..... w ,� p n p �! �"e ate+ G rt n V, a H a ' a a ' • a a m. 'II TJ *t r n K 't n 'Zr k. O 0• '� a O a a. O 4. a y0. 5 ro n a ro ata ro +k-, ^. ro NN n 0 R.CD .0 o o o s o o 2.4. o 4. N o . n oS. n o a ro 0- co n a co arn c. y g' O m . O v, co 2 no5 RR. yR. a N S �p cin go ro Cl' co lco ci, O O O co O w - H\ c. V, S3 'wa• �. o ' 0 � 0 0 O 4 0\ cn 434 ut == to Cn #D *to =- cn cn . -_ Cr, Cn Ya=1 4 _= to it o " o " o a no Co OOO OO 0 O O +• 0 .. 0 p -. .. 0 0 - .. 0 0 VV,co, ca ti -n O \ rr, 'h O \ ' O , , C °4a [c n O a.. w .. y0 cA E. w • .. Ca ON w .. m w E. w 0 0 4 da ce m n 't m ,-t y v, n rt m m a p ti .1 0 O m N rho O ht ro CD C O ht coo a n O 0 N rroo O • 0 �a rOo rOo a 'ins O ., pa rot Ot. no 4 O a 7 O ., C n co O ., n O 't 0 0 .. w w w w Rs a. a O O O 0 O O O • r 4 5' c 4 1 4 A '+, ;r M 't ';CD N. y. N. y. m 0.'b 0 w O ., a 0 ., w O w 711 rt N rt ro •-• 's co R i C EZ n .•• n v 00 v v i J v •-` '-' v •-' N J I ,-' a. ON r-+ 00 ,--. �--+ ✓ V' .--' 0 i--, V I-, Vr ro \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ '-' N N N N N N N N N N N N N N d V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O +V N O N N N ,-. N '-' 1--' N I-. I-. N N w fV W 0\ 0 '-' 0 In r-+ cn to ,-+ In Ln ,-+ In rD 74 e O o w� * two coo Z Z Z til rt n" 'n 4' d" r--.' to con n n 0 on PI g 3F * * m o co -)h SN re. Ere te 11 tc. • I:1.'0 to Itc.o 0 n E.a. A o P. ° 0 5' 0 5' �,ro a• 0 0.O .-y n O.a. f�D• o. r0 UQ a w 9 aro n . 9 CM co H n • n4. Cn`n too -- n a, n H n ao H *, II '7*, n w Hn-. 1Ire. to y w 1-t y N rt N n 'a nron114-li n Chro V o b ftg. 0 R•I P: h 54 A' O4 ,c S, o ° o o r'7 0 n Dn! n {p^py h n i��.y E �J f+ n '"I (1 (Oo / j tp (OD /� r� VI °, g0 0n �1 6° ,ya 0 a O V. a 0 0 $ w n n O g ;z1 p-. n O O. n a '17P 2 •-C £�`C 0,4 ao O % 0 0 5 0 (J re C. y CA a p. o. a is a a0 A �! p nr 5' 5' 'On II o O 5 O O o O 0 t co 0 0R y coo Q ad a ao ro n ° �0 • w F-g. ro n w_i o n OC 0.o n .. Hl. O O. p O.. . R. a' m R. �- K1 n V co n v n n h R o a 4. N a, a '-' to a n M G n M o N N 0 ti . 5 y i o O n 2 0 n 2 0 „ Fd v C 'I m ti CD re n 3 coN n m Ca V O O y O y O ON y eil O A o U, 459 4.3 -= V, cn - - -= V, Ln - . -- U, 0 "U D e ;P N c e ? N o e JP- N o CD • 0 0 Cir, •• 0 0 O V •• 0rre 0 O V •• 0 0 re #,H 84 .. frilrh �• chi, ci, cNn O . O a�'rr•• rn O O � V 0 0 e rr' can V O ]• O O p p y F• •' !A y CA n• h • w ti co cn F' rpt • ti DI 0 O O O O • m F'e. Q N p • ry 0 1-t I A 0 .t O . G n O I. 0 0 ,-r O ., 0 v A • O • • O O • ' n N ''l to n V' H'1 n n N n O A , O O rt O 4.4 Ca w n m _.• n w ., n a, .. •v, A a' O �' O a• O aa A. 0 co 0 .� O .O'7 O Et b. n b n b. n (� e°Y. Ox?... I.1' .� I.' n Cro .'• 0- L * nq + 4 q � ebre ' O' .� n p, •� 0 •.� n o ,C co `C cfsco 'bS 0 .- w 0 o m 0 c w .. M •+ h1 CD �` �r it M R S `- M n S -1 �1 �1 �1 N N �1 1 N N �1 1 N N v I N \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ C' r-, r-+ I--• Lelcn "••• li1 cn N V, (f, --• V, n \ ----.\ \ \ ---.. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N N N N N N N N N d NNNN N O ON N OOO O . .a 0 0 0 0 V b rs V r' V � -, s.0 rt cn Cl) z 1? 1r co n - co n 51 1-1 51 P4I n fD 00 0 CD co n co co n a. 0 rr ti n O N !) no F' n fga C sw d a co a. 0 ooo N1' co 0 5' o 5. CD ;; v 5. N. NS C ro F C a CD ro5 Daerg00 V 'uo• 7 o rt , `g: c. o� AD o w p a' ,Y 0 co w t O ►e ra. Cl m.-O No 0 o. N W z p Oo , es O y cn .t 41. o' cn rp rt p E w O OR O fD p rt O CD N D a. Cl, PV IDD R f0 co o 0 o Da co, N ,t, B co a co °, o n CD P7 gl n tZ 0 No 0 O rt. t: t) ¢ j i 1 / / o C r m / - / ] 0. eo n k f G k e % §¥ƒ » § 5 2 ; 2 $ \ � - = nom i _ e 2 } 2 E ( 2itro _..:r k § & ) ƒ§ ° ° n / k / 5. § Po 0C ƒ ` 0 ƒ E. 2 / C. - P [ '' .-1 / 0 t / ƒ * } k 9 m P p n 0 § 7 z z x 0 - _ 4.4 } L P } \ } C ƒ / 6 « @ \ 7 t ; § 4 P P } \ ; 0 / n @ § m @ / x N.)~ / / x x x \ ® \ k \ / \ k $ / $e = ee Na Is.) g o0 n rii5 0 M 0 co og 5' w / CD M » a' ° 5 = Gcv, � w y Z NI mo 0 o r. o Cw '% tn p nQ � ti. In n . CI e2 '-O C7 e m m rD Cl a e n o y n w0 ►� O w ' O �^' n �' a w� a' M w w " Duni ,�-` `' A ►e 'CJ O fn x '• �ai o .8. M«, I '0 8' G o a w �7 c. V fD '* ��,yy co. A O CA 0. co /"to (p ro o w .n CCD Q' P a- o '` 7 O 4" 171 n a o 1. w szl. AN co 0O 1171 ICD 7 7 n Y �Y 0 °S O O r) C #a4 $a4 ‘34 44 .64 44 44 4 N N [' n Cin t4 44 i .-+ ,--` 44 .--` N N N •. •. In O In O a, a O O to N R. O co O O O UD Ln O Cn O O O O A A O O O cn 4 co O W co O O O O C 0 0 co 0 0.1 0 O O O O rn O co O O O O O O O 0 0 co 0 w O O O O bon o d4 � 4" r a CD N 41 r-+ rs v' TI IQ OG n pw a tll \ J J J J \ J J J J J J J J J J J J J a N \ \ \ \ .-+ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ to r-+ - 1..-- r+ O 1-, I-+ N N .-+ r+ .+ .S r+ .+ �.-, - 1--+ n C-+ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N so O O O OO co co co co co co co co co O co O co .s O O O ..-3O O �-` .3 ..-.. .-` .-` .-' ,-' ,-` .--sN co '�. 5 W N oo N •-' ON N N W W W W C.N W W 4, O •V CO oe tz: IstzCD a ., cA0 Cl) 23 n 0 oa 0 o x Cl) CD o GO A CAD a. n o d n � l'''.: o PD c z C ID E.CD a ,.'-p a. N a � � . -. W. 0 w n M M el rM AD co r�ti -. a m y, ,n N f/q A it n A 0 or s X77 U, 0O o O o O Ry O O O Co O O I' O O O O O co n A AD A Mt ro n J J r J J J w \ \ \ \ \ \ !, OOO O O O W 41. 41. 0 0 0 A O G C zrt d tri g r gt aZ' �0S 0 bye� O O O Nwo NN pA•4 5t O o (n N ,,LT, iD g O co O O C "co ' Pco "co co O Vi e. :* y OO OO O O ,5,, P g O O O O O bS A, it ri 0 0 0 co co 0 0 0. o co 0 co 0 0 a•F 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0o Cs •e o b 0 b b 00 o I y2 9 O ri0 OY O O O 4 9 9 9 9 O G 44 44 44 4,4 44 44 44 0 a. 44 Le .n 44 454 (xi N •-' (n N N .-' L, NN (n O co (T O O Ln O (S. .c O O (n O O O O O O P 0 co O O co O c O O O o O co P P PbO P o coO O coO �• O O coO O O b A N N h11 A CD O N 4 4H Ln 454 W 454 i in H 00 #H 0 vs) Vi 44 i-D W454 ? N O V (n O CO Oo O ..+ N ..5 .+ y Ui O 44 4A, 44 O ON .-+ Lei ? Cn - (n N O - lV N N n O N � 0, � LI". - Ln O 00 (n tr 41, N OWo N N V' OV' CD "-- - \ \ M M M ,-h M M I-I, T M I-I, M I-1, I-I, •h I-I, Fl-, Ft, 1-1-, M MI O O 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O I'S n C0 0 0 0 ht rt 0 0 It 0 M rt It 0 0 It It 0 101. W 5- W ice' 2 5 2 5 "w 5. w `5' "5. n 5' 2 Cow C5D n N n CO5 0• CD[� Oa SCS 0" CD CD 00' fD -- [C.D O" �' £ Pa P FS P R' P W P N p g P� Fi AD Al �s' w r' PD �t a. 4 a. � a. 4, a- , a 4' a- � C— art a 4 C— a 4. 44 at 40 al 454 al 44i a. (n a. N a• a. (n F'. N a.44 al 44 at N a.40 a: .-+ a. (n a. N a. N R. (n O O O (n O O 0 0 0 (n O o O 0 O O O Ui O O O co C3 O 0 p o O 0 O a o 'a O CS O '0 co a- ,..coO O o ?- oO s- o 'moo o o s- o o p- o P 454 C. 44 �, o 44,-, o ,moo44 C' � w o0 0 of oa- oa o 0 o o ° oa oa -c) 13-' a ar o oa. o � oa- 0 0 0 oa- 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n n hi, r*, F*, I-1, 1-n I-1-, •n n CIn n n n n n n n o o Q' o' Q' 0 p' p' p' p' O O 0 0 0 C o CI O 0 0 �* A a A rt �s O -h M C C M 8 8 0 0 ni a - .- n \ \ 1 — M -' -, CD O O t/ O co K .0 a G CD SD 3 5 CD a iv L -CD W ?t. C tc to �' 0 d I '.0 i h1 o' t can b �* DD N N 4.4 CD co G O O 4.4 O Vii N vl Ci �• O O rf • • lF• o O O O In NH �„ �/ n A A » C O O O O to o rg C O n 8 •� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p a• Pt. 0 0 w E o 0 0 0 b 0 b b 'Op • C 0 0 '-+ .+ .-+ N .+ .+ ..-% p 1.i7 a 1-, '-+ Ili 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �' �, o Ito a . L4 to to to to p Pto - o O O O UNi N.) O vC a' 4 0 0 0 0CD 0 0 0 0 0 o b o O rD p o 0 0 © o © 0 B a' o o ro o' o E w O R. " -I 0.a a b CAo, n N 0 L.' o DO m y tD n r�r 44 L4 G. C\ W 44 44 W -1, A ND O O I-- O to i-+ �7 #7. 44 '-' L4 44 O G� r gt L4 C. LR N 44 O 44 N '--, Ui r•-' O UD U, L4 r-+ 454 co OO Oq W O\ to .•-�. Cs tri J V0 W Un W W W W Ui W Ui 1n O O W � O •V' O '00 Un .A O V N.) r-+ i.,.) is) N .. (n W Vt 'Cf V In V Ui -P Ui W Ui N Ui '--, N) V J J co 4D. W 1. y F'h r'h r*, ,-'h r'h 1-r, M ''+1 1'*1 1T N'1 �h r'h r+, ,h ,t r'h l, O y O y I. 0 Q 0 Q Q 0 Q 0 Q 0 0 0 r-+ ri, G\ H, R 2 CE ter, (D �*, 2 5- A �r, N R N �+. rr Oa o 0 'F• fw1 n f�•1 N A CDhf�'1 N A CD 1:',') A A O o co o '0- '0- 0" 'S' .`Y to Cs' a' a• CS' k O 't7 O rr, w Rs w 3s" PI W Rs w R. aI 4 w - w r•r w 3s A .+' A, rn fD O- N n' .�-r O-• K an'- p-' K a' n a' M Cad_' a rt CD 0- R. 0— (n L4 a: L4 e'• L4 F: 44 R' 44 E: 44 R' 44 F 44 ar 44 ¢, A a• .• 0. U, a. '— a• to a• N a• N a• Ui a. N a• .-. Lr3 O O O 0 0 O O O to 0 p O O O p O O P.. p a O O a p a p G p a O J O p O N O O O �. O P.. O �'. O N O �. O p 'd ctQ L4 -co 4., 0 LH o 44 O 44 O 44 i,9 - . O LH O O�G O '[i --+ 00 r, Su " �--� r-x pyp p C p0r•-+ p0 0"" 0 ow o0 0 op- oG+ "CD 0 ow 'co t m. a • oa c> al- oa o 0 0 0 op o N , O O c. O O O 0 O O a•' O PD ro �, 4, r* w .r, rt . n in 0 o O C n CD n n n AD a• n n . y a. a. a. a. a. a. o a. a• AD ro o (t o 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 (No y O O O p p a a 5 a 0 0 o� a 9 a' rD 5. R. 5. 9. 5 0 a. (r'o (`n (r`n m C0 Dn (no (r'o p_, 0 M 0, 0, O1 0, r0, 0, 0 0 - o a 0 0 n 0- G DD O \ \ G. \ n ND O O O O N.) 0 N ,..0 n C n v 2. CD n a tld '10 C n n n on z o KJ o C n n nit P n W y .y. ICD uro n n �t o O n O n w ti `.7 Fr PI. b a ~ m 4 rn m 2. 2+ .A N N Q Q� -t N N y to gi '"a R n o. ' w ^ h7 �rJ 0 0 0 o n C o 0 o Oo n cn 4 010 0-0 G a' x O a fD w §' rD -' '�- w w " O n w w w w y O a- g. r+ K x O rD • 0 w o ° CD .Gt w w °° 0 0 ° y ° w 0 0 0 ° ° a 6 c° R ° a' o G 'n a j,v O M " p n n 0 �L, B ,--' c, .p rni cn o• O co R' r•t "� n fp ��., G a MI W �' O O O y JG 'C "'Q O O O m n G .II r+ �--� a. �. Oq. O " nq. v, O O O u n O O O vi - " " 0 CD .a o w `o w w `C° va 5' n C. °, P a 0 5 ° N CD 5 S a.p n ri Sr Oo 0 meg; n `C n P. 00 o. G r, y • p 0 ca O. O .0 y 'O to 0 0 0 •a vel, cn n c o rt n 5 i n " " in CD NC OL • g p n p R. a. G 41 oCD R. y0p C' l6 0' `° P Er G P., 0- 'n n 0 ,-t 44n 44 44 WN 4.4 44 44 s • 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 Ui '44 44 44 0~ pi - c G1 —1 Cs C 44 Ln as N Cn Os Ln O O W O GJ W G OO Cs a to JJJ CD J 00 Lr, V -1 N N O W O J Ln CN CO O i-+ LV LV O 00 00 -P ;--, .P Ln O W 0O N O W Ln -4 00 O LID N 00 Cn Ln O - N 00 N • . 00 C1 G1 •A � CT O � O N 4, O 'n 00 0 0 co, Et .-, G 1PF \ a, PP R. . .pp�� a• x nn 9- P C° 0, o w ~a n a. CO C n 14,n n N v hr: A .' n c O O DC CD K ' r. CD Co 1 8 to a CDa c 5 it n OW / co C CD C O CD - On rs VP 4s4 a crg go co Ln u-. ..c, N =to a' E. n O. n Wn lo A a. L O O O O A O' co o Y lD lnD rli `E P O O O O O �• m rt O R, O 0 O b b O 00 I° q frtD O. O 0 co '� rt D o O O O O O 19:1 ra g M 0'0 0 N C cn n 0, O cn riJ 4▪. a 44 44 w ti n n o 0 0 0 CD o D' .-� (n N N N rA rt n p� 'a' O . w O .-+ R �-+ DD CD 0▪ O o O "• n C. n rt n o C o O �. w O w o n rt rt y rt O rt O O O O O ''� [p y Q '.3 O w tOii .1C' N �j Oco �. OP O O O O '17 M o C o o sD ppp�' - 00 O DtD4 Li', cco gi O n w rt C1 Pt p Dp C� �-• n a� ro p p, '� a, P'. y n b C w rn 0 y o E. o i ' o . �' 0 HrGt ""'' w "0.3 O N •f. N) Q t�, O N ft I.1 o. n hy n t� gO P• :,1 �-y m s �c c 0 oC. CA 5_, CA or 1.51o 0 cm o i a a. o ui w o ,e °, O a Ill n co C9 n Go n 0 454 0 n 0 4 ft OD 4a0 U, W 44 44 C g o Lia W N - - n #H O 434 O tag CN .-" V' 454 Ln Ui gt 1> V ltt V 00 00 O .-� N — — CD UQ ? IN A O V' J Ci, b b A. �' - \ N b O W .ft Ni V0 N) 00 N G� N 6 1 V V' O H. N 0' 0\ O SCD 'nt \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 'O ri O O O O O O OO 0 I-1, IOt ,Y 5-t .t rt rt rt .t Pt rt rt rt co n R. n5. nr, w � n n CD CD r'nn CD Kr., C . �' P w fi' ' w R0t0 84. a 4 a. � R. � a. � 0- E- #a e. a. 44 E 454 & w O O ONON a. O O Vi O O 0 O OO O L O a. s� O O O 0 p O a P" o I= 0 o o ¢' o 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 O 00 0 't n .t .t n w 0 0 0 n O' O' n n c co g roo N coo O 0 0 0 0 `^ Pt, i-+, ti.., .t, [Ti r o -A -4 -4 - -4 ----I -...1 -4 2 N \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ C. ' G1 1 . 1 H N 1-,.. ,-. -' �.. '— CD1O O O O O O O O O O NO 0 N N) N N N N N n G n a a CD d N 0r y fp,D it 0C x4 F. (1ro el co a a• o. co co a. n • {U E"' M rt V O CPI 2C1x 11 Tl °o o n - � wNo .no � � tv .- rnmt p 8 Go C of D ��y s too 0 0 o O G o o yo VI VP M \ R p. Fe n '', W W n �'i Do Q, 0 ,-, i-+ .+ N 14, g �.' rt �.'' N 4 o CEC .t �• el0. ,''v o o G all ,eD a. °• M SP 0-. --.1W00 �yI �' N W o • t R• y o ° o o ° O C ° R o o N 0 g 14 V N #4 .t .t p. 5' o o p, N co 0 a w o o cm 0. �, `�� c �, r ` u++ b� a: oo hh y y W o ' CD c. erl o '7) 0 ,-' F.'s ko. o t R M ca ?'CD \g ° co -co 4 4 p w co Pa CI n °E. , v o CO* vt. y R tv 'd a. CID 0 n .-N CD CN CD #y3 W t O CD O CD 0 0 'd .. WW 44 44 -. WN44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 49 " N .64 co N N - N N N 0 Ui - . 0 N W ON N 0 .-- - V ? WW 01 W W W ., - ON ON Q V' -.l W V .--.. O O. W o W W J W W W O v :-] U, U, [v G1 63 o .A -1 ;t N N Ln N N N ON •-� t i U) O - O O O ,.0Ui (.71W '� tt f O▪ \ \ O `, •\-' - - •, _ N N N N d co O O O M V N N n I o S 12- g- o CD . 171 ril cop r 60- IcipiCD 0 44 FLE 'YR coo 0 o 0 0 0 o0 4 -, � � 'wo 0 0 0 0 0 00 a ►� R. ro w .- to o o o o aa. 'ren n Z til ,-i7 p C7 p n �e �4 ' 7Jo a. ss L-4 4a. �' `" n �� o. o O ' G r*s o O d4 G y °: o - v. .� v, u, 0 `h' n o 5-crQn c. n 5 a o. �, Co 4 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 n K n G W C .t o 0 0 n O t c$ G. y ' n :h.� Ft 0 0 0 0 v n a E o o C' V n two R rr 0 0 0 o •a '� p g n (L rD o CD �` CD 't In' 0 FT p P w y tre o. n nt oRam :'7 tqp ro 7' G R rt rt to Fri 8 (_'' 0 Ft J. F• 122 O 'i w g R y ! 1� w n n b w cD n N CJI cn o ti O H., n '"' '- O CDN.) 44 40 n H G., 47 W N 44 44 4 0 40 .4 4#i 4 0 40 40475 40 4 9 4 0 4 0 4 4 40 4- n E, 44 0 44 C\ 44 44 0 44 G\ Ci F• V 44 N N N ( W N N N W N N W N S rt N 00 N W N J N :4 W Vr Vr '"t 0 � - W W W W W W W lW W W W W W K n' v '0 v N v oo N 0 O O 6 0 W to N N N '0 W0 N N N '0 N N La'.0 N n N H V' r.-, N N N �7 G1 ON n 'r, O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,-,1 \ Ft Ft 5- Ft M ht Ft rt �rtt Ft Ft n co n CD nR. N n n F n P• t' w i wt w Rt wt g t 4.7 R., 464 e: 44 E: 454 e: 4d4 o' 0 o' 0 0' 0 o' "' o' 0 0 0 0 0 • o w a 0- 8 oa 0a. oQ o O a 0 o 00 w w w w w a. a. a. a. a. o 'OJ a q o a- 0 0 0 co to n n6 CDD Cn Cn 4 co 0', r0i, t-e, .-i, tH+, til A ,- 2 N C \ t7 o 0 $4 N o '0 n d CD n 0 n : 0 E ,5 C orl (A z � o• CA n p n 451 epff: n N n 1-1 r. w R° 56 CD 3 v' v' P zi4d 4 5 .`� 0 ''11 '�] til, trl el t7 C) td by tr1 A. ccn u, 4 4 A. 'i7 d n tz c„ N o 4. "' n n RI n . pCpzpID sp.) to 0- or, ,..� r+ fey' m G p '� e- Cr' Fes- 5r 5- o °� cc o� w� w ° p- ce y E.a c�i Pt.° o.oro n. a o cc co pR "0 rt y R Cit 0 S O �oO G O O ''' y OO ' O • 0 'zip O k7. 0 111 2. i `/ M o HI CD 00 L n n o H vo 44 4o 4E4 #4 44 ta4 44 m 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 V* 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 t44 il 44 Vii 44 44 O W rW-` n N ON N r` r-' N r-' N N N N r-.• N N N N .--' W W ON G1 01 0"' N N cn N N ti. Ln N Ln Cn Cn Lit N Cn Cn C 1 Ln N r+ �l N N N 00 00 O �7 O 00 00 Ln O J N y cn in O Cn in Q.. O Ln O O O O In O O O O Li) LV Cn Cn En Cn v J O to O -i Ll O W :-.1 Li �'t r-, -o- N r+ r-+ N ,--` N [N Lv N N N NJ NJ v NJ 41. G1 G` W N W G1 G1 N N 00 O n CTi n r-, n o C. n Iv C N O » .0 r0 to g CD wpp+ c . CD • a rk. a 0 0 CD CD 0 CD co cto (0p•' 8 5 � tt 44 X44 a4 n g AD • `0 G. ND n a. CDD 0 cNii 0 cin w �. 0 Q. -. O. h o 0 0 0oto aro A re 1,4 o 0 0 0 o• "� ti V noel 0 • 0 • 0o a m tz A 1-t on O O O O q O• Op ' n0 C . P- 44 #4 #H #a4 R o "D q N % , rD r- h � �. ri r_._.O UJ—, ro O OO ap'b. m '*irt K O O O 9 O Ocn O O . . o ND. DD m O O O \..yy "Y nV A 0' K o' Ce 5 0 5 to 5' roC M co171 CM v' r+ o V' e M il '11CD coro R. 0 44 44 • 44 44 _ Sao t- W ,a444 CCD 4A 44 =b4 4.V ,44 44 n J W J - 454 454 J 6R •A 44 J J CD —.7 N VI W N N ,7 VI U-1 V cn cn �' N �+ V .- 00 r+ N N N) Li' 0' - Vi to n 0 O O O O N O Cn tr incn ix, cn cn C N to o O,_ 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 cn O 4, 0 N) 0 0 O N V' N N.) N O O O O 00 0 O 1-h 'g'• .-trt le nB. M m Oa n o A y�t' o o a: .64 a: 464 P.: a4 o' o o' 0' 0 0' 0 P- o- P- o 0 5' x. 0 5' a• 0 5' o 0 n_ 0 0 o pOp., — p # - w GQ o R. 5" 0 p- ��' 0 p- C,s. o P NI CAo w 0 arc 0 Nt Di .-t, uu I; N CPD O n W 0 O p a. o a• o a• o U. o •0 0 •0 0 0 0 5. h co 0 [t et • 0. � n 0 GN N N '. r-+ � v 0. N N N N rt o O 0 N r. C n w x 5 n a n p m' 4 la n n - w N 0 0 G. w I w 0 N n WmE pco , nCD ro icr. Q n o E. y Al fA A O w '0 P. O n G O' m 0 o A ft) W N 0 roCD O a••-� . p• n vii P, g. 0��• w Fry ❑ ro 0- m rs C n �° n q n R El A' O O y N O m n ^' O n "d 0r p cry /. r p' .T '.�• y, o n W f�o W k '0 ..a ° n a `".. E:(14* y .4.9. e o00 kms• 5. a P 9 g' a• x c o 5 2 II i d0 ; . n a. 6. R' n Crq f� ;o by h1 Cn g g °p y n � O m y y m g`C O O - O 0- rt 0 dQ r CY R. o o a. R• R• y' co OO a nn ra- o v o A co rt #79 on 4.4 4.4 G\ `aF on � '.O on O V 4.4 - G\ G\ O 6H ' Q O O O O N O coO Cn O O�• OO O O bb O In O O O O b b b O O O O Co O O O O O O Co O 0 0 0 z m M P rt rt r3" `.S" "Q .-0• CD 1-tint A �dOO 0 O O 0 4 n o 0.. o.• gt g g g N w N t t Ft Ft CD r '_ 2 W k D Cf< v N 0.. n 8 8 o a R. 5 x U 1 mr•i -1 G G ems, rf Y 'a. . CD n ADC ›O a n n R N N CO co O O FTl FT' U-1 CN '--, 1--, h-, p-, C\ Co 0 0 0 \ '--+ J . -1 J v 'r•t J N •-•• N .-. J F-+ '--. r• N N N N N N N.) N N N N OOO OOO 00 0 0O — 0 . - V ,• V0 .p 0 0 -Pe. no n 4 X z d d C o o Fad l tt ,ra• g tt i a r4 E: x CA 0 t� g DO 0 ti a �a d b ao 0 0 0 . n o • ro `rl •-i'C e' o \ � 0 CD ', m CD a ... 1 ti 1 m o m w m w P'oR o p. ► td * a. a. a. a. n' • w w 5 5 0.• m c 44 44 44 p H y p * t'� p (Yo O cn In O p, tt y ,A N ,�� n> .• niv O O 0 " cCO . E• y 0 `� 0 0 i 0 N 5. a G r4r 1 ,� im a ,' od o 'dl,I Cl-a a• . i o ^ til ' ca 0 VI„cn Cr i o R 2 0 'd a a a .-+ 44 44 I 44 44 4 CO WJ O O W coO coO Oco n GJ O ? O W --7 P 0 W 00 OO O O -t a a 111 ITI a a a a m c. a a rr 4-1- o- to- Q' Vl (% rr rr til n J J J J J ,.z...±..: 1 J J J J J J J J J P. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m .N+ .N-+ .N-+ .N-,. .N-+ .N-+ .N-+ .N-. .N+ a, .�-+ .N. + .N-. N .0 0 x C CD w0. b o o 0 1-3 'C M. M. G o a i- y ti �. N .--i C H i--i * Ltt. ° n n O N P' 7d n m r pEa. o P 0 �° b c o 4 n � � o C) a. (� d fD l-' J . p- o o� ° m Ei * .. I* 0 p 7d a0 N a. eo ' p r`t• O CD M. R 4. a a 9 -. ~I °0a o 1 CD o a a. 5• 0 0. �, CD cro d d 0h 0 0• P 0 0 n CDb CDCD NJ a -9 N c '0 w ,o 0 W N C C O a N W i 0 ''d,,-. ''d ,, G y y O O 0 • 0 N A IV Q D4 X 'Ci '° o 0 O O CD. .C. G w a. . a. . o o ° a a I -41 -1 -i JJJ J J J J J N N a. IN N N N N N N N d N N N N N N N N N N .t C 0 0 R It i• C m ''3 O co w O C o. HYfT1 Z H �H H �' H �HG d o o 0. H H w Z 4. W H 101 OK * H rt H H �.'0. a �' A �" ~ 9E rOi o m w [D d ° a. n p. f. o. o rho' cn w n C1 t7 g a 1 *crq * p p S. p 0. . o 5 C1 0 c rt o, �, a CA co b cr. c p E C y p p O O r r a a. b 'rJ a. a. O 0 p p 171 ti ro .moi v N 4/10 w G1 CO I v CO W G� M-' N ▪ c P O W W W -I W CCC .fir" L.. w OD 0 a I-P b C C !A (A on NO NO w w Cd A n O O � r. CA 0 \ \ \ n J JJ \ J J J J J JJJ J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ---..N N N N N N N N NN d O O CD O O O O CD NO O OOOwN N N N ▪ N N N N NN a a d I e. O 0 0 o 0. n1-1 col 7z 1. 10. n q d G 'phi Cl) cn yK tilx ,t 9. Ha C. C v a. R. p I0. ',7 �• �• ~ [ ,-'d ,'. 'K' �y ,,,, o `� .. q a O O L5 o- :h t17 m � a y o p C, 4 v' �� w w i * cn a ( a A. ,1 o n a t" �. •o b co Z o 0 Z. ,• ir * co Co N O O O• 1* a 'iY . ao o n 4 rn o n n�o c ug A a n y W a. (C - n a.m gN t n 7 0 �. a a a. i A 1.1.4 a 4. .-. 04 00 ... 84 �4 i34 #13 c H i34 44 N "44 Tra t g. • N i ON VI N N W O O N , � m ✓ w w o . a, ro . .t rt a 0 0 a a 4 ,. o .- o " 0 o .- o a • 0 o 0 o" 0 0 '- n7 elln I -. -. _1 _1 _1 N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 IN)0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O Al N N N N N N N N N N N N N N A p..� N .--� F-, I..a N 1--1 H 1... F-, F+ F-� f.a H.a o3 yc M 0 4 - 0 --i Ot1 Cl)o 2In .� bri A-y ro H H 03• o k k k = CO Py ro 'O H ~ 0 It a t N �l H Oa = _ _ "�' z (AD re . n 8 co ` ,s. M. . 0fr, RD re re g. 0 176r, Ill a til cn RD n ril CA b P CA N H-' re in 44 4v4 .tei, ,"N N 9 pW H LN N OOiN --I In -r, O00 g O Cn Cn � Vi C O Ma y tt A A h A A J -----1 --1 J v v J J J --.1 ----1 ---I --1 J C. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N 1-+ N r-' "'' 1--, 1.." " "'' I-+ /'' A \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ M N N N N N N NN N N N N N NN V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y C--C F-1 N t--,• p--, N h-• 1--k h-• h-+ r-, h-� rt C C O O O O O I-+ .-, 1...+ F-+ N. N I-+ r-+ N N a C n C) 0 M if 0iy y 7d F . ro CD �, O < 0. 0. C F'• on 0 N G e ►� (� w a z 1. b- g fD e gJ s r i '4. I . K il n' p 0 (D !D / M Q (� A. N "1 Cn G MIt. n a n n I c rte-. rp ., O Cg. R • CD o w. 0 C* ti y Ant m CD D ro 9 n O. s a ¢' O 0 P- 5' a. o C n w a w CD A rt a G 6' A A C, b *4' n CCP GN a. W o z- . tiif 4. y dO O.v V o n z 9. 0N .'t o n CCa. O, o O P W n O o h a ., N O N tri n n �� N 01-1. O O N O -- p , N No O C-,. co --+ 1-, Cn C O �P. o `n 4 tt 1 ung �n • 4 (_ "Pr ' C �' C a » eb CD(7rnw r, r & G rt,• 4 ° o R o n . R n �. o a. �. t9 N ro y oc r-- o cn o f ,� • c 8 X C R• ,, ff 0 >v K O rt , . Z C C, or m n fill M fD Iii: ! ii. . o W ' .7 a 1.1 rb O73 0 F+. Q. fD �-h r* 0 a K g'U H 44 - y n <n N ' g f1 ro 2 R. tt O y � n lu n y v p k1 ^ o a 8 0 00 $ hd o ti u+ X a 1 tai 0 As p N as 44 - ,Tss a � 017 t..1 n O 0. N N N 0as c, DJ O - G'\ L1 W Z.>) P+ \ NN N WW N '- n N 01 G1 ZC '- W o o w Ko "O b • a. x o p 0 E o o- p (aD. N y n '7` C i Z , - m ,, o oro \\ \ \Ls, \ \ \CD N �: Ii ; qi O .. O .. H o O ..,, a. °na. p.c, o ., o .� P K o o m 0 0 .; 0 n• 9- & n y • a N n f�' N �o 0. , O I o . `U o . o � 75 I PSK. Cl.y N N Cr' N CO0 0 ri 17 �1 J J --1 �1 J J �] --1 Q. o O O O ON Np O O o V' N N N O N N N N N so 'Li. O O O G1 N r-. ' �-' "'' Co '� oe CD z rt V�y tt tee' H ; H al n -30 H xIt 4 . n pd2. a ro � ii y h o0n a (n cn cn rnOaw k O' H ° Cff 4. ° p a ' Zpe a1-1 ►-I Cpp y C n a �-b 0 0y 4. Vt7 0 cn FCD V p n ' mO tH H 7CD g• n � N m ' O y0 N 0 O m 0 E. a. G o 0" 0 0 G h1 o C C) so C a k Cl) CD �pFyy' QQ y v 'vCn H H y '''Odl o r1 9 r) 1-1z a o t�# o tan 999 t.,sn tsi is tsf I t 2 4% �i --. .-. 44 44 44 tin 44 ori'1 Lo W W l o o C 00 .. \ C--1 o o n W o O .+ 0Lo .rs' W J aD 00 — G\ ,;P 4� c. W (N 0ao cn -p a " o n c, v J .. .- o oo nA. 0 C m w g. ' C C C C CPt' CD / (r. 1 � \ \ z \ vh y w. ., . m N O c CD CD 0 44 P Ul ..�' (D f0 CD (DLI1 Fa HI 0 W y '•• ' y o 0. " a: . few p'Pel a w p• a. •• -gn �,• ;. . R el r: ,' 'C a p p C. w O '' o • o a cC ° g ' 5 .' ,, ff pt 0 -3 n nn' CD p 8 o' o' • o, n 0 p p e y• crQ'1:4 ,;: o 4n H M N 0 ' FU n 4,4 n F0 a• 0 p 0 Q n n CO n \W.--+ \J.-� fr..._. J\ \ .\J J N .-' 00 00 00 \ \ \ \ \ \ C,.+ N .-\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \N N N N N N N N NN N dO O O O O O O O O O O O PO ---, N N N N N N N N N .. W N .• N CO .-- - CO CO CO CO 0 on n tt nA- a r° H a �Ca H GIs abs ven fD tt o o e w C 4. 0 R. el V 1zi r ` 4 ro L- , o mm,,• a m Q ° y F 1 Z a tll � r a 0 tj 0 r � C4 rip N pa A vA. K c• rt a. o r7 w 't y F•-1 �r tt y o a. H a ° 0 o 0 b G 0 G - w a p n ti. 5 �. * n a. la g C. la 1- p I A yCrq rt n w O L� y O P `'i, 'y PD c 33 h7 n yam H . �e o ."' n• C w FCD CD n tD 40 co • r r n s C/ p CA R° C� soh A cr aw tii . h• a s. r,. o 4. R. r 0 w o P, , a o b zt g O O C- 1�I O A, . F 1 hS til ryA. a r,• W W A gC.n N h1 T • i . n m o n N fi m ra Pi i g w rai� "c/ a- a ,n1. R re CD 4 ? ONo • x w w O ".CC C A Y IA AI 0 • l' O. H O. a y 1 A R C k. I a ' s. A• 'A. „L A. a. i E 4 R.0 y b 1 A A. 1 I --.I i 1 i \ izzl \ 1 I \ \ \J i \ \1--, h-� F-� r1 t-1 N NN N N N N NN NN N N N N N C0 ori r:, w na 0 � Altv a a a o oz .., �, tt lig °' �, ,�5 A>AD a . nnnnd0 t� m '0000 .2 O a. cro R A 0 0 0 5 (pV Ro foa* V"oo'1* n ° a rat rt 0" Fsi. '� �yp C C ;� n`G o m d d d ° ° p o o afD i `t ° P•il �, Fn h aaaa AD AD n vi ~lncn x0,4 m. c O- 0'0 y o' R. o' o' ° °° . z �- � � nnnn y R R a 0 E 5. CA CA CA CA ro a Z a 0so 7:J tai UP C/, CA I. g. . w Pi S• . n rol.eDil E C a 0 • 8 n; o• t: o D a a 'a 44pR. 11 '11a K o o N St CI> ro 0 0 0 �' 000 n o0 0 + iva P p • O p o e a r7 n rr 0 n 0 ,a x W bH fD a #H #79 W W r-, r•s 0 #79 N N R N Sr9 (D t3H3. jag n. Q N N 0\ O 00 Cn Cf, N CJ, N (n r-+ DD �-' a - J O O O V, O U, O Q.) V, a O 0 O a U.1 00 00 00 00 .A .p b. J O O O O O O O O ,* O 7, O m O - . 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O r \ \ \ \ h7 "C 'G a "0 \ \ Fil n .r p `-t a ,-- a N a• o 0 T ° 0-' SH a 44 rq 0 0IIa n ,Q • O g 5.ag C r, 5. 1."e yCDCDO ITO 0 s2, r r*, , rr, r, ra _ . o Oa t rae rr N ro p . p OI-., CD Up 0m O O 0 0 O., K a a 1-t NI a CA a. a. 9 5 cr o o u o 0 P ,h HIp n CDN a a a E-• r•r, p W W C O t11 a 0 0 00 -a -1 --I _...100 00 00 a i. r-1 r-, r-, r-, r-, r-, I , r-, r-+ r-, r-, I-, I-4 — .S I-, r-, a N N N N N N N N N N N N) N N N N N t7 0 0 0 fill . . . . . OOOO 0 . 0 O 0 . SO SO - � � - - - 41. - CO 0 0 i - 1 a I y PI f 0 i 0 it ii:g:ao CD C DI CY Cr oi n n Cr :.3g:r ° * -co ria (D (D CC) 'nr' b1851!^'� o rt + WN OmC �I. it H o) rt °o . o E s `O 'TJ IIf D ii. ra n n fD �"� C1. n �' chi A �' O ori el AD A R so rt rt .+ n 'a ��'- �, V el • n �' I. d y n n (Lc': n a. 3. A a �9F yN+� ,t Fnr �e ° p : 0n n 5 b W cn p 0 i AD M p nnN0 F2 7 R n CD w w+ v. 0" n (o ~,� g1 o z Y n N C7 cn O ¢- c c n b ww ' w n A , n 0. p O P--,, - i--+ 4s 44 4A �o p ' 0+, G O O O n (p CD 44 O Li, U, (n V7 Vi U, U, Cr) 'G 't0 Cd O O n w W O b O O O b b b N0 O �C0 D4 O O p" ' 5, n" O O O O O O O O 0 '' O a. V) (D Cl) 0 �G Pnq rnt h W W • �' 0 A E. 0- 0- n n me G� n cn n 'V-. n. n O o O • moo ° yg CD rr' ' CD N a, Q O re O .°r, n G. AD n o E 0 c '0 ' y o. 0 0 0 0 no °, Q 5' C 0 0 P. 0 N g m O n a 'CD UR O an 'u AD ' a a o' . p 0 n' B o 5 g r ed 0., R 5 5 n n °, CD re '0 •' • v) o ' E Q P ° ° a n �L* •C n 0 5 44 Q. C. Ci r, 5 0 O 0CD n #3H O rt °Z E4 Q O. h c:, Q O O R - n O �W N1. E 00 O O G O p w O O m O O g. rt tt e ._, n NJ \ J \ J -4 -4 CO J -4 J J J -4 -4 •". \ N \ CO \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ C -.1 J r-+ J N 1--, i--+ r+ r+ •-, i-+ N 1--, f+ n \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ N Na N 1-' N NJ N N N N N N N N NJ b O O O ' O O O O O O O O O O O O NJ O ,.. N O O .-. N --` F-+ .+ t"' .-, 1-' rt NJ 0 '•-a 00 '•-s Ui '0 J '.0 ' ,...0 00 00 CO oo n )-1 7:4 . n g E co ■. n Gs , M. o' co 0 a o- a EE• n CD -' ( N p- of, n 0 • CD 5.CA 40 CD n o' a O n 0- 4 40 o, e rn 9 o 2g. a 1 � o 5 g n N o o P a. o _ K n n CD n n o y0 0• n 8 con lo a 0 2, Cl) to f a - iCDD ' :„ii MO 0.:., CD ri, a a y a o' n ° • C o n n o C y co aE. F CD i a5 . a 4 K' 0. CD n co o a p U LI 2 C. --,• -.., 0 0 o ei p 11 \ § k n , § � § \ P [ § ) c m ; A - f n � ; ■ D 2. CO ƒ Cl) k k. \ R. k § n k ] n / E ; E . n ` Lo. ± \ k Eti o ! i 0 o 2° "4 0 sot Ii k §, .1111 ° ƒ � 2 ƒ g, A. 7 « $ E / IV $ k >4 k ■ a § = fk E L k$ r ¢ 2 ■ 00 ■ ON WI w t _ k it ; i — — — £ ` - ± / 2 2 r . / T :ztluil . I ... . .. I .. . ..si .), wp\ y % \ § 4 % ® w w/ / r m w S / 55 ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ g / / ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ 5 RRERR G R B ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ I ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ § — x 2 2 / x x 9 * 9 x x x } N N N N Q "---. N / » / / Q Q % / / » 7 8 8 8 8 § » ] ] \ / / § e j / § r. > » r. e, A) a a t, a g° Z A c 0 el el r R it Ato o xi X C. m n ti o N Sp at h E" w U. .f by " a n w . . 'Rb k CR w LP N W i. i1-.• N+ A ? .i qi S9 CV a Ft Lra #a 434 LR 44 i . Lra N ) $s #s 44 44 44 1 44 bi ## 44 44 wwwwwN N OD V ' CO J J J J J 0P 00 -J ? ,W CT W C� O VUn .+ J N W N .' CO W J TT U W W W N N ,-•• 14 W ;--% .J (n -P. ;- r' iv :P. O\ r-` - - O '0 A ? (n C CT CD b W C\ U N CA J CA • A Ur ? r-• CT G\ r-• W COCA CT O N J ? N C\ U. 1-. In r-+ J \ - \ ❑\ \ t\- \ \ \ \ \ !\ \ \ - — \ •\ - \ - - ❑\ \ .....„ O 005555 5090 555aa 5535 O O 00000 00000 00000 00000 d o o d o op o o o pot o O o o # Off�**, G o HH m P n J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J -4 J J Q, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I--, - I--, r' r-+ .-, 1-+ r-+ N r'' r'' r'' r'' t--, " i--, - r-+ 1 �--+ r' r'' r'. SD \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ON O N N N N N N N N N N CO N N N N N N CO N N N NI W N NJ ,�+ N4, W N N U. .P W N Ui W N r+ N W N t7 n w g. n P. n a 0 0 n co 0 C n n n b i t'' o oo bo a cr. A A w W 1 n n H4..7 vY fag Lis tO 4q S4 #s 8a #H 4.q 451, 45.53 vs Ln s 454 W W W W W N N N N r+ .--N N r+ .--s r+ F+ ,-+ )-+ i--, #R4#, 459 49 4R T. V C0. J 0. — -- O O W W W lW N " N N i-+ "i--+ `-+ ` ON ON C. Cs Ul 41, O N Ui J W .-- J W V O\ N N O J N O CO ON W 4, W N .-, V N W J N CO ON Ln 4, W W Oo P OD N 0, O co g... r- O N. O 0, W .. V' ;D W W �l w oD 0\ In c\ i--, O+ O O LV t—,�, {a N W O to W W 4, O ON -+ W F-+ ON J O W -4 N n. N NO o--+ W A -' -P J r--+ - - W \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - \ \ \ \ \ '---. \ \ \ \ \ \ 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 O O O O O OO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o o d o o d Eo O 0 o o o O b per�**, per�++, o o o Huh J J -4 J J J J -.1 J -4 J J -4 J J J -4 -4 J J -4 J J J J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ,_. t+ N N N — — �-+ ,-. ,-1. i--> N ,- ,-s I—+ t-+ -+ — -+ F+ ,-. ,-.. —. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O CO CO O O CO CO O O O CO O O O O O O O O O O O O Ln 4.- W N UU W N N OA 4, W N Ln --IN NI N W N ,N. N N N N N W N .+ n x toto n it mm g• g• g• e Z x Z 0 00 al n n x W .- •- o a n .aHpot 0 � no . . .co Pt tI '11 •,-, m Q. 0" y bri rtr 1;Ig fb PI m n 0 n I.�a• 0 0 II., el 0 0 &: a. 0 0 ro as � µ+ ON N W • • o 4.4 t0 i�3 La 44 44 #i9 L-4 t4 A4 44 #p 44 4s 49 44 . #R Vbb as 0 46 In in - W IJ t7 Cn -P 4, W N 4, W W N N cn cn Cn O ,-.. J N 0-+ O O 0Y cn �l O ? _0 N OT O T N 0 T A N G O co p co V W cn yr In 0 oo m oo W ;--` o ? to W to .-, O W O C O 00 O O J N N • J .p ' to J — J N N W N µ .-, T I. O O O O O T In J J •-+ r-+ — N 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 `° 5 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co co co 0 o r' o E `C `C `C `C `C `C k' J `C *-.4 Cf' D'• O' O' O' 6i `C `4 `C `C `C tn. n n' n n ,y RI (F0 fE Paha N 0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, aNNWNN Pt a nPt a J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J \\ \O J \ J J J J J 1 - —. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\\ N N \ \ — \ \ \ \ \ r--, r-•• r-+ r_. -+ .-.. r.. r_. r-, '_ - t-+ r•'' "'' '--+ J J N N \O r+ F+ N - 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ - \ \ \ \\\\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N.) N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O o O 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O r--+ 1-+ Ln -P W N W -P W N N 1.0 4, W N •-` N .-+ N N N N N N GO T to -P W N r-` it 1 y 1 .T ft A " H M H Vl y vl $; m CO H n -S. IA cn I. .°; 4N 4 �= ao » n • to g5 0 A rr l'§ #• tn �p 0' a v) Ca (D -Pt ° O n 3. 01 a g . a 5. 0 0 2o f' H `"° iv o,I 0 o ti to on ro Wn A ro. p, II. a 0 0 A C n � n2.n n a V1 nson n en ►1 n r 2 'n- n n °o rem w c w v o n a. Ru E.,t C m C " O f>t s o. R• . ss o. " .e w n CID '.) VD 44 44 tis a. _ 40 ,614 °(7° 4 w ��yyryNryN 2 n •+ v 0000 w 0, o 5 µs -' 1,. coir ' In N N N W O 0 " N W T W c r. 00 __1 Lo �l LV w O 0. `y 0 C ") O •0 • b b 0 o4 W .-. k O CII VI Cr O W �1 W W 'F + o O O O O O .-. �1 '- C.C) a n E 0 . o n o N w B •O B . R. co 14 0 ri,y , 0 o M "1 ' N n c o A • n u y ti r IS r'i l .--. JO J ---1 -1 •�1 sJ •0 J J J v v J \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\\\ \ \ \ \ N N N N N N...,._ ........ •-...._--, `•••.. -...._. i N N nnn N �-• •y. 0 0 v g 5 0 p M ,CJI suro A e.. fDA A M .1 4 M 4 iy p � � d gi t7 C o 2• In 0.. ,:,4,: 9 E. 0• .a o o '+ 0 0 m .°�� g , n a p ff 5' c. 4 . o fD 5' S. n 8 tai CO3 VI 5 p o O 0 p n. .ri 0. Cr 0 0 : 5. e • 0 aq 0 o 5 p o • 0 p 5 050 H 00 O P a O ro 5 0 8 :(-1.4 W W IV r-` 00 r-- ,+ IV N e . O 0 8-n ,-n 0I 44 44 44 44 44 • �(¢¢WJn��3 49 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 w vii Vii OBD Cil r�I cocCo 1 N J W J W � 0' ? fN 4 00 '0 O N O O O • \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ 0 0 0 0 0 C, 0 0 0 8 O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 o 0 0 co O co co co co co co co co co n e n f1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 f1 G G 1r ✓r 1; 1v c G p 1r 1r C C 1r O' 0' d' D: 0' 0' 0' 0: Cr Cr 0' Cr 8' Cr O n n n n • n n n n n n n `n r� 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' 0 1 • rr r1 M r° r° r< ,1 r< rt O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1+1 M 8 •'h •'h •'h •'h •1, •'h .h .1, •h •h •h •'h 8 E 8 E E 1 8 8 8 0) 8 8 w m P w w w w w v w w w 0 Fv 0 4 8 0 4 4 4 8 4 rn rt 8 (4 4 Ft thi ---.1 - v -.1 J J J J v J J -1 v J - ,0 \ \ -J -4 \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ N N \ ' \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ .\'''''. \ \ \ ',....---s N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 y N N N N N N N IV N N N N N N N O 0 0 0-+ Ur. 4.. W N '-+ N 41. W N ,-` 4n . W N '-+ N r-+ — 00 —1 R v 1, F4 0 et a z n A n - - n ei 0 0 a o 1. `11 E. O O O0 r pd ro r W co CD W N !D 1 'Si R ft n n 44 44 40 44 44 44 44 44 40 40 49 44 44 44 tH 44 44 Baa 44 40 W • 00 as �l �l --1 --1 c� c. a a c.• p. 4, CoNV bo -..4 b. <r 4, Cc Nb J L1 In to ---.) ON N N 4... lv O OO cr. W - L] N 1--+ r+ cn �1 Ln W W a O O O O O .-' 0, '0 W a 0, `-` •-` N 'V J a v 0, �y\ 5 \\\\\ \\\\\ \\_ \\_ \ \\ \\\ O • O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OOOOO onroron O OOOOOOOOOOOOOO O O O O O0OOOE 0- OQ6crdcra" OO7QcO' ' ' " " ' r n n n' n n: n n n n n n n n n n ' ' O; " n nnnn CD rn rt cnco co co co CDD ' Ft' b pco co R CD rn F CD C C C CCD CD ro0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •.1 •h M ni •h M .h •h n..1 •h •h •h •h 1-h to •h •, M •h .,1 E E E E E E E E E E E E E E 8 E E E E E AD W W A. W W W A. A) W A) SA W Al A) N W A� N N R R R R n R H M (p ft K h K R R 4P M K .t MY K M .-t M co co to 17 A .-• .-• —1 --.1 ----1 J J J v J J J J v J -4 J J J J J \ \ C N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 yy N N N N N N N N N N N N N) N) N N N N N N N N 1 -+ r-. cn 4, W N .-• (.1) W N .-+ C.I.N A W N .-` Li. W [J 1--` a CD 0 g n a M r, a n H n B" a. g C n CD ron Cil coo on roE — g a Ft a.M C CAI A, `C a. w a. (D I ~ Qp CAO O CCD CD i4. 0 et ti DD 5j.:t `C 9 20 W R ►r �a,j, k A. • 0• m A ti e.s COtet FD 0. CA O, A W N to f+ A A v 4. (0 I Di rI �I H H H H H H '6' H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H �-I Pcn n n rt n n n co �t n n n n n ry n rt CD n co n �r �e n CO n rt n co t Pt rt re rt rt rt rs ht n n re tt Ft ro rt re rt rt rt re it it it re it rt ... W N — W N -+ W N —` t.N N N W N r—. W N .--. W N ••, W N.) N W N r•. W N r-. C ro ^ o C� 4c, 0 o 4 4 cN r N r-, rt rt eq n•0 N • --1 J W J J N W W r-` — r - ht rs Co OOLn O0O co -Du . W uo `00v N N A A . N N ,, ,� .o O O O crt N -Du +7 to ell Co O O CO O O G, N N V' In Lit c, til is ON n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n r1 rn 0•t, i*, r+, r+, ht, i, h+, 0-t, rn rn rt, rn t•t, rn rh '-n 1+1 0+, rn 'hi rn ro t.n i-t, t-n rt, rt, re, til M "•' t-`▪ N A N N• N b No •�'» N N N r. 0 CD i n n Ix 4�-i CD y 4 a n MCD q °+ epi .n'�J• X •rj % 4 0 0 B n i i a x CD K. . n C„ 0 w v CD4 X � ,.: � 0 . n L "Ly b a. • CD 5 6o � D a. AI X4, '-7 0 . C) � C a E. D a. aa n N G L iY, v o It }9 ° z 0 o O n o �so7n an �—IHS—IHS—I ]' 0 p a p 0.,1 ••45 .N$ re re H rpt co co Co N W N W N 0-' 17 \ \ \ \ rero ELn i Ce. a rt CA an R. elllCL I. r• • `wt QO ql I. 4 4 ree rn W W N N N e J v •P }+L a La La W `f Cs C. 0 U. Lal Co C) C)C) n A, rn rn rn n, ", ", 0 a a t \ \ i --, 1 \ \ - n 0 0 dNN ado I ; o o - 1 ro d on � x d o m c to o o ,n- 0 o I. n z E G' o R. I .o y H r. O P rt R. P CI. a O r w N' x 'al o 0 -ti 41 n z Z p n . n P n n "U y a y o .y w n 7d = rii o osn E. n R P. �� '3 y g. iil azzg:IzPan zJzxg zxzw zP:i z7zi z7ev4cnz gdz .b z ryv��-1 � '* O O o y t- O y O y n O y O y O y o2 O y �' O 2 n O y o [ N 8. a s q y Y n Y a a a P p a a a a: a `a: `a a n: �, a R � fit• a H 0 �o ,ro n ':16":' 190,4 .b g�yy 7d n qd n n qd n b n m y y P n rt p n y N 1°JT a y p n - n. It w R 4$ El n rn„ .P. pA� V-. N SE�pL ryIry }a. 9 {Op.. G. Q �Fa% P. C. P- P- " EG�DD: N A, F A- ry, o S N & P T R T 3 o 3 n n r A n P .A.. ppR p c o p n so ."^+ ,z, n. n 5! a M Otde A o C;'-' 'o 0 4 n Una I3 i •C ( w P• 0 p .d N R R- 44 44#4 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 04 44 44 44 44 44#4 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44*4 84 ni b O W 0 Ir .W.. --.1 -I, 0\ W V' In Na N in N J W N In N Vi W AO ON n N In In 0. 00 Ln VI O O O O O In P to In In O }n O In b P P n 0 0 0 0 0 !.n !s C C N N C C G C C C O co O G C G C C C C 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O C 0 0 0 O O O O O co O O co co O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O co co O F n wa a o C a w o o aR aE 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o A A P. o 4 4 4 rt g g R R R R & R R R C 4 e n a e a- 0 0 3. tZ J 00 J 00 00 -J J 00 00 J J J J J J J J J J ` .6N \�� \\ \ .• \ \ ` \ O \ J OD ' ... .. ,-. .. I —. —. _6 .6i-. .. 0-,, .. .-. .. I-• .‘ .. ..+ —, .-. . H ...% .. ,I. ,,, .+-N . N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O OOOOO OOOO O - 0JJJ J- 0 J 1 00 CO00 00 .0 Y7 O O N N N N O N N . O O J CO07 J n n v g p P A 'l7 'O p n rD 2' O K. 2 a ° 3 to t1 '.y a n p g n m a N g . I .-o Po g 12 ' o. m Cl_ 9, ro9 n ''',.., 1 w G .8 O O a 8- '4 -'4 n al K n 0 St. R. 0 v a.• y o a' a M R o n A. o bi y °A a y o x 4. ro "� ' A 4, w — ...... .?N.N N 7+ p O W [n O cn to J J J lC to Oo In y G 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O P. O O O bo o O 1„y O n y PO . Y 9A A u.o O O G O r 0 a' 0 c0o O C O GN'" o `J' yo o S B ° �N„ —W 8 S 8 ° 4 N cn N O,� a N to N O .� a. 0000 �, a ,, 000 0 '.a 0 o a o oCC 'C o CC 0 R .ti .a b `° ° ro .a .d `° ._. to n " 'til° W W f° rn n 7 5- 0 7. e N w r. C. CMN N N N N N N N N N N N µ \ NN N N N N N NNNNNN N N el O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O p® -O ‘0 ,..0 ,..0 ,0 ,0 ,..0 ‘0 ,40 ,0 ,0 ,..0 ,0 00 �7 F m nroCD N o z • 0 Fr 5), hr �y p n 5. N '" �ri �5jiy x o �co _ � �ct o. a o R° e� p ° n t7 d p v* ° 5 �. 0co O O y CD WP IC 3 -- 57, 2_0(") � C o c p n p '7'; 05. ..1 '� L 44 zX g. rC") t-9 i CO 0. O C. G o - C co .. rp Ga. m-: A. �• C7 • o ° ° a. N a 5 aci, o• co o' vo � cm "' �a CD CD � CM 0 - � • •- n G 0 � w ° a. co 5* G 7.0 '0 v n n0- N rr, w CA rn n E g 't O 'tj„' ac p O cm, 0. c m • ' n K 0 x n r ry a. RI Cn DD 5 x a% 5 C 'Cr 1 a w n on ", a Cl) C7 n rf D CD o G y 0 - C7 g o �5 n r � .. U 71=' I '0 8- o Or. DD P „ a o 0 0 'O 4.,$) I . ..„ AID API CD N o ' ' C�1 N C!G '�' 0 0 0 0 r° ,'q r'e o -P 1 q0 Q. O .4 �7 Cn (n ro AlCM • K n • �. 0Hro CD 0 ro p i Ln tri 4 • 4 • C) o 0 o p- n ,...,PD v, cN„ o ' d d a 2 C r� " 11111 05' KCDpp nD. o , u II . DD co R n 5 n n d Cr1 a R C n C no - - 4- 0 °, a 5• 0. M M O Do m 't? 0+ 5' 011 til CD n SZ 'J F CD O O O \ o k E0 CA \ £§ / / } so cga / 0 0 ? 2 E. / 7 § f Jma 5ro ƒ \ ƒ _ \ k \ \ ƒ k i. ® / q § ƒ ƒ n \ Ra \ ub / \ \ / & k ; ; ƒ o \ _ n \ \ `a. / ƒ ® c § / a \ I. / / 1\ 0 — - - — f - 7 , k § k / k $ 7 # 2 z- G ƒ ƒ j c \ # - --L . \ 0 • ' j • 4 \ ƒ ƒ ƒ d & ƒ \ j - / 1-s111111 y 111111111111 N N B 8 8w w w X n C n 0 Cb CD 0 n n CD n n e' 1 0 tri 0 oW N n nyO N pO y °' w 0' o o o 0 0 n a R a. a. co a 0 o c. a. a. o .. m o N o }7. R 0 ea iI til CR b ,1 00 00 OI OG\ WfD C1 n it n n 4 _ce . 00 0,0 ,..r, o 4a9 #79 #H -LPH O 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . II . t. ...., 0. , . . 00 n Nit II Iril .c,Trs,,,) 11 ..1 Pp n O Till ! 4A A w oo - � .N-. `o c� n '77 n co Vii ! II N .A co •0ON Ul 0 I I : I i OOo � i W 1 I Oflaj 0 al M n n - \.. , .+ C. \ \ \ \ Oll\ \ \ \ O o tv O IV N N .i N N n X C n C n N O F n n n w C-1 w �' w C w o m ;aa a a aro a a C E-E: E: a: a o' o' o" o' a. o' o. nd A 44 I ON GI (..O ! c' to O t CO ,tf U, t, [' o [ he R III ! W d W � n N lW NO00 w II rim O VO -11. W ,� 550 i-+ 9 9 00 #3 ON f7 45Ln SS ON L9� OY Lb00 00 II "' " •-� bH '�' 4S �A. V N NV V W V J CON1 - .1 1 1 A N .Coliti V O W � JN 1 11111 N�WJ N V C 1111 NN VN 11 , 11 0O A O Cn -...1 oN 1111 \ \ N \O O O O \ON \ON O NN N N N N P a C d 0 a h O ton O O SOS n n O r ren a. 'Ct7 W N .-. W N .-. O O O y ,� ,.,4 `C `C c ,. O n n n n n n n ° o a a a a n n n n o O O O Q 0 '� 4 R fit' fu 'a 'G "0 '0 r a a a a n n ro n ro n 0 5' co w 0 0 O 0 p- p- a a en E' g. g. . g. 0 ° b " nro' a M co 'r ° co 's co P o. papa.. o 0 a a o '.c 4 a P.. o gi :9 a. 0 0 n n ga 4' a 'd o w co 0 oox a ra N O o o coo oN - �' --P - •`, - ' o c� T li C ' 0 . • 1 i l 4 ` fi 1-3 to 1 0 N . N ° N O W n 0 4,o4 4.4II N W p . N O -Vl V oi N if N O '' W W N CD,.. NJ �COO O o. 4.4 434 W • N „ it 11 ,,r, ,. J '-\ ,--111111 .311 ,4• 1111\ \ '-+.311 II \'-.311 -. \ \\ \ \ \ N N N.) N N N N NJ O O O O O O N N N N N N '' N N.) N.) N.) N N.) NJ Z. 0 e 14 I( d CD e o E. m 4 r• n oz P, rt n n 0 * d d d d O 0 0 0 y COa. n n n �J' O O O o n i*E � n w COn r O R. G. P Y "n C * ii () 4 y C) 0 0 CD W W "7 4 • A rt n n n o o O O ° n. O' 0 A Da 0 14 C5 R.• 'V G $., n "I' Rt45 0 O E• n O m rr n re 0 b n A 21 n O O 1 re nft n O 00 . . .. . ,1.. . . :---.1 ..0 [} IT cl, pJg. lf11111111 4.,, , H "s O O O OO "[3 :. o 'ft a ,.p< k O �' �' 0 ." • CD CD 04 1 a 00 00 n rt 0 0 00 1.1 0 .� 5 • m . - . . - - 11 . 11 -. 11- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N On / § nCA § p \ ƒ X ^on / G G. & a / R § ; co o / co n J * no 2 ` o ` 1 \ R. 2 re n c„ R. } ) a = cn co § \ + 7 n ) } ƒ 5 / i k / 9. 2 / 0 C $ / \ 0 2 i / o R \ § � 2' n , 0 w y J t co/ CD 0 co ? R / % ~ P. \ / \. ~ \ ; % in K ƒ OV @ • ƒ I }3-' ° - - 5oo00 / w ƒ / 2 ƒ / / / / ƒ 2 / ƒ / � R $ ƒ ER ƒ \ § § § I 1 \ I 1 Cl\ E k n § § § } I 1 / , § n n n ; n / a fil II » aCDCD Q Q G Q Q 3 CV0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m» # N B § B N K n 0 1 Z Pzd02 Dcg � ( � t-i5 a a- aro, 4 c.. b m iy K n CD n lD O 5 0 o •-�C y ti g a. a. a. a a C7 U U ' a a � 5: � � t7 t7 U a n V. n 4 C d cn co ro ro ro d 0 d � o H cra as w ''3I Po ,b Ms. CD; I--I �I I 4 f co D co g. 0 CD i i y a a o 'a w til ro co ro o 0 0- C o a 5 co ro n " ^ n CD 2.CrCi HI v "Cl Z o a o 0- o z 4 '01- 0 cT a. co r u, N N J iI N 00 IINI .N00 CD IVA o ti n til 0 M O .:221, 11511 \ \ 511,511\ CG O N.) O O O O NNN N--, .. .+ it 72 o n el ro o a w x V) �s •Crq 5. n n n M- O . w n A loo �e p: 1,-,C4 1 4• n • a Ni A" n o o o n n ry o c0orqq G n. c.t y Ell a. n ¢ d"O �iD .-CD `C q .aPI fi n m n � n 33-.... C o co CD CA Pzi a Way f°p Ccfq .��7+ n F o tPDO A r, C An c° 0 n0piaOC/' o .• oda U np• "' 0- '-ev CDc1w c ' xn r rt aR Cy tiM O 'aO ya c9, O0 In A n a n a .. n 0AD co aito n Fe, O X , CD Cn n Sip 0,4 En O,Q g CD D) O rD . y d N "'d n W r' n c' a. a, o CnD 0' a C7 v■ xc. G. a * .0 a w a' 1 4 O d n0 21 'CD CD a, CD H, lD a, n C n N a' H n0 n▪ n a... �* n y a 'tl a. _ n o V CSD p n Crg cn p o n ro P E. p, co °,oro N rt w P- Q° p CD 0 'G 5, co n , N n 4I. O O C .n'r ti' '+ W w �� Y g n O G ys '171 O '� O in a ��D• CD J In y N ' pi co 'V a' C N --1 yr W� is iO s fD A n `C P I w w • �' a m d o o' 4. O a o a 2 K C cam, R a. c o a• r. a. E. O 5' n 00 o Co a 5' $ p 4. Vy a a c.0 4 [i7 n n ro N N d N a C G GO m n5 0 " Ca m ; ytil g' eD /^ti iv▪ R rte-- �/-- ry- �y- �y00- `i ^�' r� 1� h� r� ham- N w r. V1 til .�+ n '�. nro �y ro '''4 0 'M' ` a, • p4 .Nt .fit n co H rd. \ \ n ro C• a c ...4 • 00 CD n o K • n CM h * 0. a o, ti a 04 \ N `S et w h [...3• A �] Oo to N J N N #4 #,H n. 6o U VA to .-• U V 1 Cn W V 'C i P b�, P 4y R O A GA" M N A., A 4 o S g. y' 0 Ae i m b cio til II -7 -1 --1 J II II �1 rl \ \ \ C�d N N N N N N .i'-. .-+ .-+ �-+ .-. ..+ n O G dCD z ,i d r'I r C...4 b..) 1--` a #1 it g0 ,.., 7d 11) 0 0 :; Co 0 0 0 a1.. H ' eo ... �. .� (Nexp C �a Fr H C C g tcg gl t I I r9 n rt R. I I C C C C .. �, • CD P1 ed w tie. 1 . 1 0 d d d AD • n O co0. co0- to a f 'a ' b d d d ren H . H C 0 ccoo : cm? C/R QV C) too cocA F, a. d CD g- ro •' ff 9' QV ro S cp o o ° G m v . 5 H c° c r7 K c a D S 41. 0. G c. .a co .a cn A - fp n gcr g �* o c b m 9 E. 5 a 0 .P1 q fD CD AD .* M M o"a ca c. C) 0 tow O. w � nto G7 v F A cii `C in o cn 7- co • m H fp w cm ,zi x c d a ° n 7.1 Ift Q. i -to Ars) 1-03 I • • ......, U1 4, eo OOO V • N N Fps g 1 CN :F.1 4, R QC WN O n e n c''; 3 e i--Fi 0 . . 1 fD g a n w coo 9 � a � � ill to 0 0 0 0 0IV, 1 ,..0C..s.,) 0 0 0 .-, 1--, N �-, µ •--� .--, 1--t .N-, b n 2 B n D rn R ° O 0 o p a o K ° v"�7 w G M n o n rt 2 a B n 0 cn 00 fli ch : co rb 2- 00 c ' `,a � 2 NN .+ � b R. am E. O J O - c6' 4'. * 6 ° o ° E W • o o a. oDe g' 0 `c n'7 g. d c. n Hd ro r � 6R 41 . n 7q n G 0 CD co ri• (I n d iit � g '' y 0-00 o d n c Fo 0 p m ° o-a, o *a0 co CD cr. p-'II rt o• `° q `° . 0rg aro a ° a- '61 ro 0: coo co CPft 2 ° `c r c u"'. `° 0-o 14 E O ID � co m 0 0 0- w n n Do a D' '� w' b �a 0- fD vni X1 j .°� C a, 0 cn 00 H G Ci-k CD CD SZ A ?- '` M A, � a. m • r. n p g/ too 'Po 0 0 n c doda N . aM n ,9,02. p ti F 1 ii cm? f D- o m 01 Al l n $. a. „ teli a. , " _ a p n t* c, o ''I' O. Ea F. w `° o a. ~I w oa. rD n A a ° a. a til,I lz n C. i n N O y U. A o ° H M 4 tzg r Cl bX P tii s) * (� c, * 71 v n 7 a N rn u, N ° ' 4. y � Oa n1 5 '� o50 y n .0 a oM po H ti w Q. ,+ o o � Cep O a. V] n � y • ? W m nrrD y N p) rt II n CD [a a N 0 `- n O 1-3 G o 'a ql o" E. a n'oco H by a `° a - a. 2- o 5 , `�• ° y co 'a 04 a' Gz o " ro - (A & R, p- 0 o y d o o. y a n o a a .°n a, o. H yi tpp o ttil ro a N 0 H co 'V g rD , O 1.0 tf°o ° " p bQ CD P �, P a• PI C P,' 'd �i G G.. p a a F' 0 q O rp A t✓ W y ti f✓ a. N N a c 9, O O r, g- `h 'd O 4 a Cr.'U ►p1� CA cn Op H nco 4. PI `G� a Crs '�' 5' g 2. y ' n 3- D, H C7 z ro a `� H ai G a, ell ,-i 01 w �re ra ^• .w p' g coo °, � tt a+ o rn � a co a V H 'n o o - o y r:"'•a no k n n, n co O o g y H w 000 rt �s tis hi ro a II r, n a w w a. (. o 5. p p P ° p5 co p µ v iv ,2 y n M ry y U. p n M m 5 ,— V o cam, N m 5r• 0. Q., G` a B o a. p N 0 ° o 8 ��v• a v y N �' vi G t`,n a' o .tr H, n `r " �s rCDc CD oo a n 0 . 0 w f. r� o H H a a a. 1-e ell rn w O � R gi 5' a Fa 8 8 . ' ., o "i y n N g £fe fD N E. b CD a. •& o a°0 a `aa x * v ay cy ay ate, O N . O ym k• g n '-',c, ..,•_.,) ear. N. rte,. U, O N N f t 9 , 'a 'Ci rq re Al CD AD 0 qi h co a. n a o a . cr gy ° 'a `c ro Crq p w n H &I' I 0 "t 6. co n O pC O w � a P 7 IP g. ro ❑'1 ^ i � 5 inCla r: gyp •'Uo- rE ,-D 8 ,�1-iro, Z • On 4 p n r, ngq co°O re cofD CD ti 0.' 'i Fq w3 y K . Qgi P. N N til Z1 ....1 i1 z..-....i i �. ro \ \ \ \ - A N N N N N b N N N N 0 L 40 40 GO •-• M � ,..0 .- u O .n-- .�• P , 54 i a--� M O O N 0 pp N: N 00 00 ,, CO 0 Q+ 7 N qt.-- '-'-.6 V C.� co u N N M • o •ri -ted -Cr ,('-'j -d • a g3aaU w g u U FOO O _ O E' Or a UoO OF v v v E -Fa, -c 0 " c x v c ° a v -, ..O v A z w b I 42 ,g Ov p.0 CO � .W G C v v 0 A ao •0O J v i d.• V R; . u Ka O ^ 0 .5 v �^ � cErC . 7 x •p IIy' H0 -24roO v CC ° v2 . O Uv BuL) U Ga N u O .0 -.,.„0 ° ° [ a ii Qv go w v 4 v v v Au v e oB 5 v cMN M A G y 7 7 K a9 `d U n. u CP- .. .� v C U00 oi O O � v AC , T b40... y „ yII. v v vvy C w v O 40 v 'O >; C • • CC v v -v 0u v '- v 1 v v OO E I C 44 S v a a •n .: 5 UaU vn U .F-0 3 �' U vO p nv y0 •5 G e . to .g '• • w-c 0 7,4 Lu ;; b4 U $ ,O u v4 p oY v ° a5v . who t w• op ft a OauU C ' •t•V C .II yA 1 p n x C a R yY -o y 01. Vv d 3 f+. 7 1 a .°' k AN L v u O8 ,2 . m a., y ❑❑ "' Y v 0p 0 v C a. a 'p C a ,%., 0, av 0 0 C .4 .4 edv v .. E .s v a .� Et"•� • 'a y sC v •.0 N Cc � 0.4dyLO .C A V 4 V. 4 F E: .Ci S N vv, s.0 C., G N M '0 G\ N N N N N N N N N Ca 11 et U x o F x o (I) 04o 1Q W v pp•+ a7 v a v El o ea w a u w v U e� w w z.ea 4.1 MI 4 - o a.) o PT-, l :75: TT w : ica al S7 A Y i. .4 30 1 . w ca w A. cn - o v co J v 42 t 4. EEA 0. I.. g° ..1 t• g V .a N ro 0 0 0 W 4 v u V o 0. o o N O v Rv, O. v �" H U U Ca F ria Q U a U a Fy pO .D '•' O y .E.+ v'� Ccd • ol eY n ri o .S"'Op uhW• ❑ •IB o u g v 0 •O Ti Ev 11111 > C 5 CE8 4p v-3vw0Nwy v 'C O "V '44 FO •bN ` N aN d°U E'a y s • s V [ y C « I ti � ✓ 3 pw O vw N o 'bv c vEaE c o o h ' > v v R: Oa E -0 w s > S CvE U w j ❑° '' v wW ev v " .0 a oO 0 ° a oaC-0, 9 ,v .c F-• or vFvpbA uvao v k i 7 .a ooav .9.V A s VT; ws w ,G E aw O ?C C 'O °o °E 5 I IV u js'1:11 ' N • sw p ti sC w .O pq u va COO R . h N Y E o oa v ° U -o5a7. a U c w ? rc w c g r.au.0 O .2va sv .o • uE � i Nbp o2 u .0 O U O O 4 $ c ao 2 N v u 2 v > go o ^ 'So •O v io 0 w 0 v p cd ,, v .^ p ' o ovA v ,pv0 a u xO v 4 A t•,'4 G vL' - pv _ y UO v 0 u O p ,E v N v 0w ca u �, p 0 :: O �V u Nou nu o v o n ° [ • w 1 uEv u o G U p c v H x c v o v v u q z via ON • v h 7 v m ✓ r.d O 7 Q du dE P. A. •O C O ' 0 3 ao a E ° ac :V V •.� a o bU t O aV, 'a V y � Oeo vv ^O Vv OO 'v N u es V0, ro E N U U T. .0 o\ b ,O A.r4cy 'C � x � v , • , r_ • op E w v y b , "v v Tb :a Om d TA L . C uuv c , „ vv cu v w v Y w R M` vw ^ vCv p 0 C U V ,NL v dC w go c W w O " vyvvu � .Dp ?PC UCoo 0000v o .v, op U0 • vC av u 13 a c v e, e w a an. . oto W -o 2 N lit: y ‘.1' vN 0a 12 a W cv aa q 7 4 4 4 v f 3 row 't v •>E E v v ,°4 8 ' t- sir, .° � v v v v Lw, •°, u '� ° v 8 v c a v .1FE -8 go w a.,S w w w w 0 o Z w 5v 8 wv w1 S w g m $ 4:-i 6' x o O c ) v N- r r r e- ta., M O M M Kt an M an M 7- Nv an M W co v ttO 1I U • oa S. a cora C .4V 'T3, a m �" v ;N �vW1 he 11.c4 aV 43 val v iv � v R+4 U W v E v vO a ; R4m L� v a 3 $+. a O b E , U et r u Um x w o maA a u p a � ca a, °v 4 W 0. Z n i-i co m. O O eq s. a N g N gW ;8 I4 �F la 4 a U h C O O O U L.) ,•-. 1.. * .g 16 6. a ,ti h ,-+ F O O a a O t . ... P t. o o v WW• u U O M' C a o KU „N bO N o aCC7 ,=Ci., O Ni .h• 'g 1N N U. y pt0 N L .v. 1 -0U w Cg,0 • N O `\ : Eu3 o ° oo x y Up Ect -(`;C:2 -11, 4 '� 7 . FA. ° O N E �: xa v ° v U p0a 0 'g 11, y C- v `O Uxv N C -C `" aCi 0 >. •5 Cr y II o [ DI ' ° 8 o 0 U 'gippV a U oO T � � � Cuvy > V Ov° y n vM u v .O O � O g v . tiCU L p ❑ A N m N C C V W .a u ,C T 1 U ,e v 0 6.0 i v, C QVOo v' u.2 Q- yU : o C ° p pv p .ga5 v b o ° , � WM • yO cC p .O q e) "5 C 2. g-'..? .ti 5s y1iOCC b h' v 'a v m v O 7,1 y 7 b v V. C -0 -08 -0 . A, p C/j C cai pp v v v v v v .ti v P.. U Ea. -F., w _5 '43 H a+ sr NI O oN al M 7 yr !1 N N Cg SI) v bk g U 2 o z VR. y 4 00 a H K' � A ami ...0 C E+ d 4 U U U o a u 04 oi o n Va r v al a rs Q W y . v A U w 'O v V3 a b a xG ' y 0..) 124^ w Ai . a Ca F• O A. O so N N O N AIS-4629 6. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Consideration of a Resolution Certifying that the City of Tigard Provides Services Qualifying for State Shared Revenues Prepared For: Jared Isaksen Submitted By: Liz Lutz, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The City of Tigard may certify that it provides services required to receive state shared revenues as outlined in ORS 221.760. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Finance team recommends approval of the resolution certifying the City of Tigard provides services required to receive state shared revenues as outlined in ORS 221.760. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The city estimates the receipt of the following state shared revenues: Description FY 202.0-2. 1 FY 2021-22 Cigarette Tax $52,250 $50,944 Liquor/Marijuana Tax $1,251,297 d $1,140,612 State Gas Tax 1 $3,930,000 I$3,624,320 The State of Oregon requires the city to certify its eligibility to receive these revenues by stating that it provides more than four of the services listed in ORS 221.760.The city provides six of the seven required services and is therefore eligible for receiving the state shared revenues.The services that the city provides includes police services; street construction;maintenance and lighting; sanitary sewer and storm water management;planning, zoning and subdivision control and water utility.Approval of the attached resolution will meet the State of Oregon requirements for certification. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council could choose not to approve the resolution and not certify the services to receive state shared revenues. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Acceptance of these revenues will assist in the funding of the City focus points and strategies. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION 6/16/2020 -Approval of Resolution 20-33 certifying the City of Tigard provides services to receive state shared revenues as required in ORS 221.760. Attachments Resolution CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21- A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THAT THE CITY OF TIGARD PROVIDES SERVICES QUALIFYING FOR STATE SHARED REVENUES. WHEREAS,ORS 221.760 (1) provides as follows: The officer responsible for disbursing funds to cities under ORS 323.455, 366.785 to 366.820, and 471.805 shall, in the case of a city located within a county having more than 100,000 inhabitants according to the most recent federal decennial census, disburse such funds only if the city provides four or more of the following services: (1) Police protection (2) Fire protection (3) Street construction,maintenance and lighting (4) Sanitary sewers (5) Storm sewers (6) Planning,zoning and subdivision control (7) One or more utility services;and WHEREAS, City Officials recognize the desirability of assisting the state officer responsible for determining the eligibility of cities to receive such funds in accordance with ORS 221.760 NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The City of Tigard hereby certifies that it provides the following six services enumerated in Section 1,ORS 221.760: (1) Police protection (2) Street construction,maintenance and lighting (3) Sanitary sewers (4) Storm sewers (5) Planning,zoning and subdivision control (6) Water utility SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2021. Mayor-City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.21- Page 1 AIS-4630 7. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 5 Minutes Agenda Title: Consideration of a Resolution Declaring the City's Election to Receive State Revenue Sharing Prepared For: Jared Isaksen Submitted By: Liz Lutz, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The City of Tigard may elect to receive state revenues as outlined in ORS 221.770 entitled Revenue Sharing to Cities. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Tigard's Finance team recommends approval of the resolution electing to receive state revenues as outlined in ORS 221.770. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY ORS 221.770 regarding State Revenues Sharing allocates a share of state liquor tax to cities on a formula basis. The law requires cities to pass an ordinance or resolution to request state revenue sharing money annually. The law also requires public hearings be held by the city and certification of these hearings is also required. The hearing on State Revenue Sharing was noticed and held as part of the Budget Committee hearing on May 3,2021. In order to receive state revenue sharing in FY 2021-2022, the city must levy property taxes in the preceding year,which the city has done.The city estimates the receipt of$654,635 of state revenue sharing funds in the FY 2021-2022 budget. OTHER ALTERNATIVES The council could choose not to approve the resolution and elect not to receive shared state revenues. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Acceptance of this revenue will assist in the funding of city goals and strategies. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Budget Committee hearing on State Revenue Sharing for FY 2022. Attachments Resolution CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21- A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CITY'S ELECTION TO RECEIVE STATE REVENUE SHARING. WHEREAS,State Revenue Sharing Law,ORS 221.770,requires cities to annually pass an ordinance or resolution requesting state revenue sharing money;and WHEREAS, the law mandates public hearings be held by the city and certification of these hearings is required; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 3, 2021 at Budget Committee to receive State Revenue Sharing; and WHEREAS,in order to receive state revenue sharing in FY 2021-2022,the city must have levied property taxes the preceding year;and WHEREAS,the city did levy property taxes in FY 2020-2021. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Pursuant to ORS 221.770, the city hereby elects to receive state revenue sharing for the fiscal year 2021-2022. SECTION 2: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2021. Mayor-City of Tigard A fI'EST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.21- Page 1 AIS-4632 8. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 15 Minutes Agenda Title: PUBLIC HEARING:Adoption of the Budget,Making Appropriations, Declaring the Ad Valorem Tax Levy and Classifying the Levy as Provided Prepared For: Jared Isaksen Submitted By: Liz Lutz, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication 06/03/2022 Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Oregon local budget law requires that a budget be adopted by the City Council prior to July 1, 2021, for fiscal year FY 2022 following approval by the Budget Committee and after a public hearing has been held before the City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST The team recommends adoption of the Approved FY 2021-2022 budget with technical adjustments. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Budget Committee, comprised of the City Council and five resident members,held two meetings on the City Manager's Proposed FY 2021-2022 budget on April 24,2021, and May 3, 2021.At the May 3rd meeting,the Budget Committee approved the Proposed Budget with adjustments,and forwarded the Approved Budget to the City Council for adoption. The FY 2021-2022 City of Tigard Approved Budget total requirements is $392,505,287 including appropriations of$236,480,046 as shown in the Exhibit A- Schedule of Appropriations;the remaining $156,025,242 is the city's reserve for future expenditures. Staff has included following technical adjustments to operations totaling$209,840 in appropriations for council consideration. 1.TPOA Contract Market Adjustment—The market adjustment of 0.75%based on the TPOA Collective Bargaining Agreement that was ratified back in October 2020. This market adjustment will be effective as of January 1,2022. 2.GO Bond Debt Service Payment—Adding General Obligation debt service payment for Library Bond. This will be interest payment portion of the bond.This is not a new interest payment,it is an existing payment that was missed in the orignal budgeting process and caught during an internal review of the budget. 3.Additional Modification for Hydro-Cleaning Vehicle (Vactor)—The Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater divisions need to add an additional$120K(evenly split between the two) towards the purchase price of the hydro-cleaning vehicle (Vactor) in the approved FY 22 budget. To address the escalating costs associated with the new dumping sites and regulations, the department is proposing modification to the new hydro-cleaning vehicle in the approved FY22 budget. These modifications will give the vehicle the ability to recycle water by pulling it from the wet debris (complex screens involved). The modifications will allow for the following: •Less hauling of materials which will save on dumping fees and staff time, •The ability to recycle water for daily operations which will conserve water allowing Tigard to be more environmentally conscientious, and •Increase productivity by Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater field staff to help Tigard meet its DEQ mandates. If the council approves the budget with the staff recommended technical adjustments, then the total requirements will be$392,505,287,including appropriations of$236,689,885 with the remaining$155,815,402 comprising the city's reserve for future expenditures. These technical adjustments do not increase expenditures by over 10%in any fund. OTHER ALTERNATIVES Council can make additional changes to the Approved Budget up to 10%in any fund.By Oregon Law, the FY 2021-2022 budget must be adopted by July 1, 2021. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS,POLICIES, MASTER PLANS DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION Tigard Budget Committee met on April 24,2021 and May 3,2021 to consider the Proposed Budget. Attachments Budget Resolution Exhibit A-Schedule of Appropriations Exhibit B-Technical Adjustment to Approved FY 2021-2022 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 21- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD ADOPTING THE APPROVED BUDGET, WITH ADJUSTMENTS, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS, DECLARING THE AD VALOREM TAX LEVY, AND CLASSIFYING THE LEVY AS PROVIDED BY ORS 310.060(2) FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022. WHEREAS, two hearings by the Tigard Budget Committee on the budget document, as proposed by the City Manager, were duly called and held on April 24, 2021 and May 3, 2021, where all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to appear and be heard with respect to the budget;and WHEREAS, the budget for the City of Tigard for the year beginning July 1, 2020 was duly approved and recommended to the City Council by the regularly constituted Budget Committee at its meeting on May 3, 2021,after proceedings in accordance with Chapter 294, Oregon Revised Statutes; and WHEREAS, a summary of the budget as required by Chapter 294.438 was duly published in the Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the city in accordance with Chapter 294.448;and WHEREAS, a hearing by the Tigard City Council on the budget document as approved by the Budget Committee,was duly called and held on June 8,2021,where all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to appear and be heard with respect to the budget; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The council adopts the budget for FY 2021-22 as approved by council following the budget hearing on June 8,2021. SECTION 2: The amounts appropriated for each fund for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2021, are shown on the attached — Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations as approved by Budget Committee on May 3,2020 with adjustments made by council during the hearing on June 1,2021. SECTION 3: The City of Tigard City Council hereby imposes the taxes provided for in the adopted budget at the rate of $2.5131 per $1,000 of assessed value for its permanent rate tax; plus an additional $0.29 per $1,000 local option levy property tax; and in the amount of$2,622,000 for debt service on general obligation bonds; and that these taxes are hereby imposed and categorized for tax year 2020-21 upon the assessed value of all taxable property in the city as follows: General Government Limit Permanent rate tax $2.5131/$1,000 Local Option Levy Local Option Levy tax $0.29/$1,000 Excluded from Limit General Obligation Bond Debt Service $2,622,000 RESOLUTION NO. 21- Page 1 SECTION 4: This resoludon is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2021. Mayor- City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder-City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO.21- Page 2 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted General Fund Policy and Administration 1,676,325 0 1,676,325 0 1,676,325 Community Development 4,410,334 0 4,410,334 0 4,410,334 Community Services 27,385,301 0 27,385,301 32,390 27,417,691 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to TCDA 1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 2,773,714 0 2,773,714 0 2,773,714 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 1,600,000 0 1,600,000 0 1,600,000 37,846,674 0 37,846,674 32,390 37,879,064 Gas Tax Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 3,409,585 100,000 3,509,585 0 3,509,585 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to TCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 2,467,104 0 2,467,104 0 2,467,104 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 200,000 0 200,000 0 200,000 6,076,689 100,000 6,176,689 0 6,176,689 City Gas Tax Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 .0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 2,042,337 0 2,042,337 0 2,042,337 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 2,042,337 0 2,042,337 0 2,042,337 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget CommitteeJCouncil Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Transient Lodging Tax Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 247,863 0 247,863 0 247,863 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 247,863 0 247,863 0 247,863 Construction Excise Tax Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 559,800 0 559,800 0 559,800 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 285,773 0 285,773 0 285,773 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 50,000 0 50,000 0 50,000 895,573 0 895,573 0 895,573 Electrical Inspection Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 254,267 0 254,267 0 254,267 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 254,267 0 254,267 0 254,267 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Building Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 2,653,792 .0 2,653,792 0 2,653,792 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 150,000 0 150,000 0 150,000 2,803,792 0 2,803,792 0 2,803,792 Criminal Forfeiture Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 362,719 0 362,719 0 362,719 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 16 0 16 0 16 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 362,735 0 362,735 0 362,735 Urban Forestry Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 152,088 0 152,088 0 152,088 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 152,088 0 152,088 0 152,088 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Parks Utility Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 4,604,613 0 4,604,613 0 4,604,613 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 75,402 30,000 105,402 0 105,402 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 325,000 0 325,000 0 325,000 5,005,015 30,000 5,035,015 0 5,035,015 Police Levy Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 2,123,549 0 2,123,549 5,050 2,128,599 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 2,123,549 0 2,123,549 5,050 2,128,599 Bancroft Debt Service Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted General Obligation Debt Service Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 2,416,000 0 2,416,000 52,400 2,468,400 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 2,416,000 0 2,416,000 52,400 2,468,400 Facilities Capital Projects Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 45 0 45 0 45 Capital Improvements 31,798,270 850,000 32,648,270 0 32,648,270 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 31,798,315 850,000 32,648,315 0 32,648,315 Transportation Development Tax Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 2,137,736 35,250 2,172,986 0 2,172,986 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 2,137,736 35,250 2,172,986 0 2,172,986 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Underground Utility Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 21,105 0 21,105 0 21,105 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 21,105 0 21,105 0 21,105 Street Maintenance Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 379,361 75,000 454,361 0 454,361 Capital Improvements 2,840,000 0 2,840,000 0 2,840,000 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 3,219,361 75,000 3,294,361 0 3,294,361 Transportation SDC Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 4,683,890 800,250 5,484,140 0 5,484,140 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 4,683,890 800,250 5,484,140 0 5,484,140 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Parks Capital Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 7,580,000 2,186,945 9,766,945 0 9,766,945 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 7,580,000 2,186,945 9,766,945 0 9,766,945 Parks Bond Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 834,185 0 834,185 0 834,185 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 834,185 0 834,185 0 834,185 Parks SDC Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 4,058,700 1,451,000 5,509,700 0 5,509,700 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 4,058,700 1,451,000 5,509,700 0 5,509,700 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget uCVv Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Transportation CIP Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 13,099,000 170,500 13,269,500 0 13,269,500 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 13,099,000 170,500 13,269,500 0 13,269,500 Sanitary Sewer Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 2,594,197 0 2,594,197 60,000 2,654,197 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to TCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 1,450,846 13,000 1,463,846 0 1,463,846 Capital Improvements 100,000 0 100,000 0 100,000 Contingency 200,000 0 200,000 0 200,000 4,345,043 13,000 4,358,043 60,000 4,418,043 Stormwater Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 3,768,774 0 3,768,774 60,000 3,828,774 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to TCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 324,528 23,000 347,528 0 347,528 Capital Improvements 4,687,500 90,000 4,777,500 0 4,777,500 Contingency 275,000 0 275,000 0 275,000 9,055,802 113,000 9,168,802 60,000 9,228,802 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Water Quality/Quantity Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 340,000 0 340,000 0 340,000 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 340,000 0 340,000 0 340,000 Water Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 10,646,000 0 10,646,000 0 10,646,000 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 20,969,789 1,351,000 22,320,789 0 22,320,789 Capital Improvements 0 25,000 25,000 0 25,000 Contingency 475,000 0 475,000 0 475,000 32,090,789 1,376,000 33,466,789 0 33,466,789 Water SDC Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 7,745,538 25,000 7,770,538 0 7,770,538 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 7,745,538 25,000 7,770,538 0 7,770,538 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Water CIP Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 14,523,000 567,000 15,090,000 0 15,090,000 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 14,523,000 567,000 15,090,000 0 15,090,000 Water Debt Service Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 7,204,364 0 7,204,364 0 7,204,364 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 7,204,364 0 7,204,364 0 7,204,364 Central Services Fund Policy and Administration 14,367,452 170,000 14,537,452 0 14,537,452 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 500,000 0 500,000 0 500,000 14,867,452 170,000 15,037,452 0 15,037,452 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Public Works Admin Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 2,533,386 0 2,533,386 0. 2,533,386 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 5,000 0 5,000 0. 5,000 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 125,000 0 125,000 0 125,000 2,663,386 0 2,663,386 0 2,663,386 Public Works Engineering Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 4,556,633 30,000 4,586,633 0 4,586,633 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 150,000 0 150,000 0 150,000 4,706,633 30,000 4,736,633 0 4,736,633 Fleet/Property Management Fund Policy and Administration 2,790,658 0 2,790,658 0 2,790,658 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 125,000 0 125,000 0 125,000 2,916,658 0 2,916,658 0 2,916,658 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Insurance Fund Policy and Administration 244,561 0 244,561 0 244,561 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 25,000 0 25,000 0 25,000 269,561 0 269,561 0 269,561 Library Donations and Bequests Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 100,000 0 100,000 0 100,000 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 100,000 0 100,000 0 100,000 All Funds Policy and Administration 19,078,996 170,000 19,248,996 0 19,248,996 Community Development 7,623,926 0 7,623,926 0 7,623,926 Community Services 29,871,569 0 29,871,569 37,440 29,909,009 Public Works 32,113,187 130,000 32,243,187 120,000 32,363,187 Debt Service 9,620,364 0 9,620,364 52,400 9,672,764 Loan to TCDA 1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 51,350,287 3,803,500 55,153,787 0 55,153,787 Capital Improvements 74,627,770 3,889,445 78,517,215 0 78,517,215 Contingency 4,200,000 0 4,200,000 0 4,200,000 228,487,100 7,992,945 236,480,045 209,840 236,689,885 Exhibit B Technical Adjustments to the FY 2021-22 Approved Budget Summary Below are Technical Adjustments to the FY 2021-22 Approved Budget. Technical Adjustments are changes to the Approved Budget that come as recommendations from staff. Each item below has a brief description and then details the change to the Schedule of Appropriations. Please note that each adjustment is presented with its impact, they are not cumulative. City Operations #1. Market Adjustment for TPOA—Market adjustment of 0.75%based on the TPOA Collective Bargaining Agreement that was ratified back in October 2020. This market adjustment will be effective as of January 1, 2022. Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted _ General Fund Policy and Administration 1,676,325 0 1,676,325 0 1,676,325 Community Development 4,410,334 0 4,410,334 0 4,410,334 Community Services 27,385,301 0 27,335,301 32,390 27,417,691 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to ICDA 1,000 0 1,000 0 1,000 Loan to CODA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 2,773,714 0 2,773,714 0 2.""3,714 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 1,600,000 0 1,600,000 0 1,600,000 37,846,674 0 37,846,674 32,390 37,879,064 Police Levy Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 .0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 2,123,549 0 2,123,549 5,050 2,128,599 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 2,123,549 0 2,123,549 5,050 2,128.599 1 1 Page #2. GO Bond Debt Service Payment—Adding General Obligation debt service payment for Library Bond. This will be interest payment portion of the bond. Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted General Obligation Debt Service Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 2,416,000 0 2,416,000 52,400 2,468,400 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 2,416,000 0 2,416,000 52,400 2,468,400 #2. Additional Modification for Hydro-Cleaning Vehicle (Vactor) —The Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater divisions need to add an additional $120K (evenly split between the two) towards the purchase price of the hydro-cleaning vehicle (Vactor) in the approved FY 22 budget. To address the escalating costs associated with the new dumping sites and regulations, the department is proposing modification to the new hydro-cleaning vehicle in the approved FY22 budget. These modifications will give the vehicle the ability to recycle water by pulling it from the wet debris (complex screens involved). The modifications will allow for the following: • Less hauling of materials which will save on dumping fees and staff time, • The ability to recycle water for daily operations which will conserve water allowing Tigard to be more environmentally conscientious, and • Increase productivity by Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater field staff to help Tigard meet its DEQ mandates. Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Sanitary Sewer Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 2,594,197 0 2,594,191 60,000 2,654,197 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to TCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 1,450,846 13,000 1,463,346 0 1,463,846 Capital Improvements 100,000 0 100,000 0 100,000 Contingency 200,000 0 200,000 0 200,000 4,345,043 13,000 4,358,043 60,000 4,418,043 21Page Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed C2lariges Approved Changes Adopted Stormwater Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 3,768,774 0 3,768,774 60,000 3,823,774 Debt Sert ice 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to TCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 324,528 23,000 347,528 0 347,528 Capital Improrements 4,687,500 90,000 4,777,500 0 4,777,500 Contingency 275,000 0 275,000 0 275,000 9,055,802 113,000 9,168,302 60,000 9,228,802 3 I Page AIS-4633 9. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 10 Minutes Agenda Title: TCDA PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Adoption of the TCDA FY 2022 Budget with Adjustments,Make Appropriations,Impose and Categorize Taxes Prepared For: Jared Isaksen Submitted By: Liz Lutz, Finance and Information Services Item Type: Resolution Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE The Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors may adopt the Proposed Budget for FY 2022 prior to July 1, 2021 in accordance with Oregon budget law. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST The team recommends adoption of the FY 2022 Proposed Budget as approved by the Budget Committee on April 24,2021. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Town Center Development Agency Budget Committee (made up of the Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors and five resident members) reviewed the Executive Director's budget on April 24, 2021.The budget committee subsequently approved the proposed budget and forwarded the budget to the Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors for adoption. Oregon Budget Law gives the governing body of the jurisdiction the authority to make certain changes in the approved budget prior to adoption. The Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors may adjust expenditures as long as the increase in a fund does not exceed 10% of the total fund expenditures. The total FY 2021-2022 Town Center Development Agency approved total requirements is $19,957,700, including appropriations of$16,075,625,with the remaining$3,882,075 comprising the agency's reserve for future expenditures. OTHER ALTERNATIVES By Oregon law, the FY 2022 budget must be adopted by the Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors prior to July 1, 2021. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS The FY 2022 Proposed Budget aligns with voter-approved plans for the Tigard Triangle Urban Renewal Area and Tigard Downtown Urban Renewal Area. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION 4/24/2021 -TCDA Budget Committee approved the FY 2022 Proposed Budget in a public hearing. Attachments Resolution Schedule of Appropriations CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 21- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 BUDGET, WITH ADJUSTMENTS, MAKING APPROPRIATIONS,AND IMPOSING AND CATEGORIZING TAXES. WHEREAS, one hearing by the Town Center Development Agency Budget Committee on the budget document, as proposed by the Executive Director, was duly called and held on April 24, 2021, where all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to appear and be heard with respect to the budget;and WHEREAS, the budget for the Town Center Development Agency for the year beginning July 1, 2021 was duly approved and recommended to the Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors by the regularly constituted Budget Committee at its meeting on April 24, 2021, after proceedings in accordance with Chapter 294, Oregon Revised Statutes ;and WHEREAS, a summary of the budget as required by Chapter 294.438 was duly published in the Tigard Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the city in accordance with Chapter 294.448; and WHEREAS, a hearing by the Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors on the budget document as approved by the Budget Committee, was duly called and held on June 8, 2021,where all interested persons were afforded an opportunity to appear and be heard with respect to the budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors that: SECTION 1: The Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors adopts the budget for FY 2021- 22 as approved by Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors following the budget hearing on June 8,2021. SECTION 2: The amounts appropriated for each fund for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2021,are shown on the attached —Exhibit A Schedule of Appropriations as approved by Budget Committee on April 24, 2021 with adjustments made by Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors during the hearing on June 8,2021. SECTION 3: The Town Center Development Agency Board of Directors certifies to the county assessor of the County of Washington, Oregon a request for the maximum amount of revenue that may be raised by dividing the taxes under Section 1c,Articles IX of the Oregon Constitution and ORS Chapter 457. SECTION 4: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage, PASSED: This _day of -2021. Chair—City of Tigard Town Center Development Agency A'TEST: City Recorder- City of Tigard Town Center Development Agency RESOLUTION NO.21- Page 1 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted City Center Debt Service Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 425,025 0 425,025 0 425,025 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 730,000 0 730,000 0 730,000 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 1,155,025 0 1,155,025 0 1,155,025 Tigard Triangle Debt Service Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 5,600 0 5,600 0 5,600 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 5,163,500 0 5,163,500 0 5,163,500 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 5,169,100 0 5,169,100 0 5,169,100 City Center Capital Improvements Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 Capital Improvements 4,373,000 0 4,373,000 0 4,373,000 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 TCDA 215,000 0 215,000 0 215,000 4,588,000 0 4,588,000 0 4,588,000 EXHIBIT A - SCHEDULE OF APPROPRIATIONS Budget Committee Council Fund Program Proposed Changes Approved Changes Adopted Tigard Triangle Capital Improvement Fund Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 0 0 0 0 0 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 2,973,500 0 2,973,500 0 2,973,500 Capital Improvements 0 0 0 0 0 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 TCDA 2,190,000 0 2,190,000 0 2,190,000 5,163,500 0 5,163,500 0 5,163,500 All Funds Policy and Administration 0 0 0 0 0 Community Development 0 0 0 0 0 Community Services 0 0 0 0 0 Public Works 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service 430,625 0 430,625 0 430,625 Loan to CCDA 0 0 0 0 0 Transfer 8,867,000 0 8,867,000 0 8,867,000 Capital Improvements 4,373,000 0 4,373,000 0 4,373,000 Contingency 0 0 0 0 0 TCDA 2,405,000 0 2,405,000 0 2,405,000 16,075,625 0 16,075,625 0 16,075,625 AIS-4601 10. Business Meeting Meeting Date: 06/08/2021 Length (in minutes): 60 Minutes Agenda Title: Receive Final Briefing on Concept Plan for River Terrace 2.0 Prepared For: Schuyler Warren Submitted By: Schuyler Warren, Community Development Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Business Meeting- Main Public Hearing Yes Newspaper Legal Ad Required?: Public Hearing Publication Date in Newspaper: Information ISSUE Receive final briefing on the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan and direct staff to prepare an application to Metro for expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION /ACTION REQUEST Staff recommend that Council direct staff to prepare an application to Metro to add all areas included in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan to the regional Urban Growth Boundary. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY Background In 2019, the Tigard City Council updated its two-year Council Goals to include direction to staff to prepare a concept plan for two urban reserve areas at the southwestern edge of the city. The first of these areas,West River Terrace (Roy Rogers West) is comprised of 303 acres located at the western extent of the current Tigard city limits.The area is south of SW Scholls Ferry Road, east of SW Vandermost Road and directly west of Tigard's current River Terrace community. South River Terrace (Roy Rogers East) is located at the southwestern extent of Tigard city limits,north of SW Beef Bend Road. This 205-acre area is bounded by the existing River Terrace community to the north, the recent King City urban growth boundary(UGB) expansion area (Kingston Terrace) to the south, SW Roy Rogers Road to the west and SW 150th Avenue to the east. City staff applied for and received a 2040 Planning and Development Grant from Metro to fund the concept planning work for these areas.A contract was awarded in June of 2020 and the project kicked off in July of that same year. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this is the first major long-range planning effort in Tigard to take place entirely through remote coordination. During that period, the project team provided multiple opportunities for public input. While the pandemic made this more challenging, as in-person open houses and group meetings have traditionally been a cornerstone of the public participation process, the team used multiple alternative engagement strategies to bring the public to the project. Technical experts in the fields of infrastructure engineering, transportation planning, environmental science, housing, finance, and commerce were part of the project team and generated detailed reports on the concept plan. Based on the feedback from the public, city staff, agency partners, and the technical experts,the project design team developed a concept plan that best meets the city's goals for equity and sustainability.That plan and the associated detailed technical analyses are presented in the attached Concept Plan Report and its appendices. Purpose and Process A Concept Plan is the first step in planning for the eventual transition of an area from rural to urbanized land. It sets out a vision to guide future planning efforts and provides approaches to meeting the city's goals to create walkable,livable, and equitable neighborhoods that provide housing opportunity and access to all. It also provides a high-level look at the environmental context for development; associated infrastructure that will be needed to support development, and the funding levels, structures, and sources that will be needed to build this infrastructure. Under the requirements of Metro Urban Growth Boundary Management Functional Plan (UGMFP), Concept Plans are completed for urban reserve areas prior to their inclusion in the Urban Growth Boundary(UGB). The Concept Plan provides the basis for the Metro Council to make a legislative determination on expansion of the UGB, and must comply with the criteria in the UGMFP. However, cities are prohibited from performing Comprehensive Planning outside of their jurisdictional boundaries. As a result, Concept Planning is not a land use process as provided for under ORS 195, 196, and 197. However,it is still important that the Concept Plan is in alignment with the goals and policies of the city's Comprehensive Plan.The Concept Plan and supporting materials provide information to the City Council to demonstrate the plan's adherence to and approvability under the provisions of Title 11 of the UGMFP. Metro Framework Metro is required to update its buildable land inventory and housing needs analysis every six years.At that time, and based on that analysis,the Metro Council also considers any amendments to the Urban Growth Boundary.Their decision is based on criteria in the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (UGMFP) which is the section of the Metro Code applicable to land use and growth management. The UGMFP is the functional local equivalent of the Statewide Planning Goals. A city in Metro wishing to expand its UGB makes an application to Metro within the time frame provided for in the UGMFP, and the Metro Council uses the criteria in the code to make a decision. That decision is reviewed by the state's Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), and the Director either approves the decision or refers it to the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) for review and approval. Mid-cycle Amendments The 2016 amendments to state law enabled Metro to consider additions to the UGB of up to 1,000 acres three years after the regular cycle additions.These mid-cycle additions do not require an updated regional buildable lands inventory or needs analysis but must comply with special criteria and restrictions under state law. Because this process is new, the criteria have not yet been applied in a way that provides guidance in how they are interpreted. Application Timing The window for submitting proposals to Metro is based on when Metro adopted its most recent analysis of buildable land in the UGB. In this case,that analysis is the 2018 Urban Growth Report,which Metro Council adopted on December 13, 2018. Under Metro Code Section 3.07.1427(b),the deadline is 30 months after that date,which is June 13, 2018. However, the Metro Council,in light of the challenges faced by cities in preparing plans during the COVID public health emergency,voted to delegate authority to the Metro Chief Operating Officer to extend the deadline by up to six months. The COO exercised that authority on April 19, 2021 to extend the deadline by six months until December 13, 2021. Staff have set a tentative target date of September 13,2021 to submit an application to Metro, three months prior to the deadline. Application Scope Recommendation Based on direction provided in the adopted 2019-2020 Council Goal, staff prepared a concept plan for both of the city's two remaining urban reserves,River Terrace West and South, collectively known as River Terrace 2.0. Further direction from Council in subsequent briefings indicated a desire to have staff examine the full range of options available for preparing an application for UGB expansion.After a careful analysis, staff believe that an application that includes both urban reserves will be successful and offers the opportunity to efficiently continue planning efforts as the project moves to the Community Plan phase.There are some discretionary criteria in the Metro UGMFP related to mid-cycle amendments that provide some level of uncertainty given that this will be the first mid-cycle amendment considered by Metro,but staff believe that the final Concept Plan meets those criteria and is approvable as prepared. In addition to meeting the UGMFP criteria,the plan is informed by and effective in addressing the following guiding policy documents: •Tigard Strategic Plan •Metro Six Desired Outcomes •Metro Strategic Plan to Advance Racial Equity,Diversity and Inclusion •Tigard Anti-Racism Action Plan •Tigard Affordable Housing Plan OTHER ALTERNATIVES There are at least two other alternatives available to Council. •Prepare a mid-cycle application for the south portion of River Terrace 2.0 and wait to prepare an application for the west portion until the regular cycle in 2023. •Prepare a mid-cycle application for most of the two urban reserves,but leaving out a segment of the west portion. The first option is not recommended as it creates a need to prepare two Community Plans in sequence rather than at one time. The second is not recommended as it creates a need to prepare additional analysis to support the application. The Concept Plan was not prepared in a manner that sub-areas of either the west or south portion are readily severable, and splitting either portion would require significant work to determine financing options and infrastructure phasing needs. COUNCIL OR TCDA GOALS, POLICIES, MASTER PLANS Goal 3: Ensure Tigard grows and develops in a smart and inclusive manner Secure external resources to: •Accomplish all planning and outreach activities necessary to expand the City's urban growth boundary to include the South River Terrace Area. Complete Title 11 compliance, apply to Metro for UGB expansion, and annex South River Terrace. •Prepare a concept plan for West River Terrace. The city will direct all work under this goal,which is contingent on: *All direct,indirect and overhead costs necessary to make South River Terrace "development-ready" funded by private sector partners and/or through grants prepared at the expense of the private sector partner. •The continuation of existing city plans and projects such that they are neither slowed nor disrupted by River Terrace planning. •The inclusion of equitable development principles in River Terrace planning. DATES OF PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION 3/3/20- Acceptance of Metro 2040 Planning grant to fund concept planning for River Terrace 2.0 9/15/20 -Briefing on River Terrace 2.0 2/2/21 - Briefing on River Terrace 2.0 4/27/21 -Briefing on River Terrace 2.0 Attachments Presentation Concept Plan Report Concept Plan Appendices AgendaQuick©2005-2021 Destiny Software Inc.,All Rights Reserved it City of Tigard —�.�'ao Ip � ¢ ,� ... , , p .----_--„ ....., 01, . . --- ...., , 1 i-Pisk ...,,, , , , , , River TIGARD I 1 errace 2 .0 . ,.. ....,,, ,,,..2___ *.4.:;.7, _z.,.:.., _,ze.- = -' A Neighborhood for Everyone Una vecindad para todos City Council Briefing June 8, 2021 What is a Concept Plan? lit). tors Int Ideas and Goals Concept Plan Community Plan I evelopment Collect community ideas for The Concept Plan will outline A community plan will further Development will occur River Terrace 2.0, which will a broad vision for the area, It refine the vision developed through land divisions, inform the Concept Plan. is the first step in the process with the Concept Plan and planned developments and for eventual development. will provide more specific site development review. proposals for Future land uses and developments. 2 • rr " BEAVERTON 5 = _ _ Where is River . . � _ 214 � • : F Terrace 2.0? 4...- ' + ' `VIII s- _ r. -r - fir �•�. i' - ' TIGARD ' . co. :, r -1. 4•�y.-t Vriter, s"T` ' _.--,...-ie `1_ r. yf '°'•^ ti ti +,�y 1 2�' �t r 1 • i 1 ' ". .-' + ;fr.) kms w - I I.' + Ii•:• cJr ,` e •�:.. Y •. . ,r ii. zira, Siete r.:-.6-31.. t , �• r' • F -- I L -.�'�rr 74 *2 kj" "' kr h,.�e K.. .''u` �¢ �M1 i1'- ENI")UR • , -1,� r- r ae ... in 01 SW SELF 1. .1,,K � t - , �— `i, + = ir .. . 4 x f ; ys_- ior to .f- > ,It .0 - + vy da. Zr- Y1 r . 'AI2>.- ,_um _ TUALATIfV' y - . dr .7"-..,,,,„,;„,,,_.• r-:71 lc lir - - %,, -V • } i ,`-;s1' -.IT 1 rel . 14-`4 • - '7 r 4 ''� [ ' '•'� ,. Legend k.v - TM • '` ! r ) r. #_ Q River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 1 River Terrace South 3 Mountainside High School el,i ' 1.2 rid ; , Ni v, ' ■ rii i = River Terrace 1,0 2 River Terrace West 4 Future Art Rutkin Elem.School — -mss -' i — Tigard City Boundary 5 Tualatin River Nat.Wildlife Refuge 3 0 rt" I''\ '' , k*, 0. t, ,...... 0°' . -- . . ,... oy 0 ,1 ( P` : ' f 0,0(54 Project Vision A 1 2....,......<.....„.....,0111 • ;• '..... . . i. . `-...' Vision actuali 0 zada del . V p r o y e cto TIGARD,, 0 Project Focus Enfoque del Proyecto Focus Statement Declaracion de Enfoque This work is focused through two lenses that are Este trabajo se puede ver a traves de dos lentes centrally linked - equity and climate change. You los cuales estan centralmente unidos —equidad y can consider these lenses as a pair of glasses cambio climatico. Usted puede considerar esto through which this work is conducted and como un par de lentes a traves de los cuales se viewed. Like a pair of glasses, they guide the Ileva a cabo y se mira este trabajo. Asi como un vision of the project. As such, this project seeks par de lentes gulan la vision de este proyecto. to center the voices of communities of color, Como tal este proyecto intenta centrar las voces immigrants, and people with low incomes. These de la comunidad de color, inmigrantes, y communities are among those most affected by personas de bajos ingresos. Estas comunidades the impacts of environmental inequities, climate estan en el grupo que ha sido más afectado por change, and systemic racism. When we meet the la inequidad medioambiental, el cambio needs of the most vulnerable communities, the climatico, y el racismo sistematico. Cuando health and wellbeing of all community members cubrimos las necesidades de las comunidades improves. más vulnerables, la salud y el bienestar de todos los miembros de la comunidad mejora. 5 Project Vision Vision del Proyecto Vision Statement Vision Statement River Terrace 2.0 is a neighborhood for everyone and a River Terrace 2.0 es una comunidad completa y un vecindario complete community. It offers housing opportunities to para todos. Ofrece oportunidades de vivienda a la diversidad de the full diversity of Tigard's families and households. familias y hogares de Tigard. Lo que hace completa a esta This community is made complete by providing space comunidad es el espacio que provee para empresas pequenas y for small businesses and a thriving local economy, a una economia local prospera, una variedad de opciones de variety of housing options, and accessible parks and viviendas, y acceso a parques y a espacios abiertos. Todos los open spaces. The transportation system treats all modes modos de transporte se tratan de la misma manera, con equally, with walking and biking trails throughout the senderos para caminar y andar en bicicleta a traves de la community, a road system that emphasizes safety and comunidad, un sistema de caminos con enfasis en la seguridad y regional access, and a development pattern that al acceso regional, y un patron de desarrollo que apoya un supports an efficient public transit system. Public spaces sistema de transporte publico eficiente. Los espacios publicos y and parks offer places for the community to gather. parques ofrecen lugares para que la comunidad se congregue. Natural areas are protected and enhanced to emphasize Las areas naturales estan protegidas y realzadas para dar enfasis habitats and scenic views. Public utilities are designed a los habitats y paisajes. Los servicios publicos estan disenados to maximize cost-efficiency and long-term fiscal para maximizar la eficacia y disminuir el costo, asi como la sustainability. The costs of necessary infrastructure are sostenibilidad fiscal a largo plazo. Los costos de la infraestructura shared in an equitable manner. necesaria son compartidos de manera equitativa 6 • ti 1 t •r., +".:,....„_. ,, , . , - f • Community Mole/Odd,A.A - PIN - Cy - Ruth 4derpreter , - -1r� _ L .. Engagement . , Schuyler Warren PedroM t , ,:.-c411L. Mthssa --,at , Auturm Zadritt Participacion de ... . 4 .. • 1_ ' �•'ip. � Ia Comunidad Nathan Jackson 7 amalla mohr, - Alejntra Navarro Serah Break store 11111 NI TIGARD 7 S Community Engagement • Survey— What Makes a Great Neighborhood? • Community Meetings • Online open house with 20 questions related to housing, • St. Anthony's Church commerce, and transportation • CP04 • 135 respondents • Community Advisory Committee • Project Website • • Twelve members Engage Tigard • • 5 bilingual meetings (three members prefer Spanish) 818 views • Open Office Hours • Three events— one hour each — 15 participants • Spanish language focus group Multiple platforms used to promote engagement opportunities (insert in Tigard Life, social media • 12 participants posts, email list, and more) • Public Open Houses (English and Spanish) • Two Online Open Houses • Consider vision, alternatives, and preferred option • 159 responses 8 I } ` ..\\I :::::::1.-..-:::E.1;.,:. •:,.' ! .. 4, _ . . .. . .. . , .. .. . . . . . _ .it ... . ... = - , Preliminary, ... . - -,, ,,,__ • ,, .f _ •, _ ........„-- _ • • ...:_i . Concepts! , . . . . . ,..... .._,... .1,..,,,,, ,,....,....-, , , .,.... _ __ __ Metasy 1., con ce p to s .• —, , .., iniciales $c.:\ , . ,i ,, NI TIGARD \`\• River Terrace 2 .0 — Concept Alternatives Ali -1111i -111F 1 NV V 161111 IIPP `r :was .. .R, _ Sdid18 Ferry Rd -v .-- . .le F_ Rd - .1 lir 1 1 r to .7 Bull Mountain Rd ROI Mountain Rd !Bull Mountain Rd P 4 — CC r 1' •k t ' _ _,. . 0 3 . — ---. :, ~Beef Bend Rd Beef Bard Rd ' :eef Bend Rd Concept A Concept B Concept C Legend F-a Ell Commercial I Mixed-use Center Natural Resource Area %`, Community Park Neighborhood M Conservafion Open Space •—)Pedestrian Connection e-1, 10 +d nun mmsode P-s A MOUNTAINSIDE WAYS High Scnool . 7 a /,' SCHDLLS.FERRY RD F 1) 71 a 1 y a a rn 1 i co • i} C }. O —s-- _ �• JEAN LOUISE RD A 1-.7. Preferred [WEST] -). BULL MOUNTAIN RD Alternative ... IAlternativa N K W 0 i Ah Autkin preferida Eleexnury ; ;,. . School [SOUTH] K1.......,...,..a....... LASICH LN .. r. �....0._.....:: BEEF END RD 0 ix aC O. 1,000' I. NI TIGARD 11 Key Considerations • Larger commercial/employment center in RT West, near Scholls Ferry • Neighborhoods organized around a Main Street corridor • Main Street balances livability and internal focus with external connections and access • Flexibility to allow a Tile Flat Road extension • All neighborhoods achieve an average of 20 units per net acre • Connection at Beef Bend reflects and connects with town center in King City • Achieves parks LOS standard, flexibility for how and where • Maximum flexibility for transit ,i ■ ./_.� s :: llfd4lW +�°r jcL� f :tl..,.::::,::.,::::::,.....,:,,,,,'.7.i.11111,:r:iil',1‘.1, ♦ ; E! 3e�c :i,;--71:: 1 '2! iI' 1 i ig- t"' ---a- L ?1M ji , _ �.� ..5 ��, r.,,.Aer. „Ay k _7 �arw*�. y _, , Meun[ainsille `re7f MOUM1ITAIM5IDE WAY— N1gh School .F Preferred AlternativeZ.rpG SCHOLLS FERRY RD y y E A m ri 1 - ..m 03 Legend l . l I River Terrace 2.0 Project Area --- \ JEAN LOUISE RD • Employment Area 2,3 1 MI Commercial 1 Neighborhood Node E, 1 i _ Mair1Street Even Mix Feathered Edge [WEST] BULL MOUNTAIN RD —Collector Road ;-,, ----Street I Pedestrian ConnectionI --- Minor Street Connection I .0 Mountainside Way Future Study Area • cL .4 Beef Bend Road Future Study Area ---- Community Connection o 1 ••••Trail Network r ---_ . E Art Rurkin • Stream L @iemmtary School Wetlands [SOUTH] Vegetated Corridor F. Park(Outside Project Area) t' �W-t` 'a LASICHLN .l --._v-�- ..: School(Outside Project Area) F � E 1 Tile Flat, Future Study Area- ` ---1– Framework B.See Transportation : BEEF BEND1I RD �J O{ Section ec 4' 1,440 z 13 I Preferred Alternative — River Terrace West ,�, MOUNTAINSIDE WAY' High sthool 4 CPSCHOLLS FERRY RD Z rre Legend I -I +a L___River Terrace 2.4 Project Area I r'ti Employment Area :� _ - _ "' •Commercial/Neighborhood Node I - } I♦Main Street • • • v Even Mix Feathered Edge —Collector Road ----Street 1 Pedestrian Connection ...1 - •- •'�, JEAN LOUISE RD ---- Minor Street Connection \ •' Mountainside Way Future Study Area -' .'-""•'"'----_]F •+} Beef Bend Road Future Study Area 1,•• ,_ ' I ---- Community Connection - -•••Trail Network Stream - Wetlands ' Vegetated Corridor —) BULL MOUNTAIN AD Park(Outside Project Area) [WEST] School(Outside Project Area) 1 Tile Flat,Future Study Area- . , Framework B,See Transportation N • Section I i . I 1 14 I Preferred Alternative — River Terrace South Legend _ River Terrace 2.0 Project Area Employment Area CL U.1 M Commercial/Neighborhood Center 1.7 IN Main Street 0 I Even Mix CL ' Feathered Edge > —•_. '-- � . —Collector Road 0 Art Rutkin L. -•--Street/Pedestrian Connection 1. Elementary r• •---Minor Street Connection School ,` 0 Mountainside Way Future Study Area —- +f-w�4. - - - -- 0 Beef Bend Road Future Study Area t --- Community Connection ••••Trail Network � Stream r- - - - ..... L g.a.0i.a.r..r .fr.. . W wetlands • • . > Vegetated Corridor ` C Park(Outside Project Area) LASICH LN . - �• - - -• . , . T . • 2 -_4 '' ` ' •.I w' CC t School(Outside Project Area) i M •• 0 1 Tile Flat,Future Study Area- E I .� -•--_. Framework B,See Transportation Section f i , ' - • BEEF BEND RD p No Ce W Z N ...I W 0 0 ____----,____________„:,.._77-7 - Y—wrWNNf11U,N1 � „r--r Trrt7iT � Na \ .. et------"', ";,eIW� - �v T _�' .aa,.. ,�` `\ . ��1I��\ .. - \�1•, \�sl m7s ,�.- baa 4Lit- ' - � qt\q♦ \ r'--1,4_ . ♦ '\ •-a P4 �� .NSI �� Inti � '� ;��.� �,�� Q \\��f i� c, ��'� %~ t, Housing Concepts ViatillAtilkire 00 "0'1 Na - 'tad r-j vaospertar.,Live,a,,....---.„_____________ _________ Rev/house rsSoo s! ( y h. I tnr.' Duplex `1 _____ tna,=<.sin:r Units art«:: UM,per Corsage Custer � tmsR:vd- IlnirsperLa,qA Medium Duelling plus ADU ep CO TIGARD m II Housing Principles • Neighborhoods provide a diversity of housing choices that will serve the full range of housing needs for Tigard's current and future residents • Neighborhoods integrate opportunities for market rate and regulated affordable housing to facilitate home ownership at all income levels • Neighborhoods are designed to thoughtfully incorporate adjacent natural areas and commercial centers • Neighborhoods are designed to provide opportunity for an average of twenty households per acre A:: ‘,J.F ..4-`.,,iiir_ ‘,..,--/,„,,...K.Att,%:-.1.-- ' , 7:-A.r.,450,0,_-___!..4t,:# ,,::,,,, :,,„ to a1-fie f iz\ •- per•-..:11 ). � � -,1104v yr 'y Y ii a p 4 „ _ :. r Mw. SII 1 .1 ki \ J �. ReyyS 'I• ,` ., �t' $ Ali•--t _ ,, i iisi . s .... - _ 17 Three Housing Typologies ..,.. : ..,4%,Vq170 l •� itta§ ' Main Street aw.� .:--11%.----,,i, \: � _ ' E::ch::d 4\ - ,.. ' FEdge „ .... ..® .... _ a- - ` __ ✓ Distinct in housing form, profile and 4` intensity ✓ Similar in terms of housing types provided - V Similar in density (average 20 units per net acre) Feathered Edge Over Three Blocks k114 .il.0--At*. ::.:i 4--- O Iff.►4t l Even Mix 4011 PIi . 110111111 11110 _ - Even Mix k. l - I Main Street 18 Main Street • 4 10,4i . . . .,..i...,,. . ,.. ... „...:,..„.!;1:.....p.... ,..... .. v.- '...N...II - ' ' ,- -. •1 1 ,.------ . r Commercial and .„ - . • •., •%.. -•,.... • . ••- t,..2. , Employment Or ..„ 1 41 t Concepts ', ,..."1 , • , 0 F r ill . i ,......,....., I 'P . _ . . ..-. , - - -_ • .4 : 19 TIGARD 0 Commercial & Employment Principles • Commercial areas provide opportunities for business and employment to serve River Terrace residents • Residents can acquire many goods and services to meet their daily needs without having to travel long distances I ' , r, �� 9 V .i �t � E hip, �., .y f .. ,A, SA I rpoji. t 6 _ . . i , ir . a' __,-.. - -Iforo.- at5 i ',711 II 20 0 Commercial Concepts Scholls Ferry • Largest center along SW Scholls Ferry Road • Commercial corridor (about six acres) along the north-south collector street • Commercial corridor is surrounded by a larger employment center (approximately 10+ acres) !ITS' Mountainside M O LJ N TAI NS[t L WAY_ High &dim • This center will have visibility and access from — ii. SW Scholls Ferry Road CK LL5 FERRY RD _ 10 • Can serve the neighborhoods within and outside River Terrace 2.0 1 • Planned to provide complementary uses to _ _ _ the South Cooper Mountain main street area ". I' - �- # ' a . , _.. ..2i 21 • Commercial Concepts Roy Rogers • Main street commercial at SW Bull Mountain Road, about four acres JEAN: RD r • Intended primarily to serve the neighborhoodsI 1114 r within River Terrace 2.0 and developing areasI'A i 1� to the east ' " ,•I I • • Would likely also serve some regional traffic, ■i'• particularly at the edge along Roy Rogers Road m•' Z } I. • Neighborhood-scale commercial retail and civic �A._ uses along a two or three block segment of the BULL MOUNTAIN RD main collector street CI , • More internal to the neighborhood, but 1 maintains connection to, and visibility from, -_____ • ._ ; the major intersection �. i Ij i ii 22 I Commercial Concepts Beef Bend • In River Terrace South along the north-south + extension of River Terrace Boulevard where it F .. ...:_, meets Beef Bend Road . y • About five acres LASICH LN . . •-' 1 . , • Envisioned as a main street corridor • Intended to be a neighborhood-serving - commercial center, with a mix of retail and civic uses, that has strong connections to Beef ▪ 1 Bend Road • . Te— -:na... .- . • Goal is to design a flexible commercial center BEEF BEND RD p that can reflect and complement the Kingston Ce Terrace town center to the south w Z in W 23 r 4 rt +fi Y y . ,:q;•," ,.\ 4 w t ....I , ,, .. , , ..,,, ,.,_:..„Y ,' . . `ail .' �'r§m'd.,, —,n r s ____. � .. _________,,4„, � �� sf� , .., __ ____ Transportation — u ,�1� Iia 7 r ``?� pr o fe ' _ ,, tY . 7"11 f °1 14 i �'N' � � r� aFs� �� , � rConcepts rrzz `t i , ,s.1,� 1 11f tit '' , .. . 'itrri E - 0 ,. il _ tr . . 0., , . , ,,.. . , , . .. !II " 0 F 31 $' i" TIGARD m 0 Transportation Principles • The transportation system emphasizes pedestrian and bicycle connections within the neighborhood and to regional trails • Streets are designed for safety and to serve all modes of transportation, including vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit • The transportation system connects to regional facilities and extends existing streets and trails where feasible and economically viable AN o' I Qfi I:. 1 e,, 7541%, i7 , — ` I it \f_ ,4ti :PI �: .- iilN�llA� C) 4 tkv I Transportation Concept SCHOLLS FERRY RD �` ,'- West Improvements '1 ! I • Framework A - SW Mountainside Way extension t serves as main north-south collector I TILE FLAT Rd CLEMENT`NE ST ', • Framework B -Tile Flat Road extension I • Improve SW Vandermost Road (at western edge) --\ • Extend SW Sabrina Avenue from SW Bull ° t JEAN LOUISE RD Mountain o i n ._____ • Improve SW Bull Mountain Road from SW Roy a Rogers Road to the SW Mountainside Way (or Tile < a Flat Road) extension ' m cE • Upgrade SW Roy Rogers Road from SW Bull v, I ! . Mountain to SW Beef Bend 0 c, ro ixinz • Extend Jean Louise east to north-south collector ---- `.;. • 0z 6 3 0 Q I C Legend 1 r-]River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 1 Tile Flat,Future Study Area- 6 0, MOUNTAINSIDE WAY m —Collector Road Framework B,See Transportation •-••Street/Pedestrian Connection Section ---Minor Street Connection •Q.Mountainside Way Future Study Area 26 Stream Transportation Concept South Improvements • Extend River Terrace Boulevard from SW Potomac 2 to SW Beef Bend II ° PATOMIC RD < NPARAAION in ce • Extend SW Lasich Lane from SW Roy Rogers Road w 1 • Upgrade SW Beef Bend from SW Roy Rogers to SW i › - Vi 150th he o 07 x r -I WOODHUE ST • Multiple intersection improvements, primarily ; alongRoy g SW Rogers and SW Beef Bend, including _ _ installation of traffic signals or roundabouts LASICH LN' a 0 0 i Ln BEEF BEND RD ,r .—ELSNER RD Legend r 1River Terrace 2.0 Project Area —Collector Road ---- Street/Pedestrian Connection - • minor Street Connection .1). Beef Bend Road Future Study Area 27 Stream Transportation Concept ,, rs Trails sWSC„OCLs • Trails would provide recreational and — __ _ '1 N,ig��.Food Pa,R commutingopportunities 5 s.a.NA AAPk • Smaller, neighborhood trails could connect residents to the main routes and commercial • corridors J5` ° • Connections to parks for recreation along the way I • Multi-use community trails along the main j ; roadways [WEST] • Trails would also connect to the regional trailNI system r ",. Legend River Terrace 2.0 Project Area — Collector Road [SOUTH] ' , •-• Trail Network — Street I Pedestrian Connection -- -,----' • Trail Access Points{Conceptual) •-• Minor Street Connection • 1µ`i I Trail Access Service Area(1/2 mi] •-Community Connection I • , "9 -- F Eµnau Proposed Trail , ,_ Stream For planning purposes,service :„af° Wetlands areas are shown as a radius Vegetated Corridor instead of along a street/trail =Park(Outside Project Area) network School(Outside Project Area) , ,_ , , - , , , 28 I Transportation Concept Transit • Transit service possible once supportive levels of development are reached — dwelling units \ A1.. B —Cvllecmr Ra°d II -'• \ ••Street/Pedestri°n Cvnneti°rs merA'ne --Minos Sheet C°nnetli°n and destinations "' " �' `" [WEST] .M°UntdirtS de V°yf°NteSNdy Me° suexwve- •U.Seer Bend R°°4 FUNre Study Areo • Flexibility in plan to accommodate transit She°m service along one of two potential alignments E ti�..!o.._ • First alignment option internal to ' ;# neighborhood, following collectors - A , ...... e " • Second alignment option external, along arterials - B 3` • System alignment would need to be coordinated with King City and Beaverton .�oma.aa u [SOUTH] • Otak I/I� 29 c . ., . . (.:''''':":C:.----4(17:::---141411.7"1 -1"1141;11'.." '...41111111111111.6."1""4".."' . ...-- II Y fx. .. `;; ' wy4 or .4 Parks Concepts - VOA A y� --.,:, la •}i y . ...re 01" .: _ .. . ,„it ..,-. ...... cr i Ir..ty. El N ,r .,. Y 1 I .t� ellt 6 11 '• ,� 30 TIGARD 0 Parks Principles • Community and neighborhood parks are located throughout River Terrace and provide a range of gathering and recreating options • Parks are accessible and connected to commercial centers and neighborhoods by trails and multi-modal streets • Parks emphasize natural features such as views and tree groves i igah;rzit..”-ii,.-.4. .. • . V -.- . 4. 7.- OPT"-11.-11 -= '.46E': 1 :- ..n 4-- - ' *4.1k.'. JP -I '. -- - i"RI ''111";il ' 'if', . • ' ' .'. ' 31 Parks Concept 7, Yu ,- West ' 00 _.v .,rt" - - - • Two community parks, one in the upper section and . ' [WEST] ' --.. 1 •- [WEST] one in the lower sectionI. C l -,w - -� • Half-mile service area would cover most of River j Terrace West ,' l 1• _ .-...L....: : SN.Li:005:n- • • Still within one mile of both community parks Y - •�_' X14, - „t, • Four neighborhood parks z .: • Two to four acres in size • 1 I • Some overlap with the community park service areas, j M 1 • • Four linear parks envisioned to be located near the 7 . commercial centers of each area and along the -------------j n _ — — — natural resource corridors West Community Parks West Neighborhood&Linear Parks Park Service Area Legend - Community Park:1 mile Community Park: 112 mile _ Neighborhood&Linear Park:1/4 mile For planning purposes,service areas are shown as a radius instead of along a street 1 trail network 0 0 r 4 Parks Concept __ _ _ 112 Mile z P. South • One centrally located community park : . 3 f • 13-15 acres I*� — L _ • • Ten-minute walk to most of River Terrace South - - • • With trail connections, this park could be easily walkable 1,--- `-- —' t. from open space areas _ 5 g E•.- • Two neighborhood parks a • Provide quarter-mile service to the western half of the ' area South Community Parks • About three acres each ,� - r , • Opportunities to connect to natural areas and nearby w trails - - --• Two linear parks r. • Located along greenway corridors 1 1/4 41� e • Allow opportunities to connect across corridors and link i 1 I--- ,f- -• I with major routes and future regional trails such as the __ ,,.,.0 ,� vvvv�.K,__ Tualatin River Greenway Trail I j ___L�_____r 4 tr 33 South Neighborhood&Linear Parks 0 . .. Sim* 1 JO. ' --- Alitilllill4y ...4 1", • ,. ...- 0.,5.4.101...'f,,h•:31iik..„. ,- NATI... . .. . . . .i . . Stormwater Concepts . . . , i,.,.. •• • - . . . . ,. ..„.4 ,. • :•• ,..„, ...„ . 4.r.-or 1— .1;7.01 . oi,s1i5;4 :4;;,..14;,u;-',.....;,,:-: -....,..' - ,,v..: . ' 4 1 ' '%!.,,if 1. '.',r•r.!.''.::..if!::. •:',.,,,,:t.".".1:01te''..!!.„... .0 .... -.-,'..-- oir ' '46--,,:.'..i...,,' ''.,. -!i' '.2.-'i •,.• !....0, . _ . . . . - 4Li.,. ki.. ,".',". ,„,...i.AL'''. ':,.......,::•.'4.-: .: - I ' ''• •-....:-..'.. • -,. ,,,:,-,.. ... ;,...,.. --..- < .1,.:,.1-',1..":06'.*••or!...' > ., . . ---. '' ' ''. ''' . I ..*;•'A ,....',i':',1::4 1.' ...,.1. . 1' -.;ArAis '1.(‹: • l' . .i ., , .4.- .., .).1_,...-,., i 41' t.. ,i ' . '•,' :47.!'''.::'''..... %,•::-=,'. -- , ' . • ,4' '-:{1" ( II 1 0 114 TIGARD E, 0 Public Utility Concepts Stormwater management- West South : ,..../...... .....,..........( - SCHOLLS FERRY RD, .. ' ar - - it 1 .. .., \\"" 7 re . — : t 1 ` / ''J ,'r� t r 7 ` 1 ''..:'i L7 1F `1 3�, rr - J11_ S • ,f � .,..`�.., ,4 Legend 11 re k r 0 River Terrace 2,0 Project Area Inventoried Wetlands • 1 o Proposed Subbasins Natural Resource Buffers w + -•••• Overland Flow Direction — Existing Drainageway • 10 ft.Contour Line — Water Quality&Quantity-Strategy A — Major Roads ^n Preserve Existing Storage-Strategy B iii o' 540' - •• 1 .- Closed Conveyance — Water Quantity Only-Strategy B 4:.. -4Open Conveyance — Streams 35 I .. . .. , . ,r ..,iAlk, „ie. , . , .S 4., sIli ,, i, d 'ti , fir 1, [Ill iiiii ' i ' . \ YAM h L \ illuib _ . , .... • • .. , ,, Implementation ..... s, _,7. . _ IJ Concepts ..,,,_ , I _ __ .,. . _ . ...4 I:..•,:. r - ''fir 0 C.,,, _ h i M 4. 4P: illil ,' 0 TIGARD m 0 Infrastructure Costs Funding Strategy Concepts Infrastructure Type Estimated Total Cost , Transportation Water Service $10,661,000 • Private development Sanitary Sewer Service $5,876,000 • Transportation supplemental fees Stormwater Management $33,559,465 Parks &Trails $35,534,426 • Existing Tigard transportation SDC Transportation $75,400,000 • Washington County TDT Total $161,030,891 Parks • Existing parks SDC • Grants • Cost reductions (private development, value engineering) Stormwater • Private development • Tigard stormwater fund • CWS Regional Stormwater Management Charge program Sewer • Private development • CWS Capital Fund Water • Private development • City capital funds for new reservoir (utility fees + SDC) 37 I Housing Policy Concepts Encourage middle housing & affordable housing options • Tiered SCD structure— lower SDC for smaller housing types • City-supported loan program • Marketing— relationship-building with affordable and market-rate developers of middle housing • Incentives for ADUs on existing lots (extend the SDC exemption) • Land acquisition and banking— led by City or housing developer • Education and information— share the vision, generate interest • Community land trust model — nonprofit, community-based organizations • Tax abatements T. Rte- // ` ,:AA ii P- 7 11 + 7 E 38 • • II •k • , • v • • . 41 • .fie. + , ` z",! 7 • t. t ',p, ,,t. � � • •. fix. to. L ('t 1 . ' • F ; Y « f F / j /r...P.ii } S ' • • '�' • i, 4 • / • ;j , • _ ziet • • A® , • t a..10 xd F- i f v 1 .f" •�.. .1 A. / ,Oiir I C M = Cin -1 . 4„, m CD COa.) u, m L O ... _ ,. • . . • F• C,..) . _. U o r J, - . g::. .(0 _01 : . L i y i'C VI' C i. (ZS 0 = 'ie. . • E ...„ NS::: • F. 1 . i. ►• x tI 111 : 4 .i, 2. . . y ,. r v. 1 N- ] :F - p l: ,.i l f Jk • `‘-,_w# -1w1 ,` - p 0 , :t.A, # + - I .� .1 r, T •'... 1 \• .• +#t # •��' tJ1 • 14- . t d 11+ 'y- 1 it - �'s..:V a • 'i r y t. • r'r;• t ""1 r5 .`�a 11-'JL fy� •� S • Y �y, 1 .,T °r r1'+ ~ ft.. .x_J 4' I ,w• t .. ! 1- •^1 +� h.;�;^.�'. F -_,,l -- v s y�F' „j?!_ +11 - 1$ . ,11 I 7,0 rag ••••• i#./p" te. 4.0 4? ,ti. , 'T'• y ...1 F•. t r; {, t, •3y 'rro.• .�' .,.?" •,I. ' ' 1.4; I ri Ill z • _ JL•.F._ i .:+ _ ,t AI + 1 {:_. 'T•�•M. i.7 1^.--r'Ir • s�- r. i wish id.i. x3 pei% .r ..I- ' _•"• ..i 1 510E5g. 'Al • �' ," .re -i'r .'-.- .J ,s b + 4F S I4.J,i , •ai+` • 4«y, • i 7' i O • a� t • C *jj r # .. - .'Kelr-4 r • 43i. 4 - i•,t • ' r # t� r n C _ .r! 11! n*33 a v.;Arj: • .ani.• ' - _ h -1 . . �. . - - d' aj "T f 1 I • �l , { 10. F m • ,¢7['fi Y . , _ 0..:., ._1., . • ,,!..., .4! x, cik t '. ,{� .y _ - y' t 1 . 4 •' `/ •S- -7 IS... �th4 ).' *-" �p?�# t. ♦ ! � _ .i r M Jv •''� :. y�• ` )5+p'r�.t"'.'1#, .+.fie ^ Rrt r ft ,.r' '.0,-,•-•.7 fir .- ^3.4• 7�Cr^ f - • y -._ - fir. - -. : .- ' r v _.1,,4 '*" t • • r e - • ... f. AMMO'.. • II , . , • . ,4 _ . .. ... .. . ._...... IN CONCEPT PLAN - 111,AY 2C21 TIGARD RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Acknowledgments I 2 AcKNowLEDGMENTs We acknowledge that the areas we are planning for are the traditional lands of the Tualatin Kalapuya. They and their descendants are the original caretakers of this land. We regret the displacement, genocide, and forced assimilation that still impacts many Indigenous families today and recognize that injustices visited upon Indigenous peoples of this region have yet to be properly rectified. STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMITTEE Jessica Pelz,Washington County Carine A. Keith Liden, City of King City Ahsha M. Anna Slatinsky, City of Beaverton Sarah E. Erika Palmer, City of Sherwood Estela R. Tim O'Brien, Metro Leticia R. John Goodrich, City of Tigard Nathan J. Brenda Martin, TriMet Paul B. Chris Faulkner, Clean Water Services Jairaj S. Steven Sparks, Beaverton School District Autumn Z. John Wolff,Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Amalia M. Ashley Short, Tualatin River Keepers Laurie R. Wade Denny, Clean Water Services Celina Alejandra M. Marc Farrar, Metropolitan Land Group Zahra M. Read Stapleton, Metropolitan Land Group Anne Debbaut, Department of Land Conservation & Development Darin Barnard, Tigard-Tualatin School District Marah Danielson, Oregon Department of Transportation 1111 . li TIGARD • RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Acknowledgments I 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF TIGARD STAFF Otak Yi-Kang Hu, President Steve Rymer, City Manager Nathan Jackson, Vice President Kenny Asher, Community Dev. Director /,!' ilk, Melanie Brook Tom McGuire, Asst. Community Dev. Director Darlene Dick Schuyler Warren, Senior Planner Ahsha Miranda Lori Faha, City Engineer Alexandria Quinones Joe Wisniewski,Assistant City Engineer 11 7 q DKs John Roberts Dave Roth, Senior Transportation Planner Craig Schuck Lloyd Purdy, Economic Dev. Manager Keshavan Tiruvallur Corey Johnson, Senior Mgmt. Analyst TIGARD Jamie Watson Susan P. Shanks, Senior Planner Cole Whitehurst Tegan Enloe, Senior Project Engineer u CITY COUNCIL PHS 000. 1.1 _ a Jason B. Snider(Mayor) CONSULTANT TEAM Heidi Lueb (Council President) Serah Breakstone, Otak, Inc. public Involvement John Goodhouse (Councilor) Ben Bortolazzo, Otak, Inc. Liz Newton (Councilor) Marcy Mclnelly, Urbsworks u r b s W o r k s Jeanette Shaw(Councilor) Jessica Pickul,JLA Public Involvement Emilio Calderon (Youth City Councilor) Brian Vanneman, Leland Consulting Group Kevin Chewuk, DKS Associates Brian Ginter, Murraysmith, Inc. murraysmfth Mike Carr, Murraysmith, Inc. Shawn Eisner, Pacific Habitat Services IlL: LELAND This document was prepared by Otak, Inc. by: CONSULTING Kaitlin North, PLA, ASLA I Landscape Architect GROUP Nathan Jones I GIS Specialist+ Planner RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Table of Contents 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROJECT FOCUS &VISION STATEMENT 14 Project Focus Vision Statement II. INTRODUCTION 16 Why Do Concept Planning Now? Concept Planning Process Guiding Principles III. HOUSING 24 Housing Overview of Findings Middle Housing Affordability Strategies IV. PROJECT CONTEXT 41 Planning Context Baseline Conditions V. CONCEPT PLANNING 58 Synthesis &Concept Frameworks Concept Alternatives Selecting a Preferred Alternative VI. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN 64 Commercial/Employment Nodes Housing Prototypes Mobility Network Parks&Open Spaces Public Utilities&Services VII. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS 93 Infrastructure Costs Funding Sources&Strategies Potential Phases of Development Housing Policy and Actions More Planning to Come VIII. APPENDICES 106 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Figures I 5 FIGURES Figure 1 - Housing Prototypes - Main Street & Even Mix 31 Figure 11 - Concept Plan 65 Figure 2 - Housing Prototypes - Feathered Edge 32 Figure 12 - River Terrace West Housing Prototypes 70 Figure 3 - Metro Regional Urban and Rural Reserves Map 42 Figure 13 - River Terrace South Housing Prototypes 71 Figure 4- Existing Natural Resources 46 Figure 14-Transportation Improvements - River Terrace West....73 Figure 5 - Existing Water Pressure Zones 49 Figure 15 -Transportation Improvements - River Terrace South..75 Figure 6 - Existing Sanitary Sewer System 50 Figure 16 -Transportation Improvements 76 Figure 7 - Existing Stormwater Pre-developed Land Use 52 Figure 17 - Proposed Trails 81 Figure 8 - Existing Streets Network 53 Figure 18 - Proposed Parks 82 Figure 9 - Existing Parks and Trail Network 55 Figure 19 - Recommended Sewer Service 87 Figure 10 -Zoning Map 56 Figure 20 - Stormwater Concept Plan Diagram West 91 Figure 21 - Stormwater Concept Plan Diagram South 92 Figure 22 - River Terrace West Readiness 101 Figure 23 - River Terrace South Readiness 101 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Tables I 6 TABLES Table 1 -Total Housing Units Needed in the Tigard Planning Area, 2020-2040 25 Table 2 - Housing Prototypes - Main Street 34 Table 3 - Housing Prototypes - Even Mix 35 Table 4- Housing Prototypes - Feathered Edge 36 Table 5 - Housing Prototypes -Acreages and Densities by Subarea 37 Table 6 - Range of Housing Types 38 Table 7 - Recommended Transportation System Improvements 77 Table 8 - Parks Land Use Association 85 Table 9 - Preliminary Sewer Service Cost 88 Table 10 -Water Reservoir Cost 90 Table 11 -Water Backbone Pipe Cost 90 Table 12 - Stormwater Infrastructure Cost 92 Table 13 - Infrastructure Costs 94 Table 14- Comparison of Major Infrastructure Costs and Transportation Fees 96 Table 15 - Parks Funding Sources 97 Table 16 - Sanitary Sewer Projects and Costs 99 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary I 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction The River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan is the first step in planning for a new Tigard neighborhood.This plan will serve as the guide for future planning work in the River Terrace West and South urban reserve areas, establishing a vision for how needed housing and supportive land uses, as well as supportive elements such as roads, public utilities, parks and trails, stormwater management, and protection of natural areas can be fully integrated into a complete and cohesive community. One of the primary goals of this work is to help the City and region prepare lands for development to ensure there is an adequate supply of housing that meets the needs of all residents. The city, region, and state of Oregon are all experiencing population growth mixed with decreasing housing production, resulting in a deep and ongoing housing shortage that is entering its second decade. These trends have been key drivers of displacement for low-income and minority households. Equitable housing opportunity is a critical element in planning for a just, healthy, and sustainable future for communities. Locally, a 2021 housing needs analysis (HNA) identified a need for more than 3,000 new housing units in Tigard through 2040. A significant portion (about 40 percent) of those homes need to be affordable to households making 80 percent or less of the median family income to meet projected community need. The River Terrace 2.0 concept plan provides a vision for a neighborhood that will provide 3,000 to 4,500 units of new housing, with an emphasis on creating opportunities for a wide range of housing types, sizes, and prices. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary 1 8 Project Context Located at the south and west boundaries of Tigard's existing City limits, River Terrace 2.0 currently consists of agricultural land and some homes on relatively large lots. River Terrace 2.0 is bounded to the north by SW Scholls Ferry Road and the South Cooper Mountain community of Beaverton. To the west lies designated rural reserve land and undesignated land within Washington County. The southern boundary of River Terrace 2.0 is SW Beef Bend Road and the new Kingston Terrace neighborhood. The eastern edge of the plan area is adjacent to the original River Terrace community of Tigard. Within River Terrace 2.0 are a variety of natural resource areas comprised of wetlands, riparian corridors, significant tree groves, streams, and habitat conversation areas. The dominant landforms are shaped by drainage tributaries that are part of the Tualatin River system. Slopes along the drainages tend to be steep; outside of drainages, slopes are more gradual. There are high points in the study area where views of Mt. Hood can be seen, particularly in River Terrace South. The area within River Terrace 2.0 is not currently served by public utilities (water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater). There is public infrastructure directly adjacent to the study area, primarily to the east and north. Streets in the study area are mostly local streets and private driveways; major arterials (SW Scholls Ferry, SW Roy Rogers, and SW Beef Bend) run along the edges of River Terrace 2.0 and the local street network to the north and east is either built out, or planned and expected to be built soon. Adjacent to the River Terrace 2.0 study area, the existing trail network and parks facilities are just beginning to be developed. Some segments of the River Terrace Trail are built, but many trail alignments are still being planned. The existing parks are also relatively new, developed along with neighborhoods of the River Terrace 1.0 area. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary I 9 Concept Planning Process The River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan was developed iteratively, with input from a variety of stakeholders, advisory groups, residents, technical consultants, and decision-makers at each step in the process. __ I Baseline Synthesis Concept • Three Concept Evaluation / Select; Preferred Conditions Workshop Framework- 9h Plan Alternatives Stakeholder Alternative Analyses ` Fixed and Flexible Feedback Once baseline conditions were determined and synthesized, three concept plan alternatives were developed to explore options for land use and infrastructure patterns and connections. The alternatives were evaluated against Guiding Principles that were established at the beginning of the project. Alternatives were also reviewed by a variety of stakeholders and community members to help the project team understand preferences. Themes that emerged from the alternatives evaluation included diverse housing options, smaller-scale commercial nodes within neighborhoods, walkability and access to parks and trails, safe and comfortable street networks, and opportunities for employment. Urban design responses to those community desires were woven into the final concept. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary l 10 River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan The River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan s Mountainside 1, offers opportunities for a wide variety , MOUNTAINSIDE WAY-4 High School 9 of household types and sizes, along 9<<" SCHOLLS FERRY RD GR` with places to shop, work and recreate 0a w'v '1 P' - all within walkable, well-connected I •• /-,• -I neighborhoods. rt 1 ---....... -------i "1 I ' v 1I \---:%77-1_,. `,.. JEAN iLOUISE RD __..-j Legend �. `_-_'River Terrace 2.0 Project Area # I Employment Area , i Commercial / Neighborhood Node [WEST] -> BULL MOUNTAIN RD Main Street I ; Even Mix i. I Feathered Edge I a A —Collector Road II t i ---- Street/Pedestrian Connection c w ---- Minor Street Connection '• Mountainside Way Future Study Area c ^ Beef Bend Road Future Study Area i........---L„ •--- Community Connection Oo: IArtRutkin - •••• Trail Network E ` Elementary School , Stream .,.. ._-------. .."",.l' Wetlands [SOUTH] Vegetated Corridor �+ a Park(Outside Project Area) LASICH LN -. �._..�.._ ct School (Outside Project Area) 3_•_ � i 1 Tile Flat, Future Study Area - � ._ --'� Framework B, See Transportation BEEF BEND�RD et Section ceW ® 0' 1,000' Z J W RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary 111 Housing.Three distinct housing typologies, or patterns, are envisioned for the residential areas of River Terrace 2.0, each of which is intended to respond to surrounding land uses and context. While the housing patterns differ in building form and intensity, there are housing types that are common to all three: single detached and cottage units, accessory dwelling units, courtyard units, quads, and rowhouses. The Main Street typology is designed to be located along a main street corridor and is envisioned to have taller rowhouses and other housing types oriented toward the main street. The Even Mix type is intended to be located in the middle, between the neighborhood edges and the main street corridors, and includes a wide variety of housing types from block to block. The Feathered Edge typology is designed to respond to the edges of neighborhoods where they intersect with natural resource and open space areas. All typologies are intended to provide a mix of housing types and sizes and provide opportunities for affordable options throughout. Commercial/employment. Several commercial nodes are planned,two in River Terrace West and one in River Terrace South. All commercial nodes are envisioned as main street corridors,with small-scale commercial retail and office spaces intended to serve the surrounding neighborhoods. The main street corridors are internal to the neighborhoods but maintain strong connections to the arterial edges to support visibility as well as transit access. The northern-most main street corridor in River Terrace West is surrounded by a larger(approximately 10 acres) employment area. The main street corridor in River Terrace South is intended to reflect and complement the planned town center in Kingston Terrace to the south, across Beef Bend Road. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary 1 12 Street network.The planned street network for River Terrace 2.0 is designed to be highly connected and provide options for internal and external connections. A primary north-south collector street is planned through River Terrace West, providing connections from Scholls Ferry Road down to Bull Mountain Road and further south. That collector may be an extension of SW Mountainside Way or SW Tile Flat Road - both options are explored as part of the Concept Plan. Through River Terrace South, the primary north-south collector will be an extension of River Terrace Boulevard through the study area and south to Beef Bend Road and into Kingston Terrace. In both areas, logical extensions of the existing adjacent street network are planned. Trails and Parks. Part of the transportation system includes planned trails throughout River Terrace West and South. Trails are intended to provide recreation as well as transportation/commuting opportunities; they will provide connections between main street corridors, neighborhoods, parks and open spaces, and adjacent existing or planned regional trails (River Terrace Trail, for example). The plan calls for a number of community and neighborhood parks to meet Tigard's level of service standard and ensure broad distribution of parks throughout the study area. Two community parks, four neighborhood parks, and four linear parks are planned for River Terrace West. In River Terrace South, one community park, two neighborhood parks and two linear parks are expected. The Concept Plan does not identify exact sizes or locations for those parks; that level of detail will be explored in the next phase of planning for River Terrace 2.0. Public Utilities. Sanitary sewer and water service will be extended into River Terrace 2.0 to serve new development, primarily from existing infrastructure to the north and east. Some larger projects will be required, including new sewer pump stations, a water reservoir, and large diameter pipelines. Stormwater management is envisioned to be through a combination of large, regional facilities and smaller-scale low-impact development approaches. Stormwater management in this area will follow the same standards used for River Terrace 1.0, which is generally a more stringent standard than the baseline requirements per Clean Water Services. Regional facilities will be collocated with established wetlands where appropriate and will be designed to also serve as community amenities. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN Executive Summary 113 Implementation. The total cost for planned infrastructure needed to serve River Terrace 2.0 is approximately$161 million. The Concept Plan identifies potential funding sources for each infrastructure type, including system development charges (SDCs), supplemental fees, grants, regional sources (Washington County Transportation Development Tax, for example), Clean Water Services regional program for stormwater, and developer contributions. Specific to housing implementation, the Concept Plan identifies a number of strategies that can be used to encourage development of diverse housing types and affordable housing options. Those strategies include tiered SDCs, loan programs, land banking, developer incentives, and others. Next Steps. Once the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan is adopted,the urban reserves will be brought into the urban growth boundary and further planning can occur. In the next phase, the City will prepare a Community Plan that will build from, and refine, the work done as part of this Concept Plan. Similar to the concept planning work, the Community Plan will engage a broad and inclusive group of stakeholders and residents to prepare a more detailed guide for future development in this area. i , , , -i•ji.T; .., —Tr-7 - , . ., .-• . . 7 ., ' ' • ' , . , .. . . ,• • „,,,, i • 4 ' .-' ''. ''.. - /! ?ill.- : , : f - , .i'','. ''1,‘,4,.,`''. ,' . #.;z,,..;.., ,....,:..,:,,, '.. ,.., • i„ . ,..,., .. ' ' .' k-"!!'-',);,;15”.' 'ik.'•.(r.•14 *''''f' e. ., :,,,„ , , .• lk,. 34 r , •- , 1111. 1 i• ,,. . ,%. . , , . --: 01,.....,.. . ' . , ....... .1 • ••'" , ,.$.`••••" ' .14... . ., , .,., , ."'" . ......„ /., _r, ,!o . .. O• Al': ''.. V 4-•:, ‘, . ., '... 11*,:' ''.. • .4,1'., ' .. , . ..t.- •,r, : - .•". . !..,,r. . olk. 1" . ''t 1'14'; 4'::''''''''•.1°' ••••L'i ek . .°)‘. 'A jk •. I. • •.. . ,.1 4t :Vt.h-..7,:i '•"{", '' •4... t.,.... ., . . . . - _ . -.. ., . .• .: . 'A c-: 4.• i' • 4-. . . ,,,,, ' . .- 4: - ' • -; . :.-......,. ;,,,i0.;....'..y. ' ,.,...-•,,:,,l`.. IC .' :4,1,,L;tr'r.r1,\, ''' .-1,75'A.•"•,,•'$ :..).. ." -•'.,,..-$' -4•:4 r _ • .., i . •' • 'Of ...„ P,. 99i:„...„?.4.4, '1'"Q. • . . , s.t • ,e''fr•-•.'4. ''4;;`,...l' ., ),, t ., . '''.; ,.- • •, '`), .... '. '' .'r , ,,• ,..;'..1 •., .?"-/:' . .. ' Y '; ' • . -• •• • - n. .- . „.. _,..,. . . . ,, .,,,. ,.... . •.. . .... k! .,.. • , 4. ', • . . 1,•;;;.•-:', . . ,,,,.. ,,.e-P• t. '.... ". '$ 1' •••' ..-, 1-- .- ' ' '4111.r l'iii''' ,:••JSS,,,„ '. 4 _ '— ' ' ''t-' . ''''\)- z,--..tt .. :ii.'‘ ': , -, 4E. . ;„),• , it. . . ,. •- .-<•-.4'• '• ..1 2 .., ,,.... ' • Al c_ ....... ,_ .... • . . ' ' . , . ' • '•:-.4%. ..' 'II 1):' -'''' , 1' i'''' ''' ' ' ...' ..... .°A- , '..'.79 ''.-'-:11' 4,!rf..4 1.:994 4' 99 . , '•,1$•`. '- • 1 . .•,. ..', i .... . 1,-,,.."-•"--x.(-A.., .'• ;-- ", ,v.. ' '' ., ' . -.• .- ,..- i. 't• .... . ...., ., .:t L ! .. ' ...• . „.. 4,:••• . 4' V:ii .•• - •51t''. ,.' ,- ' . .=.i-4 -‘,-- ' K , . • - ', IA; •••,i' -.. 4 '..,' . ,... _„, . . 11.77 -* . ' .• i Ar...'l ..'1 *. ' 1 •'‘ ,i',)* *Ap • ' :!. ', , - ... • ,, - -. • ' ' , • ,/ 1 q L. ,. , • ....,...,... . .. •_ . . .. _. ... . . . • ... ..,, „. . ..,. ...,. : . 4. , . „, . . . • . , ,..... . • • . . $, . ''/Ai . . . . ., • . , ,e .,. .$- • / . i •. :I " 1.• ., vv, 3 i !A, „ -.... N 0 I SI A . . . . . .„..,.... .. .• . . . . . . -,.,•, • : ... .. . ,., ' • A• :Lit.' . lir .4. ' -',' ''.:eir."' '' , P , . '1'.1%- . •' '' '-' -, -Ipt• 11), ;t,,%''. , ....,.,,.. ,. '.• . ... ., is 1 • .. " • • -• 1 WA , , ,..,” . „ . , . d . 1 . . . _ . • , ,,,,... ..,.. ' • • . , . ...• ' . .4• •,,, • 1r4r. 4,,e's• , :.‘,. ',/!? '' ;, a VI Tt---'--- ; ID .3 folti .... .,.. .. . ., ..„, ... , . . . 4 — - .' spir,,. /. , ...... \ r•.'" • - . .. .. , . • .. -,• . : . ' ,..... 11,.. ..,:'4.•,i . , ,.1: _ -•- - , •-, ., . . • " " . , . - • 4- . -"" • ' • i ' t.- ,. ••1' ' /...- . •.4 ,,, • '' '..' '." ' , •' ., V • ' •t' ., , • . . -..,, :6 '-' ' . / 'I.' 'er,'")"''.., - .. . ; • •:•NI.. 'it?if 4 Ort .,,, .C. , .. ,.„ • '';,. 4_ - ,•,„,-4`„ . 4, ... ..• . , - ,.•-•-' /- - /',/A;' ''-' . ' ' . -:: ,,V 7' ' ' • 4e.-- k.' . . • .7' -• - .//d 4 X . s., ' • • , •_ . . . .4•,, • •, -...k '4 • - he '• - -...- ' 1 -- //'-' ' - ''' ''' 4-'1' .de . . . , .„ . - . - - . _„ .. .... ... ... . :,. - . • .. . ..• ,. .-„,--,,. ..,..„:„....,/. . . .. i i.,„ - - .,,e'-‘. ., . , ._ ,- . . ,,...- - -, - ,..__.. , • - . . , .. - ,,,, ..-‘,.• .• ' ---!:-.7,7 ,-. ',, ' ' - . . ..,-,, . . t • .- •• - •--.1.1 ... . .„ :: --,v - . ... ,•,4( k . le .4-.7-4:- --... .. .tirs ..i. 1. -- - . . . t. • • ' ii v., at,-. '• ••• ".'.• • : -"f7 . , ; I . ..., • ,totb. a , - 'i. ,.... -4.„, . A;-- "- k•- ..- . f ' _ , Isnr filf u• , 1... 40,..!: ,..,„, , . ar- • . ., , • • :. . * . , . ,. ..'"';'''...,'".„\',<.,.•,',' .:' :: ' ' .: 4.'. ,...- ..i ..`. ';ie • '-' . ' . '$'4A-,,v.' , „ ,-- . . , -. - • - . ....-.4t.. ,• . '-._ '' -,.',g -, . ..._ , f,.-.. -... RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER I 115 Project Focus This work is focused through two lenses that are centrally linked - equity and climate change. You can consider these lenses as a pair of glasses through which this work is conducted and viewed; they guide the vision of the project. As such, this project seeks to lift up the voices of communities of color, immigrants, and people with low incomes. These communities are among those most affected by the impacts of environmental inequities, climate change, and systemic racism. When we meet the needs of the most vulnerable communities, the health and wellbeing of all community members improves. Vision Statement River Terrace 2.0 is a neighborhood for everyone and a complete community. It offers housing opportunities to the full diversity of Tigard's families and households. This community is made complete by providing space for small businesses and a thriving economy, a variety of housing options, and accessible parks and open spaces. The transportation system treats all modes equally, with walking and biking trails throughout the community, a road system that emphasizes safety and regional access, and a development pattern that supports an efficient public transit system. Public spaces and parks offer places for the community to gather. Natural areas are protected and enhanced to emphasize habitats and scenic views. Public utilities are designed to maximize cost-efficiency and long-term fiscal sustainability. The costs of necessary infrastructure are shared in an equitable manner. rt., ...'7,`- - .C...,t.; 460,,,,h.,..•-`'-" : r: . -' -''''''' '''''''. 10k.',,:v.''''' ;,..-• - 4''''''"3,,;.PiLa':. -''''c'''''" ''''''' ..... ..; -..r... '.0.,7t'. . i -UhtX'1'. • '77;1; ••••-..r•-•.,.4...4 s--.7'•••..• .. ',..&w,vc;....cx w.,.." ' 1- --,,,-,w,".. . ..,,,,,....., ....•,•,.....,4,,.,. .-1,,,,.,,,..,•-• .-..--- ._ .:, ,. i.....4_,,,,.. .. _,,, •.- . • P,-.....-_,,,I,-tt - . :IP,,,...... .. ,.,... 7..4.11;..`e;;1_•-•-i",..v..1.,..,4,:- •.e•....„:•, ;•-•'..,,,,,,,-,,,,..-.„ -.4 - • ,- •• ..- 0,"-,...., •• le ::. ',,• :-:',,,,. •11...e.i: •.••i',.i..A."• ',.0.. .."'. - '. i. 111 ,..----39-'- ,,....'1101111e- :- '''.., •i....;';',Zi.A::,,,,, ' . 411".,'.4.,•,:...,..,-Y.,e•,,,:„44.%.- , .„. .. .14....,.k..„ .„,,,••.‘,.., .... 7:4,,i, ... .. .....,0..-,. ;4.....,- ,- •..1-,: ......--,-,.. -„,... . .- • ..,..,...,4, .,-.3.., . ,.-1,..,..,'..--r .;.2 .4...t.,..., , ..' -,,.,„,,,e,, ,,.. • ot"-4. .• .,_ -• ._,_.../.--c:,., .,..,..,„ .p.17 .........„ .... -A . - _ ..- ,':. .....,€..7).„-,.-...0J 0,.0-.4 14. .„,....1.e#..:..,7.V-. • '•e- l,...r....f.'. .0.."4,,i,'%,1,,,.,-;.f.1;'i•1H-.'3;'"4-...e, . .1......;.',.7,;1...'..., ''... 4. •.lowA. ,.K• . ,,I„tti.,to •c-'-`,t),41'','.'.'-:..*".f4....&,.,•. ''• .•.'-'--...;`'.' ,..',.. 4i 4!:1..,.4.,Z.,.:-;,:r..•i4-,,4,:-,ti,-.--1..,,.,-",..A-:-:-.4.,x,:r",-4'.•.4''':'..-.:-.....".•,•,.,,,.-t.. .ft,41,4..,,T,.•,,.:.,-o.-."-.",-!..,,Kr-4 ''',, ••• :. . . .,•., ^IF .,•:7., 4 J lirl'7 . , 00 1111111111111111A.4.' :I. -. 4-. ”M' . '.,''':.‘-'1,!:,'T ,,,-f.t.'-' , r' ' - ; AKr"--'--•••• , ''''.*.*:,' C:.-r., . .... '"^:r.::. ..7,...,#:,-, . • S-`,'..'" ,-. '%e • 4 ,p,, - , •'''..."-::.11?*.. ''--. '''`‘'''''''''''' ' „,,,,:,-4'4' - ,f. r-'.,±"tiftl, -,...1`. -:"{-,.%'''''..,%,'''' -,,,. 4-'''. . ..f.',7, .- ;•-A . . • • •-- •••••,.,-. .f.i'--t..;..S.#at.•.'5..$-..•'.„-1:.7'.‘.::.;"-?',!4,'•'.2.-.-..1j1,•4#.i•:)•„P,"41',,01''4..-i7.Z.47f",X,t.fr'*i,"?n.,.:--..:".'fr...-N'......`.*•;•-'•-.,''„"--,I--."..V.--'•..".....4••t•'.1:;;;.-.4•'-'',;'..:.4:,.;,.:,,,744..:../..`‘,'.....z4, ,';.V=•'..:;'i.p;".....-..-?.".!-..-, ,.'•""4..',,.,f.,...;;,;';',"-•c--,'.-'' : ''....#-,.,'„,'..,••.••*1..':.•4.-•1,„,--,-":17,. -:...,'-'',,.-.I,t,:.,.pt.',','13,v• "1.4••- .-r•- . -.!',.,.;...,_.--"'••-• ,i;,-•:;"•,..",-.....1".• ' -•;'-',--. 4.1 - ••-•,*-,4•- .- • 4 ",, * , , _ .---,-- ''. --•'' - ''''', . 0 ' . --".- 4).:11:6"Y-' '.; • •• • a ' '''• 4 4:*,'''W,r"44'''' .: -.-'' - . . f.f.:,..s.X .. ...- -- - - .-.. -.:',..,...,,-.4.-.:• , . ..,. •-- .... . .• , . .,. • • .,v,...,.' - ..- -. • •1:1..- ,,,.„' .aw •..'.. . .. i-.4.,i•.,, .,..... . .,,z,..v;. ;21 l'.ar ' '.' '''''''lit ... '' '''. .*".rit-'- ' "'"'" :"-filk i v.,.''• • & . - , . • • . ,,, "-4*,1.•jA.:' ,., ' ,,,. . • .a . .,11-4S' . '.• '-'-'-: : ' .. ... „....A. '. .?.....9...'.,.-. k .,. --A• ..-,,',.. '. •$ ,....1.,,, •,,-,i,., ' .- ifr,..*,',... .., . • , .... 4' ''''.' - ,"' ' -"T4' ''''; .f.,. ' Y''''''.V ','''4. '''. '''."1.."°!- '711' . '..-.Y: ,,'„1 ../id;f. tsi - '', , ' • " .'F `. i '.4.''' ' , ' . "ft.• N.' ' •I i ; ; • • : .!: 1 '4' .. ' '''''''''''' ..ir' ,' '1%.e Alt- : -- ', ,`!.' ' - •' ,--'- ' -:-.; -- - ." -",' .>,.. .'i..,. . , ,-. *I. -'. .*, . .,,:, ..:..- ...•!:-.-1•::.i-„:rt -A..:.:-..--,-', zt.:,'-'•,,--1.--,-:,..--...,\•'-' ,•-'••',,,;•:,..4.•.- -.:.- - It'•*r' --r'••''''•'-'.'- •: --' 4 'fAllillr-- •f.iie'-''. --:- • ••• 1. ..,, tzok • _. . ; t,..,,,1 L#5,&,.• ..„:„.:,3„..„,,,, ......„•,,,,,,..,,,,..,...„:.7...,-..„,,,.....,....4. _:•`;'.1-i,.....,.,,,....,. • ,..,....0.' c..,...'„"z, :-....:. ;..L.:‘,.."..,-... :..', ., *.: ,...-.-,., ,' ',;:;,.:.;'.. ', 114, '`,'.7,..,,V,,,,r..,-,":....,. ,...4.4ft;f',,,,tt,,'...''.::,'"*.. t.,,,,,i";,......z...,..!',:n.,..,,,;[,, :,..,..f.:,....7....<,;-:.:,*-..%,....,72;',. ..:-.,:r7.:i ,:,.;......,';."'";:.•-•,,,:.:h.,"-',Z.f.:-.'1:'''',,..t.•'':' -': ' '7,,, : .. '',,• ., ...,' , ,.: 1.,-,.-. ., ", ' . ‘ ' ' - -.- . 1:11:;-:.1:''''AiP:. '' ' . `1`'. *-*,LA',.^'•' A..:.-•:.4..,-.S. ir...',..,.4.-- '•••..';4•--;'•',,,•''.--•-••;-•:'•-•,.-•:7'''''''','" . ' ---;,.. . '",-,'''. 4i ---...“.7:''' : -... .°..".- ",,-` ... .:;... )''' .r4,04.,,:i' vr"...,,SY' •,..' .. 4V ...r , 1....""1..''' ' .t, '''','' . a•.. . ., •''' ..: ‘-- . ''''';' ' ,'".,.,.; -.r" ..4'.. .,' ', 440,..--'7 • , -..;.;. . • ','.._';',14,i : ;4.-*•",.„ .4?"...0"....1-.:17;',x.:,..'T.,...;."";''.:"Z,lt '',' ' .;;',"1",'"/,':.;,..r.":.:;.,,'' -.:-.'..,,.,..3'ii„-;,-,,:,:',*.-''',',-'',..:::-:'":.,',_.,„-' - .:.,,',.;'.' ',. ',., -2...',,' ,,-:.'.'.,.:'-'" ...:? '..'''• ;.! ';',%,..,..,;,,*'-;,,i" ' .;,t-'t,*„.„114‘,.„1444,04...;,,",./,',.;:,,,:fq..-'t:::.:.';4:.:. At.,l; ,f,,t4;0‘il''.:',';..)::,;,'"1::::.:4;,;'•.:::.:•:;;.,,-;,.:'.,,,,,'._.:,-i;::,,,:,, :`,...!,;:.[,!:,:'.•:`•A'.....;-:-.,'-••,, ":-.:;;;;_.i.,,-..,..,.2....,, ,...:- 2•:-T,•_..-,:,....,..•,-,..:„: •;,.- ...,•:::.,,-,..„:.•-•-•:;-,;.•••:-'. .1....;7.:."`:...'.", ril , ..,... ...f,,,,.:., ,... . . ,,,, , .... ..1„,„..1.....,i,„,,,,......,....,; 174. •:44....4.„,c.,„.:::::„i„,,..„...;....,..,,...,.,...,...,,. ... ,_,...,.....,..,.. . ..„...,., . ..... ......... . . . .. ., . .. . , ... , ..... ...,,....., ..., . . .. . i'r..";. ,..,',. .i-..;-- ., 4'1, "1-VAt;f4t* .i.,:.:71:''.1-','-',": • ''..'ic•i,,41`' -'44-*C2:.f:0';4,'-*i,,•-'7.-•'/-4"-r:-'-'r'"`"'"1':'---.-2C4'-;;-"-- '-'''-i'.7-t.r'..-:-•';'::•.. - " ,•''.--'.;•-•'•:„...•;--e-'";--'• -', - ''' "' - V '-'-i'...1.-1'.:?,;;;;.:;•• '- ..4"7....144,k,T,..;---"I -."..-%,•,..".;;;•krt.--hi.'4 ' -'11-'1."•,na. ".4'."''',i "-- -,'''''-•--f.'..;•••;'. --•• 14--;)..• .- - '''' . "'"- r------'"*"•- •:'- --1 .-•- .•• " ..•• -. '' - •-`.,.-' -''i.---7'-•• •••*`""4:'..-,-- .---`,.'''',"{r• t"•,,, .7 l',•°•.''..4-..--dt•..-:`•"''',"•',--.•'-.-.:•,--"!:-. 2...-"•'•?.,.. -;...i,,'...,'.1,-••• '•-•:',',.-=, -'•'- ':,/,-, " '4-.4.-•'• - : "" - '••••'--,,.,,, . . , . ,AA-•-..;-....44.... •,,; -....,:r..„;:'.. .:,,z.........41.-;...:4-.;„ •'-,-.;:i...''...,,,,...:: ,,,,,'`4-''1 `•-...;:elc .....'-..."'' ...• ".'":•;'•.:-, • • -.. .. ‘,.,1,,,• " •- •,-.• -,,'...." ' ' • .0 •4 # * -* i C.- , , .;, 4,it: ,..... * ati.• , -.,-. , • ' f . . a.' . 4 . * , .^ ...- • '`. 1 . : .. ‘• l' 4 4 -'.! ' ,'•- ' , ' .- , .,... „i:, .,r. 0 fe •„• , . ,,t,,s.,.....-,-.... .,L;:;,,,,,,,,,z.:;:..;•-,.' .• •:-.. ..-.:•,.-,":•.•‘4,",s-1.....:,':f.' 1,..:. .„;:,' ''....'r,'''.'- .''' ..' .. ' •-••.- ; ^ ..., •,' - '...... . -:.-.•,.,.'" r. .-::.':.`'':-'1,:-4'.:;''.:,;',",',r ,!....'..-'4 '' :4::;1''' . . ...':'' '• . ...- f - - ry .F;.:„X*-,,,,•„,'•,, ,,, ,;',„,,,,... ..,.•:.,:',;;;*.-4:.r,r1,4)::::,."':::2-1•:-:,.;..,•;•;,.-„,,' .4.,'•••,..',„,,,,."-,,,.,..f'j-rtt';;....,.4:---.A.,''',„,::,..."::::;:,?:•,,,::• ,,,,,,,;!.....',:. - ;,-, '''• ••''...;•-• '...t fre: r- • ' --..,•';'-e4:... :4;'.*''.3.ii.7.11r. ', 0 ',‘,.„,....., 4:• ,,,..., -,.'1',..,-,--,.:...---,.:,-..:,,,-.,.:-.,..-.--,,,i,,,,,,i-,-,, ---,----,.--:-. , , . .:-.- .-....., I... ,.,,!, 4._,,, .- ... -jvi'''..,", . #... , , . , .t..,„ .„ ji. '''''..r:'AI'.r ,e- ^,..2„I-..7-Le.;•'--,-,'.7..--..,* •';',.''' ',:-.. 4'-.''''.'•- ''''-'.`..- ''' ,:-.:''-'' '' .1 .- -:-•'24'I'Pvd -1:''' 1'1 i2.' ' '. :* : , 7 -Iff • ' ipr ill , A'-Zi',,,..e....,:‘,„.:7:.,..:,..: ,,„,...„-c.,-. . .,..,.....„...,-..,, -,, ,._,:-.,.,.....„,„...!..,,;,.„:...,..„...r,.2.-?"..- •.:.„,:,... ..:.•. ,•.-.R•f."-•••.,.,•''• - #:„,.?"-•-•. t--.-•,..! •••"."-. • ..., :-.•.•.. 4.-1.4 : r;--• t- - ..- U• ;',. . t--. i '.14.1•";- '''''.4,..'""2"`,.--,•••-• ;-'"'-'''•-•,-,-.."'i••• •••-• 2c::4.', ':'-'•-•• '.•,• r. -', ",-'"1,-• ;-.-'•,?•.••.....1-...;,;,..-',..` ..r. :-. •!.-.-- :4"-L.., ...-- :••-• .- : • -.., . • ....:. . ..-;-.17. -.. .. •• 4..,., .- ' -,(-;,,...-4, r--,,,••••.,--.7,..,,,,,,,.•4..,-.•:•-...4,44,-f':-• • , .•,:,-_,.(- -• ,Pr-., - -,.-'. /..-•••, ,-, .-,,. Y .'• -,•--.., •-1., .- . ..• .....:;. .....,,,,. .. .6.. ,,,,.--A,...4:flk:'4,,...,-..-,,-,..47,...."...E.,0:-.....•-•,,,,,,i--,,p,•-,,,,,,,,,.....t."...-c.;/..,;,-.....,, ;a, •,, ..,_ , -.-, -)•-.104.• •••,,,,. 7.. - -,,,,. Ile •-:, •••••1'• 4,,,..3-,:,„:=. ,,-.z.,,,- :.-,t ...--....,.„ I.,:-..,-..,,,.i.-.•,. ::-.,,1 .---,,,,:...- - .-..,,,,,,,, -__ • '---„,-..--c . ' ' i - .---1, . = - . s 71.. #1/40 ... t'..A .- . * -...,,- 4:- ,, . t i. ,..,,,,c.,,- ,,,,,.,-,;....y_,,,--..,,, ,,,..2-..,-:,-..:%."....."!:.::1.7......!,_.,;;..•.'_. :`,„:7',.."::-......,,A.-2.:-.':':•%.,7:,...,.:;.:•.,-',:."''..,-;',..7.;-.;',., "i.:,,,‘ "!:-4:".•;'.' •,,,: "-.4" ,•,,- : ..„t' t -";•, ,:i•t,..- 4 :t- :if' "..,..::'',.i-.7"":,.:':rf:';',-''.7:1..-r.:- .:',...'''t'.7../-'7':..-:.4..'A'-'t,.'''.4,:':.- .:-,-T'f':".-• -,;.,.4.:'' ':,2r.'-'.'"'.'..'?..,•;:.,.--..', 7.-`..":::: -4,...,1 -...-- , . z_. . :. , ,;...:4, ,, ..-...,-,,,,,,",..,,..,..-,';-,."-..,.....•.,.,.,1 •':-.:,.--:.' -..,.•-.-.5-or.,..,,r 3•.. --"';._:','-, i.;••-•..', ' '• - : • -• -"-le. '. , ",•'.".:•".,,--: -„.-••;:.7....-...:"::. .. • .-.:•-•.•;.- '.-•=',.--:,'' ':";::.'''.•::'_": -,A-;',"'."-:- '-'''' ,' .-.-.'.'..-*.:• ..1':-'-'41 ",;''''' .- ... , Ap" ''' - . ti-A, * •''''•-'• ";;' '••.1" * .: ir -"'?' -.- - -"--.r.:::$irs."-f .-• .'•,;.'•-•"C--, -..,•••‘• --.-• "••-- •••"•:-.:•'. -'...4'•-•"*•-•** "....-..-7,".;-..•,•,--.:: .::.-7-• ' .-.i-..„-•.• •;...•-;;'-i-.•,-_,,,,,,••"5.:'..,"', :4?-,r-5,•-•- ' ' '' ‘• ,•;' •'g, lir, ittk.,7 -,.. , -- - _,,.. 4, sit./* lorc, - . . ,.,, .-;-,--- - --., ...,--,,,....,,,..-.--,.,..-.--,-.,-- .-..;-,...---•r'--....,. .--,-,---,..., .,,. r.., -,;-.--.-- ..&,1,- ...-•--_, :;•--. • . •i -. 'o, . "- .:•-•_ • :-. -• -• _.„ „,:-.„.,•-...,, , 3,,,,,,,•.. •. -. •„-,, A.•-t- ., ..i.' --,....,,,- .•,-L r,-.:.;.:'....::''..,''''... '''':, .P.- .";•-' ,40,411,1 VA.*" ' •- .'- . " r'"--- '• ' f:=,,;‘t _... ,;.t ..... ,.. . ,:.--4• . ?....44.:.,..1:::!, '- ii:--',•:-.,.••, ' ••' *--. - r`.. , ••-'••••••• ' : •-,"' -.-- •• - --" •- - ' ' - ""-•,•54-Y,-••••-‘," '-,•••••'' ' . - -•..,..- "...A. ,-.----. 1- • •'.'•••-"'•-•• . . ....!!.1„,-.'• -,," - • , , -.. . _ _ 41 "-•' - t• ..•-'• .,•;•-",0•.- -•••--•141:., - , , : '•:„.."--.'•,.:.•• ••.' - ' , . .. ' 4" ,,A•',.! . ....? ; • , 4,.. - *. ' . - -4.-., .-.•••••• .. •••-•. . _ ''..„.-'4,;,;''',••'. . " , ,--.. ; ' . 44...74,..,. ...78,,' ,.(..',...,e; '••-• • , -.- , -3- ' ••-. . • • -, . :, - •• • ,, -. . • -- - '' -'"'A'ts.,,-:424-",,,,."N•Vt-' - " ' • .••... .. .• *•-z"..':-' -•.' . ., ,..,_ ., • -'.. '-',-;,--•.---.-."-:/. - , - '• . -• ' ".- .. ' .` ' • . ' • '`4 - .-‘-'.----.• , -%. -.. :-- - .,..-i...,. •,. - --: - i-, 41-4.,;-, -,-,„ . -,..70,$- - . ,-...:, , ,.- . , • . , . .„,.,,,, . ,...,v,- , - .....•:%c.- ;••:-„,s:. • 44._411:1, Z*.,, ..:.„, It- .4.11. -4.1r."' : ,„ - •, ..• • ,. • ....,,- 7,••• •,-,-, ',.„ ..,..,• ,*.4.„,,,....•',.-i•••,„;•.• ••••,,•;",-.#7;-.7..,-.' .,......." -.... . . -.- - : --:' --'''''. •.-- -- . • --t'ae#A..-4,-....•4--,,-,-.1,'/7." ....,14..-,-,-,--/ i., of . * . ,.. . ';'.".I.` ; .,,• ..". ' , ,_ ...,. . , '. .,. . .,,'.,,".^).4....,•••:t••••:-*/;•,.,.,.„.,.,-,-..%=',.'4,,,-;k 1.;-...„,"tert,••-A jeil # ,' ,t: r i:li,"'' ,-.'.•-'.,,...'"e,t,.,.:.4&:7,'-'.4;""-74,;,,,'f",t't..`,:.,, ..10 4.,_, ... -.......4. ._4••• ..4..,. ' . ...r .,, . , , e . . ' '-.- ' . • •-.'‘•4..,-'.';'' ';'4'.' -•'; ' -,;•''....'.,-'4.• 7.,. , _..•,.. . • , Wil. , ..._ „ , ,.. ,,, ',..111., , . .. • • ,5 ..1.;..4. -• . • ,-, ' ''''''', C ': ... - r Ve.4,.1'' :... ''''-'.'- • ' ,, 4, . - . • ,..,`“,"-'''' . -_.- •:-.•' •- 4•-,,.. “ ;New ' - . -1' ,,,,,. ..... • ,,s- • •,,..,....:.. • -'41- .,' -• -.0,- ••-.., , •s•" .N,,.•. • 4", • • • i'•!•:.- - t',.t.- 1 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II I 17 The River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan Vicinity Map is the first step in planning for a new ,-gEAVERTON y i.. . '. r~ '`` i Tigard community. This plan provides f w', 1R 1 the framework for how future growth # : and development can occur in the River ' ""' :moi-'' ,• ''' Terrace West and South urban reserve v�L� as `�' areas. 15. q . -_ "TIGARD ' River Terrace 2.0 is envisioned as a ,,, , •,. „,..„,,,,,, ,....„4,,,,,,,,.. complete community, one that provides i' _ 7,N '* , opportunities for housing, employment, € ti, !` `i parks, and open spaces that are 4 is !'� ..-.-4.;:,..;,, 4. ;. k connected by a well-designed multi �; :. • �_+i..� ` k y = `'.;tie;:; . i. modal transportation network.This plan ! r> :., z ” ;- ; 99,1q r , _,,7,7:' serves as the guide for future planning K 11 _ - ,- -;,..t..,.,-. work in this area, establishing a vision ' , z ,,!. ' - ; 1--. , "' 4 't ,, for how land uses, roads, public utilities, 14Y : _ _ f: y r ' d opportunities for employment, parks :4:-'K` _ - -� •s '■t and trails, and natural areas can be fully " ! . ! ra sw BEEF BE-4D KING CITY sr t 51177.' f,: integrated within River Terrace 2.0. - �,_, ,, A' „� , 0 in y1" '1 a„' VS, t?1 e i df iia lk., _� S f ... : :, - l al. e is TUALAT1 N*_ �► • Mr � f� !+#a"' V ' (l. t o{ l`..• a tl. p b '1 zel a jrridt ' r:-1! \'' it -: .11 i # � ti , - ♦fir 1� �t- '`t, 3 Legend River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 1 River Terrace South 3 Mountainside High School River Terrace 1.0 2 River Terrace West 4 Future Art Rutkin Elem. School — Tigard City Boundary —5 Tualatin River Nat. Wildlife Refuge RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II 1 18 Why Do Concept Planning Now? This plan is intended to help the City and majority of respondents feel that Tigard Addressing these issues of housing supply, region prepare lands for development to needs a greater variety of housing types choice, and equity is one of the one of the ensure that there is an adequate supply at more affordable prices. That sentiment primary goals for this concept plan. of housing. Underproduction of housing is supported by the 2021 Housing Needs River Terrace 2.0 will provide 3,000 to in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis led Analysis (HNA) prepared for Tigard by 4,500 units of new housing, with an to a shortage of more than 20,000 units in Mosaic Community Planning. The HNA emphasis on creating opportunities for Oregon. The 2021 State of the Economy identifies a need for more than 3,000 new a diversity of types, sizes, and prices. Report produced by ECONorthwest housing units in the Tigard area. Strategies for incorporating affordable and published by the Portland Business housing into the community are an Alliance found the largest downturn in About 40 percent of those homes integral part of the plan. housing production since the previous should be affordable to households crisis.This is potentially troubling news, with incomes that are 80 percent or less Lastly, this plan also allows the City to as continued population growth mixed of the median family income. Further, think comprehensively about its role with an ongoing housing shortage and the HNA notes that"Data regarding within the larger region and how future a decrease in production will further housing needs by race and ethnicity Tigard neighborhoods, commercial and exacerbate the region's already-severe exemplify the intersection between employment centers, and travel corridors housing crisis. Together, these trends housing affordability and equity in can reflect, complement, and connect with are key drivers of displacement for low- Tigard. Expanded affordable housing surrounding neighborhoods. Planning income and minority households. options, including opportunities for and development efforts are occurring all homeownership, are needed for the city around River Terrace 2.0 - in Beaverton, This plan will help the City of Tigard set in to develop as a community for all." King City, other parts of Tigard, and place a vision to accommodate expected Washington County. Planning for this growth while addressing increasing area now will allow for regional solutions demand for more housing choices, and more coordinated and cohesive promoting economic opportunity, and communities. providing countervailing measures against displacement. A recent housing survey of Tigard residents revealed that the RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II 19 Concept Planning Process In order to consider future growth and development in River Terrace 2.0, the area must first be brought into the urban growth boundary(UGB). This Concept Plan demonstrates that the City has evaluated options for the urbanization of this area and can meet the requirements for inclusion in the UGB. Those requirements are set forth in Title 11 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, which establishes the rules for UGB management. Once brought into the UGB, the Concept Plan will be used as the basis for a Community Plan,the next phase of work in planning for development in these areas. The Community Plan will further develop and refine the community design, technical analyses, funding plan, and policy strategies that guide development and set in place the Comprehensive Plan map designations, zoning, and development standards that will apply. Land can then be annexed, zoning can be applied, and development can begin. The span between concept planning and ultimate development can take five or more years, depending on the size of the planning area, market forces, and the cost and scale of needed infrastructure improvements. We are here! n® Ideas and Goals Concept Plan Co munity Plan Development Collect community ideas for The Concept Plan will outline A community plan will further Development will occur River Terrace 2.0,which will a broad vision for the area. It refine the vision developed through land divisions, inform the Concept Plan. is the first step in the process with the Concept Plan and planned developments and for eventual development. will provide more specific site development review. proposals for future land uses and developments. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II 20 Who was involved? This plan is the product of many minds working together toward a common goal. To successfully plan for a new community, the needs, desires and expectations of all stakeholders must be understood and integrated. From the start, this project was focused on providing multiple venues for people to meaningfully participate throughout the process. The public involvement plan for this project was particularly centered around equity- ensuring broad and inclusive representation, especially for those segments of the population that have historically not been included during these types of planning processes. A full description of the public involvement plan and a summary of public engagement activities and outcomes are provided in Appendices A& B. One of the major hurdles this project had to overcome was that it was completed entirely within the span of an international pandemic that precluded the types of public gatherings that are so often used in public planning processes. This meant that the project team needed to work proactively with community partners to ensure that accommodations were provided to allow the broadest diversity of stakeholders to participate. Evento de puertas abiertas en Tinea sobre River Terrace 2.0 iBienvenidos al evento puertas abiertas en linea sobre River Terrace 2.0! River Terrace 2.0 River lett at.e 2.0 ser b or vecindae ru pard tudos—U114 cuntutudad cornpleta LOU una diversidad de upctunes de vrorelrtia para personaWe, e se entr cuenare en dlterentes "111Vt:Z. n 4110* -t��. . etapas de la vtda y de Ingregos vartados �'! 4 jV`7s •'�^c ` A eaves de este event°vrrtual de puertas aetertas usted ©arse w A�,vf:;ryrA,..nf•IINry fiyr;e 1 Y•• • F+St fb[e 400 t 411eStt$f•f.UU GUtP\tS to tU)V ••RL. . NtKfritl:r•!Nu.KJW+t..N ttfnilr•...r..i vwctm.r.;. �Y-i` Raitr.v;de:A0 allota nasty to dorninge.24 de mere.2021! d Online Open House Website RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II 121 Guiding Principles One of the first steps in the concept Neighborhoods Study Sketch planning process was the development of a set of guiding principles to serve as - •+111M11111111111111... the foundation upon which the concept .., • a plan was built.These guiding principles , `� 'I represent the values held by the City of ., \ l Tigard and its residents; these are the elements that are critical to creating a complete and inclusive community. I ;'� They are derived directly from, and are intended to carry out, the Project Vision `f that was developed collaboratively with t the Community Advisory Committee. ti �� , Neighborhoods & Housing g • Neighborhoods provide a diversity of •.1 housing choices that will serve the full .mss f range of housing needs for Tigard's current and future residents • Neighborhoods integrate opportunities for market rate and regulated affordable ,:prAid housing to facilitate home ownership at11 all income levels --- P. • Neighborhoods are designed to y thoughtfully incorporate adjacent ' ilio ` I. 1 natural areas and commercial centers • Neighborhoods are designed to provide ,, i1 = ,�,l\ opportunity for an average of twenty N '. households per acre �`''� RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II I 22 Transportation Commercial Areas Study Sketch • The transportation system emphasizes r . pedestrian and bicycle connections , , ; within the neighborhood and to regional i trails ' "`` , • Streets are designed for safety and ! to serve all modes of transportation, = ' . including vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, 1 • and transit • • The transportation system connects to regional facilities and extends existing J;. streets and trails where feasible and 1 . economically viable ' -- Commercial & Employment .-- - • Commercial areas provide opportunities ,..w-� -`', for business and employment to serve River Terrace residents • •` '��~ • Residents can acquire many goods and services to meet their daily needs • without having to travel long distances -- . ..-., , .�,,.. II I RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER II 123 Parks and Open Space Natural Resources Study Sketch • Community and neighborhood parks �``'� ,�,Barrow5`�c are located throughout River Terrace ji.....•�.w� +4 and provide a range of gathering and ` recreating options i • Parks are accessible and connected to j Y o commercial centers and neighborhoods i 1 by trails and multi-modal streets I `: c. • Parks emphasize natural features such j� Cach Park W.. as views and tree groves • t= Natural Area Natural Resources ' s difrr--- • Natural resources are protected and i enhanced to the maximum extent f �_ .- practicable f `. Ii: - • Habitat corridors are maintained to 1 support wildlife ranging and migration patterns I.\) . . 4. " ;1 • Open stream channels and wetlands are preserved and protected from impactsa / ,_.- of development to the maximum extent :........----) __,.,.: .4P possible r ' .• 4 C- --' ,,,// . 11 Ili 6 llr i I :1 �f -,r , "� ' ► I r .;e 7:.- .. • _ , i :11‘-' ,•—i i-_:- A µ,y FrMil: �►�.ti _- ice'' ri. w A " n , - i•- •' 4. Y( _y�' - �� !' GI '�` t �° < `"'`Tr' r. ;i Wit`` N...; :.+y,..M ii, ic: }•KI �I }� it � V1w �„ ... ! 14 4'..-' Le'4".1. -teief J _ Lit .., , _i 0 1.--Ti .. . , -. , ,... ...ii + ,, R r Yr114rr ; t� •� t f /, rJ...„:„..1.11. 3�- ' V y ` �.r , ,- y r J. w♦ fir.+•'+ F ..fC�e 1.`....; *• , -'�I'. f g -.` J + Iv 7...- 4..,- 491 - 1 . , -. . _ 41, .....' ate,-^'• a� - / • ' 4. 404> rr :fir;` F - ,.- - t ' a. i, / tom. a: 1 , - -. y 11r - ll'," _.: - , IVO . .,a N / ICIA P fil 11 a ate- : ,i. r ACI . • yty� L IA• M t 1 e r y Y . 7 - 1 .41.-riff . / i '` r. F ,... -ii4 .ii " I .. I 1 - @@F�� - fir'' ' 41 1 ,�. f r ; GSSG 6E ~� f. a 1 '- ie. . 4T 4 • • . , RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 125 Housing Housing is a central component of the • This plan will integrate opportunities for Specifically, this chapter aims to: River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan, and the market rate and regulated affordable • Demonstrate options for integrating primary reason for undertaking this housing to facilitate home ownership at affordable rental and homeownership planning process now. The recent housing all income levels, in all neighborhoods. housing into each neighborhood. needs analysis (HNA) prepared for the City • Neighborhoods will be designed to • Develop prototypes that can be used in of Tigard projects a total housing need of provide opportunity for an average of the Tigard River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan just over 3,000 new homes by the year twenty households per acre. 2040. Not surprisingly, much of that need • Explore potential housing mixes and is concentrated at lower income levels. Per This chapter presents a visual and distributions on a dwelling-unit-per-acre the HNA, about 40 percent(8,200 units) of quantitative evaluation of potential basis for specific block designs to inform new homes built should be affordable housing types, site planning options, development potential, infrastructure to households with incomes that are housing distribution, and affordability financing, transportation planning, and 80 percent or less of the median family strategies for smaller, "middle housing" test policy goals established by the income. opportunities in the River Terrace 2.0 project. concept planning area. River Terrace 2.0 takes a unique approach to housing, one that aims to provide a meaningful and implementable guide to HOUSING UNITS NEEDED HOUSING UNIT CAPACITY DIFFERENCE support Tigard's goal of more housing choices (including affordable choices)for Residential—Low Density 1,409 635 (774) its residents. From the very beginning of Residential—Medium Density 3,411 2,272 (1,139) the concept planning process, the housing goals were clear: Residential—Medium-High Density 1,336 706 (630) • River Terrace 2.0 neighborhoods will Residential—High Density 519 0 (519) provide a diversity of housing choices to serve the full range of housing needs for Mixed Use 741 593 (148) Tigard's current and future residents. Total 7,416 4,206 (3,210) Table 1 - Total Housing Units Needed in the Tigard Planning Area,2020-2040 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III I 26 What is Meant by Middle Housing? History of Middle Housing For this project, the term "middle housing" refers to forms Historically, middle housing was a common sight in most of housing that are neither large-scale apartments (dwelling American cities.The advent of zoning and development units inside an apartment building) nor a single detached regulation in the 1920's resulted in the eventual exclusion house (SDH) on a typical fee-simple lot. In between these of these housing types in favor of single detached houses two types of dwellings - SDH and apartments - exist myriad on fee-simple lots. This process was hastened in the years other housing forms, such as cottage clusters, courtyard after World War II,with vast federal investment in housing units, quads, rowhouses, and additional units on the same through the GI Bill and other programs. This led to the lot with a single detached house. These housing types are expansion of suburban areas, where cities adopted further often called "middle housing," and beginning in 2013 with zoning restrictions that limited or prohibited middle housing. their previous Housing Needs Analysis, the City of Tigard The "single-family"zoning that was adopted on a widespread has explored these housing types through their"Housing basis by most US cities dictated the size of residential lots; Options" planning efforts. In 2018 the city approved code the form and shape of dwellings; the types and numbers amendments to legalize these middle housing types in all of households that could live in them; and requirements residential zones the city. for providing parking on-site. Single family zoning created large areas with only one type of housing, one which many Shortly thereafter in 2019, the state of Oregon passed House Americans could not afford. These neighborhoods became Bill 2001, which requires cities of a certain size or within the monocultures of housing, and by extension, monocultures Metro urban growth boundary to allow middle housing types of people, segregated by age, race, income, and household on all lots that currently permit single detached houses, type. Today, most forms of middle housing are rarely found and to do so without placing barriers that would limit their in suburban, exurban, and peri-urban areas. This exclusion is development. from where the "missing middle" neologism is derived. These efforts at both the local and state levels are part of a recent on ongoing slate of sweeping housing reforms intended to address the state's ongoing housing shortage and inequities in the housing market that have led to inequities in wealth-building and economic security for the state's minorities and low-to middle-income households. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 127 Single Family Zoning and a History of Racial Exclusion The aforementioned federal home loan subsidy programs favored the development of single family-zoned areas that were intentionally racially exclusive. Most HUD loan programs at one point required that housing development include covenants, conditions, and restrictions that precluded the purchase of homes by racial, ethnic, and religious minorities. This practice had the effect of depriving entire communities of the benefit of intergenerational wealth accrual. For at least the past 75 years, the average American family holds most of its net worth in the form of equity in property ownership. However, exclusion was not the only practice that had an impact on minorities. The practice of"redlining,"where neighborhoods with high levels of minority ownership were graded by insurance and loan companies as"high-risk", meant that the families who owned homes in these neighborhoods saw their equity drop precipitously, as underwriters would no longer approve purchases under federal loan programs. Richard Rothstein, in his book"The Color of Law,"details these and many other policies and practices that explicitly enacted and perpetuated segregation and racism. Even with the gains made in the civil rights movement of the 1960's, where segregation was deemed "incompatible with our self-conception as a constitutional democracy", segregation remained largely in place in the form of single-family zoning and inequitable and unethical lending practices. The ramifications of these disastrous policies remain with us today. After decades of exclusion ranging from being denied home loans, having neighborhoods in which they lived redlined, facing discrimination in employment, and receiving less pay on average than their white counterparts, Black people and other minorities were effectively denied the opportunity to own a home and enjoy the concomitant benefits that accrue from that ownership. Presented with institutional barriers to joining the middle class and building generational wealth, they were essentially excluded from the American dream that white people had been enjoying for decades. Generations of denial have compounded to make it harder for Black people to buy single family homes today. Exclusion and segregation persists between Black and white people in neighborhoods zoned exclusively for single family homes. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 128 Tigard River Terrace 2.0 and middle housing- A neighborhood for everyone As mentioned above, forms of middle housing are rarely found in suburban areas. There are a few examples of middle housing incorporated into Oregon greenfield projects that are categorized as "intentionally-planned" communities. These include Villebois in Wilsonville, and NorthWest Crossing in Bend. In most greenfield projects, including Portland metro area urban expansion plans, middle housing is usually missing. In its urban expansion proposal for the River Terrace 2.0 project, by contrast, the City of Tigard has made a commitment to the inclusion of middle housing,the expansion of housing opportunity, and to economically and racially integrated neighborhoods. This is a foundational ethic of the Concept Plan, it considers housing to be a human right. Affordable, attainable housing that provides housing choices for everyone will be included within each new neighborhood in River Terrace 2.0. Removing Barriers to Middle Housing Removing the zoning barriers to middle housing will go a long way toward encouraging these forms of housing. The City of Tigard's Housing Options reforms and Oregon's House Bill 2001 (Middle Housing) are positive efforts. Affordable housing providers can benefit from the easing of these barriers. They could more easily build small compact housing forms on smaller lots—housing that is inherently more affordable. However, it will take work to encourage a shift in the conventional approaches of the for-profit housing development industry. Much of this work will need to be focused on knowledge- building and concept-proofing, as much of the institutional knowledge about middle housing development has been lost, and there is little to no information on market comparables to guide development pro formas. To understand the challenges,the Tigard River Terrace Housing Team, consisting of Urbsworks, Leland Consulting Group, and Mosaic, conducted research to understand specific barriers and opportunities; findings from that research are summarized below. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 129 Overview of Findings Small housing and middle housing can Approaches to increase affordability • The average price of single-family be more affordable housing. include: dwellings have increased significantly for This is primarily because middle housing • Reduce cost with smaller homes/lots. all lot sizes in the past decade and are forms are smaller than the conventional unaffordable for most of the Washington suburban single-family structure and are ' Increase home buyer spending power County population. on smaller lots. Reducingthe size of the with improved loan terms and down a ment assistance. • At 80% of the median family income unit and the lot contribute to reducing the p y (MFI), a 4-person household could afford overall cost of constructing a home. The • A city can directly reduce the costs of a condominium and maybe a lower- home or neighborhood features that have housing by reducing fees and paying for priced rowhouse. the most significant effect on affordability infrastructure. are: • Tigard's existing housing stock is The gap between housing needs and especially unaffordable for Washington • Making homes smaller reduces cost. Countyhouseholds earningless than housing supply: • Making lots smaller reduces cost. 80% MFI. • There is a big gap between the size and • Unit size is the greatest factor in price of housing that is being provided • Most households in Tigard with a determining the home price by the market in Tigard compared with housing need rent their homes. • In spite of this, single detached houses the size needed or desired by buyers and are generally the preferred typology for their ability to pay for housing. The most needed housing in Tigard is: most housing developers due to phasing • About 60% of homes in Tigard are single • Housing that can be purchased for under capabilities and known market risk detached houses. $400,000 factors. • Medium •and large lot homes are not • Housing that can be purchased for affordable to the median 3-4-person under$400,000 is being produced in household in Washington County. Washington County and Tigard but not in the current River Terrace area. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III I 30 Middle Housing Prototypes A"housing prototype" refers to a mix of middle housing types assembled on a hypothetical block, or a parcel of land surrounded by local-serving streets.The housing prototypes are intended to be assembled together to form a complete neighborhood. The housing prototypes are illustrated in three-dimensional, to-scale models. The five models test the physical arrangement of housing types to demonstrate several aspects of middle housing: Physical form Household needs Site suitability The ability of middle housing to provide Middle housing arrangements can meet Middle housing is suitable for all sites different housing types side-by-side on the needs of a wide variety of households found in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept neighboring lots, in forms that are similar and can do so within the same block and Plan area, especially because they come to and compatible with single detached neighborhood, providing small, medium in a variety of lot sizes, housing shapes dwelling development. and large-sized dwellings on the same and layouts, and there is flexibility on block—even on the same lot. the location of parking; they naturally lend themselves to sensitive siting in and Housing unit counts Housing tenure around natural areas, and forested, sloped Middle housing is often able to achieve Through a variety of different land sites. dwelling unit counts that are higher than divisions, housing arrangements, and those typically provided in residential legal structures (e.g., condominiums), zones and can do so in a way that any form of middle housing can be set preserves trees and leaves open space for up for homeownership or rental housing, shared or private use. so the housing prototypes illustrate how neighborhoods can provide opportunities for all incomes or housing choices. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 131 Five Housing Prototypes Main Street A-An even mix of higher- Figure 1-Housing Prototypes-Main Street&Even Mix intensity housing with townhouses which can be oriented toward a commercial , node. , ... Main Street B - One side with highest- ':)* . ‘; 5. .. s •,?.. +- intensity middle housing which can be oriented toward a commercial node; lower l ',,.: intensity balancing remainder of block. i -. � • Even Mix B Even Mix A- Higher profile, stacked forms I of all varieties of housing. Even Mix A Main Street B Even Mix B - Lower profile, spread-out forms of all varieties of housing. Main Street A �-� ;l a, r 1r ' ! i 0 O i:_-�' Vii, • . - 0 - - - ' ` 1 " rf 7E101 c --, TI, 1::-_1.I r-i r---- 1-•-:-1 -. .1 - -p-i- 6 r,_ _ _ _ _ =3 _ c fi---, ,_ i ..i..-3 7:3 1...)----pi ,_-_,--- - - ,1 -t--,-,„- " - - 1 - o . . b.:-_--,,,,t 11)---1 - t J t _ - Main Street A Main Street B Even Mix A Even Mix B RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III I 32 Feathered Edge -Strategies for blending Figure 2-Housing Prototypes-Feathered Edge housing and natural resource/ open space edges without sacrificing density or1,,i1 FJ Fl DA X 01 )1 'AT N_ housing choices. L _ -I -I Fl" j _ _ - 1:1* Sr ( ElE3 tr ; Q .J ' ---1 El ii i , 4 , ix k iiii,x4rt- 1-1, Ai L _ rik m ,_ _ _ i ED - 0 0 'rrq-- c---y n 1%* PPM . i , - 1 n - - \ - 4 :mom, ITION7 WIN maw nom Mn , r'-'1_ num 51,,....,J tti _l Ti -ft i , •1010; . . ni 10 " Z_ CEITTIVIN.E0 4 0 ----d. - , - . - 4 - , ,_ ----- U.-ALLOT] II Li..6 ik, ! I _.--- c _, __________-----„\ -_____,.:_ ,,,, ,, c - --- --- L,3 , t--: _ / i,'0---1 .--=---1__ /-/ _ -- _- - RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 133 The housing prototypes were created to Housing Types Common to All Lots are increments of 25 to 30 feet wide, test density and unit mix on specific block Housing Concepts permitting the intermixing of narrow lot designs to quantify total development The five prototypes include all types of dwellings alongside more conventional potential for the Concept Plan, and to inform housing: residential lots, which are typically 30 to 60 infrastructure financing, transportation • Single detached houses feet. planning, and policy goals established by the project. They test the physical feasibility • ADUs (Accessory Dwelling Units, The intermixing of lot widths ensures that of various middle housing mixes, as well as inclusive of what are often called affordable compact housing types can sit the feasibility of achieving the target of an duplexes and triplexes) side-by-side along with more conventional average of 20 dwelling units per acre. • Quads larger-lot detached homes. Exceptions • Cottage clusters are cottage clusters and smaller-scale The housing prototypes also address key • Courtyard units apartments, which need larger, aggregated principles of the Concept Planning vision, lots. including: • Rowhouses • A variety of housing should be provided in For the purposes of this study, the block every neighborhood in River Terrace 2.0. Physical Features Common to All dimensions are 230 feet wide and 450 feet Housing Prototypes long, or 103,500 square feet(2.38 acres). • Housing that meets different household or Each housing prototype or hypothetical These dimensions do not include the family needs should be provided in every block accommodates an average of 20 area for the perimeter local streets, which neighborhood, to allow for a wide variety dwelling units per acre. Some housing are assumed to be about 60 feet wide. of people and households, representing a concepts accommodate 20 dwelling units The number of dwelling units that can full spectrum of age groups, households, per acre on a single block, and some accommodated on each block is listed in and income levels to live side-by-side. housing concepts or blocks form 20 the Middle Housing Prototypes. • Every neighborhood should include dwelling units per acre when combined. opportunities for a blend of rental and Housing types take a variety of forms: tall The densities listed for each block homeownership housing. and stacked, short and spread out, and prototype are for the net acreage of • There should be no differentiation between combinations of these. each block only. For the purposes of the design and appearance of rental and calculating total residential units for the homeownership housing. All prototype blocks use a "universal entire Concept Plan area, the area of the block and lot layout."The universal block perimeter local street right of way was • Neighborhoods on the edges, where there allows for a mix of housing types that included. is more access to natural resource areas, can accommodate a range of lot sizes, public open space, and trails, should both with and without alleys. Blocks are have affordable and attainable housing typically 230 feet wide and 500 to 580 feet integrated into them, and not be only long. large-lot housing. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 134 Design Approaches For Housing Prototypes Main Street Prototype name,location,and description Dwelling unit density and mix '.l, The Main Street housing prototypes are designed for the following locations: • Near a commercial center 2 • Along a main street • Forming the center of a small-scale neighborhood- Average number of dwelling units per acre:24 serving village center. Total dwellings per block(average):57 Main Street B Main Street A There are two variations of the Main Street Housing Prototype: Housing types included: Main Street A has rowhouses at each end of the block.On Single-family detached dwellings,cottage clusters,and one end of the block are low-height garden-style cottage cluster variants rowhouses,or rowhouses with room for walled gardens in • Attached and detached Accessory Dwelling Units(also the back or front yard.The rowhouses on both ends are duplexes and triplexes) able to accommodate an office space on the ground floor. Courtyard units Either end of the block can be oriented toward a • Quads and Quad-variants,which are detached,or commercial node or main street.The remainder of the combinations of stacked and detached block is an even mix of middle housing forms. • Rowhouses and rowhouse-variants,which include urban-style rowhouses(multiple stories with possible Main Street B Main Street B has tall,two to three story ground floor conversion for live-work space)and garden- stacked units and/or urban rowhouses that allow for style rowhouses(rowhouses with backyards) conversion to live-work space on the ground floor of the unit.The remainder of the block is an even mix of middle housing forms.The tall rowhouse end is intended to be oriented toward a commercial node. Table 2-Housing Prototypes-Main Street RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III I 35 Even Mix Prototype name,location,and description Dwelling unit density and mix *- 41cN .� The Even Mix housing prototypes are designed to be located in the middle—between the neighborhood edge and the main street or commercial area.The Even t ' x I Even Mix B Mix housing prototype represents a typical residential neighborhood,however,there are two neighborhood Average number of dwelling units per net acre:20 Even Mix A variations,each with a distinctively different physical character: Total dwellings per block(average):48 Even Mix A has higher profile,stacked forms of all varieties of housing.These include two and three Housing types included: Accessory Dwelling units on one lot(duplexes and triplexes)that are two to two-and-one-half stories tall. • Single-family detached dwellings,cottage clusters, Quads and quad-variants are a combination of stacked and cottage cluster variants and detached quads.Alley access provides rear-yard • Attached and detached Accessory Dwelling Units(also parking.This allows the street side of the block to be duplexes and triplexes) fully planted with street trees,because fewer driveways • Courtyard units are needed. • Quads and Quad-variants,which are detached,or combinations of stacked and detached Even Mix B has lower profile,spread-out forms of all . Rowhouses and rowhouse-variants,which include varieties of housing.Buildings are typically one to one- garden-style rowhouses(rowhouses with backyards) and-one-half stories tall.Where taller buildings occur, they are sited around tree groves.Parking is provided on internal,shared surface parking lots,and on the street. Table 3-Housing Prototypes-Even Mix RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 136 Feathered Edge Prototype name,location,and description Dwelling unit density and mix r r The Feathered Edge housing prototype is designed to illustrate strategies for blendinghousingand natural 9 ''.�.� resource or open space edges without sacrificing ,,:op- _ r si i ■ density or housing choices.Housing types area blend Average number of dwelling units per acre:16 44 of the Even Mix housing prototypes(A and B). Total dwellings per block(average):43t\^ S ik 6';•- The Feathered Edge illustration shows three possible 1 "; 4 design approaches facing the natural resource area: • • On the left,a complex of detached dwellings Housing types included: if i' surrounding a common green extends out from the • Single-family detached dwellings,cottage clusters, " end of the block,close to the natural area.On three and cottage cluster variants ' sides of the complex is an alley or skinny"green street" . Attached and detached Accessory Dwelling Units(also Feathered Edge (a street with minimal paving,designed to minimize duplexes and triplexes) and treat stormwater)and on the fourth side is a public . Courtyard units trail that provides access to the natural area,parks,and . Quads and Quad-variants,which are detached,or trails. combinations of stacked and detached On the center block,a fully paved local street provides a • Rowhouses and rowhouse-variants,which include public promenade and access to the natural area via a urban-style rowhouses(multiple stories with possible view lookout and trailhead. ground floor conversion for live-work space)and On the right,small dwellings on their own lots terrace garden-style rowhouses(rowhouses with backyards) down the hillside.They are served by a central green street. Table 4-Housing Prototypes-Feathered Edge RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III I 37 Acreages and Densities by Subarea Dwelling units West acres South acres Total residential acreage per acre and units by subarea Housing prototypes Block Block and Acres Units Acres Units Acres Units (net)2 street; Main Street A and B 24 16.79 23.84 400 26.61 447 50.45 847 Even Mix A and B 20 14.14 85.17 1,204 70.01 990 155.18 2,194 Feathered Edge 16 11.51 98.06 1,129 32.67 376 130.73 1,505 Total residential acreage and units(all subareas) 336.36 4,546 Table S-Housing Prototypes-Acreages and Densities by Subarea RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III I 38 Range of Housing Types Table 6-Range of Housing Types Housing type rMain Street A and B Even Mix A and B Feathered Edge 7 Summary Chapter 18 or Chapter 18 variant I Unit range 1 Unit range Unit range i Range of total units on each of the housing prototype blocks Total units per block 46-66 27-89 51-65 Range of units by type by block(showing ranges for all housing types) rMain Street A and B I Even Mix A and B rFeathered Edge j ' Totals by type Housing type — — -- Unit range Unit range Unit range Chapter 18 or Chapter 18 variant ----- ----------------r- Low 1 High Low High Low High Low High 1 Single detached dwellings,cottage 10 -- 8 25 431 clusters,and cottage cluster variants 16 30 27 73 6 5 12 I 23 ADUs,duplexes,and triplexes S 8 I ( 15 I 31 1210 1 8 301 Courtyard units l - - 16r 24 11 51 8 4 4 ( 16 Quads and quad variants -- - — 12 16 I 8 36 10 01 2 12 Rowhouses and rowhouse variants - -- L- 14 i 11 i i 4 29 Total unit range per block i—� 46 66 27 89 51T 65 — --e-1 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN. CHAPTER III I 39 Middle Housing Affordability Strategies River Terrace 2.0 will be a neighborhood Recommended strategies are summarized • Education and Information Sharing. for everyone. This means that housing here. Based on the housing programs choices in River Terrace 2.0 should • Land Acquisition and Banking. The City prepared to date, and the emphasis be available to all household types, could acquire land in River Terrace 2.0 on middle housing types and overall regardless of income. With that goal in (using CET or other funds, as described affordability, River Terrace 2.0 will be mind, Leland Consulting Group prepared in the 2019 Tigard Housing Strategy distinctive in the region. By sharing a Housing Affordability Evaluation for Implementation Plan). Whether by a this vision and the related zoning this project to explore policy approaches public agency or third-party housing and incentives with the public and and incentives that the City could developer, land acquisition is key development community(developers, implement to encourage development of step in enabling affordable housing. homebuilders, lenders, brokers, affordable housing in River Terrace 2.0. Public agencies or nonprofits use designers, others)the City may be able The evaluation considers past studies, land acquisition to secure sites for to generate interest among the segment demographics and housing trends, and affordable housing where land prices of the development community that is housing affordability factors - and makes are increasing, thus making affordable interested in implementing that vision. recommendations for future actions and housing development financially feasible. • Providing incentive or matching funds. programs. It • Matchmaking. The City can act as is possible that the Citycould identify a matchmaker in River Terrace, by development partners interested in connecting affordable developers building one or more particular types of and homebuilders to development affordable housing in River Terrace, for opportunities. During area planning example, through a Request for Interest and infrastructure construction phases, (RFI) or other means. The City could then the City may become aware of willing provide certain funds (via CET or other property sellers who can be matched sources) or other incentives to the best- with affordable developers. Sometimes qualified respondents. other public agencies (e.g., the County, Metro, etc.) own surplus land that can be conveyed. The City could also work to educate affordable developers about available funds and incentives, whether offered by the City or other parties. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER III 140 • Infrastructure. Another way that • Tiered System Development Charges the City may be able to support (SDCs). System Development Charges affordable housing projects in River (SDCs) are one-time fees charged Terrace is through the construction of to help pay for the public facilities infrastructure or other site development (transportation, sewers, and parks) actions (e.g., grading or terracing). It is required to meet growth-related needs. often difficult for affordable housing SDCs can be tiered according to dwelling projects to pay for infrastructure on size. The assumption is that smaller difficult-to-develop sites (e.g., sloped, units will have less impact on public those with large amounts of roads, or infrastructure and should therefore pay where intersection improvements are less; reduced SCDs make small-footprint required). The City could use its funds homes more affordable. (e.g., CET, CDBG, or other)to assist. • Tax Abatement. Tax abatements reduce • Community Land Trust Model. or eliminate property tax payments Community land trusts (CLTs) for a development for a designated are nonprofit, community-based length of time, usually ten years or organizations primarily used to ensure less. Property tax abatements can be long-term housing affordability, usually offered to developers to incentivise with an emphasis on homeownership. A affordable housing developments, or community land trust acquires land and to homebuyers, to decrease ownership maintains ownership of it. Prospective costs. Tigard currently has two tax homeowners enter into a long-term abatement policies that could be used renewable lease with the land trust in in River Terrace 2.0: a Vertical Housing which the land trust owns the land, and Development Zone and a Nonprofit Low- the homeowner builds equity by making Income Housing Program payments on the home. The CLT model lowers the cost of homeownership by reducing or eliminating the land acquisition cost(and sometimes other costs)from the building ownership costs, and also decreases the likelihood of displacement in areas where land values are increasing. m.. yam."1 P�r t lcs. r ♦ s - - ' S r , • ,w+.+�',!t.....�x,R..'} �if'' rte~ > ,�. . ,,.- -.'FI-? ;��" '- `. -',y..f �'t.. ,- NI*# 7 '4 ? '''� A a Llk iii t,At. ' •,-` do t'..Y .� , tt L., .• . . J` _ t 1 .c"`• R 4 .r• • l +1 d .; t••y}�'I.-Wit: • r 0 .a " i ^ -,;;;„;'„).•"7.•. : '..' ' A.- - .r `. vr T F , ';'... . . ., , _,-. '.;.::. . 4M � Y 'kt't '-'.1 '' - ,4 rl , . .,.., N. . .- • , y 1 y V . • , _mac: 3. • • M 441 II a • . _ J'" r 7y ,.:i } r 1 i �. r a 1 1�, ' 1 . - .ji ; . 1 - ji f 't. soh g 4 ' 'is =�., 4. i � i t . k . , r 4. 11 - tt ;, RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 1 42 River Terrace 2.0 is comprised of two together allows a more coordinated urban reserve areas, designated as and cohesive approach to urbanization Roy Rogers West and Roy Rogers East and provides a comprehensive strategy on Metro's Regional Urban and Rural for funding and phasing of future Reserves Map (see Figure 3). Now development. known as River Terrace West and South, these two areas total nearly 500 acres of land that has been identified for accommodatingfuture urban v- � ( - 'ND i ` _ i development. me� - 4 ... i M 0 L., ,/, Located at the south and west boundaries L., g � � �_ -4,,,,,,, , of Tigard's existing City limits, River Terrace Y, 11 i I ,,":4; 2.0 currently consists of agricultural 1 land and some homes on relatively large L....„,q lots. River Terrace 2.0 is bounded to the w,. _ ,.a , �i north by SW Scholls Ferry Road and the L ` South Cooper Mountain community of , ; 4,,,,, 1' ,7.k:-... -,' Beaverton.To the west lies designated "..,mn.a rK. ,, ,. L '� rural reserve land and undesignated land i.-- r - ter F' within Washington County. The southern ; boundary of River Terrace 2.0 is SW Beef �.- ��"" 4 Bend Road and the new Kingston Terrace -' _ we, , area (King City's recent UGB expansion). A R °` n z F eM -J .- - •6... f .,I t ___ . The eastern edge of the plan area is Y JTZ adjacent to the original River Terrace m f community of Tigard. ` Although not geographically connected, J =amu �-� - ' ,- ` ,_ ,i,, , ay ' River Terrace West and South are linked by the surrounding street network and ,, z A "` tiry the larger regional context within which r ' £'( ^_. . I - they are located. Planning for both areas Figure 3-Metro Regional Urban and Rural Reserves Map RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV I 43 Planning Context Much planning is underway in andR'' """"" Ra .,, around River Terrace 2.0. This conceptI t/ istor • * Ry T, 4 plan was developed to coordinate with "..:„....-::. ' _ Sic. � " . -...f..... ,• r•~' :-1--_-,..", and complement other planning work , %R ;;:44. r ''-1 beingdone in Tigard and its neighboring '� ►•' �' g jurisdictions. f_ , µ ' " • Tigard Housing Needs Analysis (HNA). tWEST I ` n : ` - fa i An updated HNA is being prepared a. r_ concurrently with the River Terrace 2.0 r ,. Concept Plan and is anticipated to be • ` d adopted by summer of 2021. The HNA i_ A . ` ' provides guidance and strategies that , IA. ,•>_. SUV BULL,_MbUNI ,RD . inform the City's housing work and is ` .'' • - - , , ; I . critical to establishing housing policy and ! a demand for River Terrace 2.0. ... -rte 1 r - -°-- , f ., `,_'r e i - • Tigard Transportation System Plan .� ; '`� , is , . ,� '_,_, •- (TSP) Update.Tigard's TSP is a roadmap ,.. 4/ oadmapf ! 1 for investments in the community's ` Ot`l t`` F s r r shared transportation system; one .,1.r`'Jr; • , ' ., ` 0 Ill ' 7111-ri intended to serve all road users including :_ . • ' ' � _ r k e _ - '5i pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, -' • .� *- ". s -ALAI ` . ,� .� ,f.„cots ,t drivers, and freight. The TSP update will }} ' i ! •., t .. . ... "a k• be guided by community input and will �,,,, ; �;r..)...?(-0,-i " „ i : ,w ;; _' ' - build off Tigard's Strategic Vision and ^1, O ,,. . • r. Complete Streets policy, each aimed at kv.irr °,O'`;Y _ .1.O0(' 2 ;,. « supporting equitable access for road '.'- -`" ~ users of all ages and abilities.The TSP is Legend expected to be complete fall of 2021. River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 1 South Cooper Mountain Concept Plan River Terrace 1.0 2 King City Concept Plan RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV I 44 • Tigard Parks Master Plan Update. • South Cooper Mountain Main Street. • Washington County Urban Reserves Tigard is in the process of updating The South Cooper Mountain community, Transportation Study(URTS). its Parks & Recreation Master Plan, a located just north of River Terrace West, Washington County completed process that typically occurs every ten is currently developing a main street URTS in 2020 to identify needed years. The plan sets a vision for the mixed use area with commercial retail road improvements to serve future future of parks and recreation in Tigard and civic uses, along with affordable development and outline best practices and recommends investments the City housing. for the County and cities to plan for can make to achieve the community's growth and future transportation vision. • River Terrace 1.0. Tigard's first urban impacts. URTS identifies an extension of growth boundary expansion occurred Tile Flat Road through the River Terrace • Kingston West Community Plan. to the east and north of this concept 2.0 study area. King City added land to its urban growth planning area, i.e. RT 1.0. The community boundary in 2019 and is now developing plan for RT 1.0 was adopted in 2015, a community plan for the new area. and it is currently in the process of The King City Community Plan area is developing at a fast pace. This concept directly south from River Terrace South plan builds off the land use and and includes plans for a town center and infrastructure planning and policies residential neighborhoods. developed during RT 1.0, particularly with regard to stormwater management. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV f 45 Baseline Conditions At the beginning of the process, existing conditions in River Terrace 2.0 were assessed and evaluated to better understand how a new community could fit within the physical context of the land. This baseline assessment highlights how dominant landforms of the area (hills and streams, for example)will shape land use and transportation patterns and how public utilities can be efficiently extended. All of this information together provided the backdrop for development of the concept plan alternatives, which are discussed further in Chapter IV. Natural Resources The River Terrace study areas contain a number of natural resources that have been identified consistent with state and local regulations, including: • Wetlands and associated vegetated • Water quality resource areas (streams corridors and associated vegetated corridors) • Significant tree groves • Habitat conservation areas i, }t 11" Pl'' - fi tom. .., • l_iiimm.-.r � r, sem'{` a r4 .7,. °f `�. `- :.-r 11404„-,. .p ], 1l ! 1:4 , y�. /y. + i Irl. " _ - -....„--4,,.-- ,,, tt t, RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 1 46 Figure 4-Existing Natural Resources N SW SCROLLS FERRY RD z LEM°"GRONEILL ASS ""'114 Y FO•ZEST HOLLOW FRIENDLY Y LARKSPRING i • `} AMELIA SNOWDALE KFF *.• C`N BIRDSONG R'NS j4,7".1 i ,ti. -. :-",.1 I' ',i• I . A APPLEDALE L1A • • , ` :`: SNAPDRAGON 1 G1i STAHL 0 �� .A '_v , z Q TUSCANY S iz ..i: , I: . ry. il = .1 Z MILAN Z Z) " P. ¢ P. LORENZO m C. PALERMO �OS,441 W H CAMERON /,-r li CI COLONY I y Y 4 = w . O� [WEST] ` ' ~ �° s -> co I z Y�y �'?"1"','-y"' - SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD N 4j I COOPER FAq yc�f I 1.-CI BRAY DEKALB _ r► in N jik a .. OC v KESSLER m W li ! __ , .-. :` `D HAZELTINE CABERNET C = THAMES Legend c ��e 0 River Terrace 2.0 Project Area cc DANUBE - Stream Title 3 Wetland tri HAWK RIDGE I Taxlot , x Title 3 Vegetated I 'J z DEEPBROOK Tree Grove Corridor I LL w w Title 13- Habitat Conservation Areas - - -..19,...„., High Value Habitat [SOUTH] 1 .1 2 ,,, Moderate Value Habitat Lower Value Habitat LASICH a l i I, s' sl r» . s Wetlands `•� ;� 3� , t 1 T1 1 Wetland � , ` •.; `L 1 r ;*ii 2 RT-2 Wetlandei, 0' 1,000' -e _ ' 1 ' 3 RT-6 Wetland - SW BEEF BEND RD RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 147 River Terrace West River Terrace South In River Terrace West, the analysis found The analysis found that the natural 1,, that the predominant natural resources resource areas in River Terrace South t are existing stream drainages and their consist primarily of wetlands, tree groves, ,,,. .:0 a s 1 . associated vegetated corridors.Those and habitat conservation areas. There are ,r areas are part of, and surrounded by, two larger wetlands in this area that are •, larger habitat conservation areas that considered locally significant per Tigard's lke connect throughout the study area and criteria; those wetlands are shown as •, . - beyond. Significant tree groves (primarily RT2 (6.9 acres) and RT6 (2.7 acres) on Douglas fir, Oregon white oak, Oregon Figure 4. Locally significant wetlands and ash, and others)were also identified along their associated vegetated corridors are and between the stream drainages. There protected byTigard's Sensitive Lands ' , "^ '+ e-'-. -, is a small wetland in River Terrace West provisions (Chapter 18.510 of the Tigard (T1-1)that is considered locally significant Municipal Code); development activity lt P' ' " 2•'` ` :' t..: i .. � • because it connects with a larger wetland in those areas is highly restricted. Other <.�. ,. ', , • .' ' t" outside the study area. wetlands may be considered jurisdictional - x :. ,II, `' wetlands that would be subject to the : '0 . R ",� ,1' ' x .-,lr- . f,1 standards of other agencies, such as .. 10 w` - „ ' :f Clean Water Services or the Army Corps .> ,°r, x . a of Engineers. Significant tree groves and ° r Y' , W. s.•-'-_.* (� ` identified habitat areas are distributed a } ' throughout River Terrace West as well. """07: •: ,-, it---. • tiv, The full Environmental Analysis Report can fiii - :;1 �_ be found in Appendix C. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 148 Slope Analysis Study Sketch Dominant Landforms ^ , :,r w..,.__ River Terrace West River Terrace South The highest point in this area stretches The north side of River Terrace South is i `-•�+► :,� along Scholls Ferry Road at an elevation of also the high point of this site. On the "` 3f , '. approximately 275 feet. Viewshed analysis west portion, the slope falls gradually found that Mount Hood can be seen from south toward Beef Bend Road,while the ,. �:# � three locations slightly south of the Scholls east portion has slightly steeper slopes. i Ferry Road corridor. This northern area is Viewshed analysis found that Mount Hood 0 . .. also shaped by two drainage tributaries can be seen from much of the southern t that are part of the Tualatin River network half of this area. Existing wetlands -` converging just outside the western fragment this area, along with dispersed _ - rt f ._ boundary. Slopes gradually descend south pockets of tree canopy. and west from the high point becomingare ' _ steeper within drainage areas. Existing . �".,,A f f r dense canopy coverage is predominately ) ,( found within the drainage fingers. Viewshed Analysis {^� ---Views of Mount Hood A notable knoll land feature is located ---Views on the southern portion of River Terrace West, extending west from the Roy Rogers ,.....___ t Road corridor into the middle of the site. ' From this knoll slopes gradually fall south ,--a ! ___ 1 and west toward two adjacent tributaries framing this portion of the site. Views of Mount Hood i • - ___...I RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 149 Public Infrastructure Water In 2014, the City completed an addendum to their 2010 Figure5-ExistingWaterPressureZones Water System Master Plan (2010 WSMP Addendum) that focused on the water infrastructure needs for the i* A area of River Terrace, located on the western border of S‘`_ the Tigard Water Service Areas (TWSA). The plan also Sc�0N, considered the sizing of infrastructure needed to plan for water service to the River Terrace West and South Reservoir 3 • areas. Reservoir 13 r The City adopted an updated Water System Master Reservoir 8 Plan (WSMP) in December of 2020. This WSMP provides ' •Reservoir2 updated water demand forecasts and includes projectedreservoir 10• Reservoir 1 demands in the River Terrace West and South areas, as W Reservoir 16 R!seivoir 4 well as the anticipated pumping and storage needs to o` serve these areas. Generally, water connections are intended to extend to 3 SW BEEF. sE441) River Terrace West from the east and to River Terrace South from the north. The elevations in these areas are within the City's 410 Pressure Zone (PZ). There is in 0' 1,600' an existing 18-inch diameter water main along SW Scholls Ferry Road, northeast of River Terrace West, Legend Pressure Zones(HGL) that connects to a smaller diameter main at SW Roy Rogers Road. There is also a 16-inch diameter main that River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 410 extends west along SW Bull Mountain Road and ends at 530 the eastern boundary of River Terrace West. 560 640 713 830 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV I 50 Sanitary Sewer Figure 6-Existing Sanitary Sewer System For the purposes of sanitary sewer discussion, River -,--y,„.. Lam, R;rN Ps sr Fury r.; Terrace West has been divided into an upper and lower SW SCROLLS FERRY RD Ta.5uminer rr.Jnk -•-."" . , t ilf section which are approximately 160-acres and 140-acres, �'� r �: s C 1`,�1. respectively. Both the upper and lower areas have well- T Wes 1 R _ t 1 E defined flow paths with slopes exceeding 25 percent in `'(Upper) I _ i r , some areas. The land generally slopes from the northwest '_Tf9rr ..-.,s to the southeast. The areas are largely undeveloped , - - -- -ssrt.- 1 fte, River Terrace pasture and farmland. North PS � I I I:,n,.-, _. The Tigard sanitary sewer system serves the area east 'T z >U) ' if-I VI- of the River Terrace North pump station, between SW (Lower) Q N I SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD Scholls Ferry Road and Jean Louise Road and is just east ,,t' '` °cc tl ' of River Terrace West (Upper). The collection system e 'r-� • -- -- is predominantly 8-inch to 12-inch pipes and flow is , . 4! "�!r; cI 0 "'J,,1L .4.1:-. '�- =�—'t` * conveyed north to the River Terrace North pump station. 1 - wi t - • ;0•160.0 W The existing River Terrace North pump station collects r - ',' •wastewater from the South Cooper Mountain and River } 0 } �rll Mc Terrace North developments and is currently configured Ii 1 011, - s to pump north via a force main to the Summer Creek t` ,e 3 RT South Trunk. As additional development occurs and the Summer '` , r Creek Trunk reaches capacity, the pump station will be .\ . .. reconfigured. �:/2 I SW BEEF BEND RD / I Beef Bend (3— �.4 I .Soret The Roy Rogers gravity system will collect wastewater , River Terrace I from developments in the River Terrace West area and - South PS `` "� City of Tigard east of Roy Rogers Road, and from the /\ o i,soo° �� , River Terrace North pump station until the force main is �� — '1 extended to the Bull Mountain Trunk. Legend River Terrace 2.0 Project Area Discharge MH -- Slope 25% ■ Existing PS Slope 10% --- Existing FM • -- Existing Gravity RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 1 51 The River Terrace South pump station is designed to convey wastewater via a 16-inch force main to the Bull Mountain trunk.The near-term service area includes wastewater from the Roy Rogers gravity system. As expansion in Beef Bend South occurs, the River Terrace South pump station will also convey flows from this area. As development occurs in the River Terrace South area, it is anticipated the existing Pleasant View pump station will also be decommissioned and conveyed via gravity through River Terrace and adjacent developments to the east to the River Terrace South pump station. The Bull Mountain sanitary sewer system services the area north of Beef Bend Road and is just downstream of the connection from the River Terrace South pump station and River Terrace North pump station future connection as well as the existing Bull Mountain pump station. The Bull Mountain system conveys flows to the Bull Mountain trunk, which is a shallow 21-inch diameter pipe. Clean Water Services (CWS) owns and manages the sanitary sewer interceptors and pump stations, and is responsible for planning of major sewer systems in the region. In addition, CWS manages sanitary sewer systems in the urban unincorporated areas of Washington County. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV J 52 Stormwater For the purpose of planning for stormwater management Figure 7-Existing Stormwater Pre-developed Land Use in River Terrace 2.0, the pre-development baseline . y,r g. C „_:�. r r .,t :1Y (Figure 7) is based on the condition of land cover in 2011, '`. . . R' ' - f •_.` . .. .r� .,. «. � 1.. which is the year that this area was officially designated v..:. • y , �' 3,r ; " ; aktei as urban reserve land by Metro. Both River Terrace West ES ;1 - 114LA! "� _ {....at ...rt.. - and South generally drain south and west via ten small c . •� "• • _ creek channels. These creek channels are steep and have „e +� potential for channel erosion due to the fine sediment ""1"::, , ;✓i and significant velocityconditions within the drainages. + «R `, g g _ ti ;��` r' Infiltration potential is also generally poor in the River a. - ' .4fy' , - , . .`,, • ,�` ' Terrace 2.0 study area due to the underlying clay soils and v}'`.4`. '. `. . .. tt+r . . • ti t basalt bedrock. Both of these conditions (steep channels - . , '� "1r .. , :Y and lack of infiltration)will require careful consideration ti ." 34 . '" for stormwater planning. River Terrace 1.0 has a CWS- t : � �.-,,,,,7.-4.-,44.,, .'`' y 1 approved sub basin strategy with stringent stormwater i "' standards for development to protect against stream r J~ • , ;-} ',r �"„Al.„.. . -`" erosion.Those streams are the same streams that run ¢W . '4"-- '� ' .. •t ' , through River Terrace 2.0; planning for stormwater ` . ir-. %. . . a :- management in River Terrace 2.0 will take a similarf TM ,,44 approach to the strategy used in River Terrace 1.0. - '."" '` ittiti:de / ' f. - , ' ( �.._ {y b R i� t f tit. 4 44 lit rP . Legend _ River Terrace 2.0 Project Area River Terrace 1.0 — Existing Drainageway RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV I 53 Street Network Figure 8-Existing Streets Network There is currently not a defined street I Mountainside •-175th AVE , network within the River Terrace 2.0 study '��f, nn uNrAINSFE WAY High School area; existingroads are primarilylocal scHOLLSFERRVRD — o , r----- •• access drives and are generally unpaved. 1 -- in ■ Adjacent to the study area are several [WEST] r- . "CA c arterial and collector roads that will be ; extended through, or connected to, the if5 ■ ultimate River Terrace 2.0 street system. ;1-- < IIIA MI River Terrace West is bounded to the .4....•-• Ili Ili c N L 1111 all, JEAN LORD 1 north by SW Scholls Ferry Road and to ad 1 21 the east by SW Roy Rogers Road, both of z MUM which are four to five lane arterial roads >! 1 under Washington County jurisdiction. �� Bu MOUN AIN RD ' = 1 ua River Terrace South is bounded by SW = 1 J 'a { ve_ `, Roy Rogers Road to the west and SW Beef It)Road to the south. Beef Bend Road is a two to three-lane arterial road, also y 1„ under Washington County jurisdiction. W 1 MN/SW Bull Mountain Road is a two to three- 0 ' "'%. -.—r' - allane collector road that currently ends at c - ArtRutkln the eastern extent of River Terrace West L Elementary School and will ultimately extend west into the Concept Planning area. I . SW River Terrace Boulevard is a planned LASICH iN_ ar [SOUTH] a and partially built collector boulevard j "" IN ,��,��i..> that extends south from SW Scholls Ferry o' tom' ,----- 4 nm�mm�� ruumm�nnni a iuE E ' Road and will eventually connect with and No BEEF BEND RD 'ELSNER RD '` through River Terrace South. Legend D River Terrace 2.0 Project Area — — Master Planned Streets(Outside Project Area) RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 1 54 There are a number of planned and funded transportation improvement projects identified in the Tigard and Washington County Transportation System Plans that are considered as part of the baseline condition for River Terrace 2.0. Those projects are: • SW Scholls Ferry Road widening to five lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks from SW Roy Rogers Road to SW Tile Flat Road • River Terrace Boulevard completion from SW Scholls Ferry Road south to SW Beef Bend Road, including associated sections of the River Terrace Trail that have not yet been built. • SW Roy Rogers Road widening to five lanes south of SW Scholls Ferry Road with bike lanes and sidewalks • SW Beef Bend Road widening to three lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks from SW Roy Rogers Road to OR 99W • SW jean Louise Road extension; SW River Terrace Boulevard extension; SW Woodhue Street extension; 161st Avenue extension; SW Potomac Road extension and traffic signal installation at SW Roy Rogers Road Currently,there is no transit service in proximity to the River Terrace 2.0 study area. The closest existing transit is TriMet bus line number 62, which runs along SW Scholls Ferry Road. TriMet has plans to extend the number 56 bus line from Washington Mall to South Cooper Mountain, which would provide service to Mountainside High School and the northern end of River Terrace West. Funding for that extension has not been secured and timing is unknown at this point. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 155 Parks and Trails Figure 9-Existing Parks and Trail Network Adjacent to the River Terrace 2.0 study area, the existing Mountainside South Cooper Mountain- High School wain ,•yr••• trail network and parks facilities are just beginning to be Trail.Planned %a•ExP .•• tMtl lA PARk developed. Some segments of the River Terrace Trail are ' SCROLLS FERRY RD �Na jh4fJhPPd lark built, but most of the trail alignments shown in [WEST] _ Figure 9 are either planned or conceptual trials. The existing parks are also relatively new, developed along i jRtvcr Terrace Naster .� with neighborhoods of the River Terrace 1.0 area. �", PlanCamm`nttyPark •'1 .M1!Vett I.,,,',,.V, c i rt •ra 0 a •II 0 S 4 AK R15Gt PMK Ne+Rhborhoad Park SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD i' Pik ,EeWre W f.Y.._... _,,, _.r•.. .w.! •Nrighberhoed Part CI S, re ORCfiMa PARK 549 H kn.,. NNRhbork*PdParh N re Neighborhood W park • s • :Soutlarn :Verde- �a road 0 • Art Rutkin o Elementary River Terrace Master 0 •••School•`_ a plan Community Park i n •Future Neighborhood Park A f j • tWtA:lCHtr. [SOUTH] p rTra••'•.+• ,tryh• F`acrure Regkihotn , u•+•• Atuat, 1 Ad0 •,..*-.. + ` • .• r.r SW BEEF BEND RD :N `e;G..:. .Conloytuai• ® 0' 1 000' .. , .::"air, s. Pi+• '�i Legend 0 River Terrace 2.0 Project Area •••• Trails mum Existing Park(Outside Project Area) Stream • Planned Park(Outside Project Area) Vegetated Corridor Wetlands RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV 156 Land Use Conditions Figure 10-Zoning Map IqPi Re R6 p7,,. P Ft Zoning ov Land within the River Terrace 2.0 planningarea is SFCHOLLSa FERRY RD `f currently under the jurisdiction of Washington County and has County zoning designations. R-2 R? q4.6 111. The southern portion of River Terrace West is zoned R-26 EFU (exclusive farm use) and the northern portion isPay v4 zoned AF-20 (exclusive agriculture and forest use). Land R.$ 4, PA R# Gach Park P-e "I P4 Natural Area surrounding River Terrace West is: ,. P4 fi$ • Washington County designations EFU and AF-20 to the P4 west and south --A RJ • City of Beaverton R1 and R2 residential designations to P' P4 SW BULL M._QUNTAIN RD the north across SW Scholls Ferry Road • City of Tigard R-7 and R-12 residential designations to -: - _ the east ' Land in River Terrace South is zoned EFU. Surrounding - - land is: Yir • Washington County designation EFU to the west and south • City of Tigard R-7, R-8, and R-12 residential designations av to the north and east. ® o _ .„ Legend River Terrace 2.0 Project Area AF-20 " EFU RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER IV I 57 Market Factors Planning fora complete community River Terrace 2.0 is one of three urban means that commercial and employment growth boundary expansion areas areas must be considered; a complete in the southwest of the metropolitan community integrates opportunities for region. Others include Beaverton's people to work, shop and meet their daily Cooper Mountain and King City's Urban needs in close proximity to their homes. Growth Boundary expansion area While there are areas of overlap between (Kingston Terrace). How and when these commercial and employment uses, they competing areas develop are important serve different markets and developers considerations for future commercial who build them use different parameters prospects in River Terrace 2.0. when deciding what and where to build. To understand the full context of market While River Terrace 2.0 is currently at the factors, commercial and employment edge of the urbanizing area for the Metro uses must be evaluated together and region, it is safe to assume that there separately. will be further development to the west at some point. Analysis of commercial/ The "market area"for commercial uses employment demand, will take a phased is usually smaller than the market area approach to assessing development for employment uses. Patrons and potential in River Terrace 2.0. employees at commercial centers most often come from the surrounding one A River Terrace 2.0 Commercial Market to five-mile areas. Most sales are also in Analysis prepared by Leland Consulting this area. Employment uses tend to draw Group is provided in Appendix D. employees from a larger area—sometimes the entire region—and sell their goods and services regionally, or even nationwide or beyond. as 1 it t 'S',',. ,,•,‘...., l si rf Y ',a J, y 7 ;. 1:1+y .._ `, .f,. �•�,e .r' «e] i >p - .Rb'J;•,-1A V ,„,,,,,A.:,•:3 :5 _ , , 4: tit k �.4•• ,� - .j • • r ,! • ,a . ry e 7 , • �. U• s..__..i. F,' ..-.RS` y . '.?4,.';'-: „ s tf, •+ r.' .ttaZ ,,' .. 4 +' yk.�'t1., i t - - •�� +' -fid . L • y 4 4:47'1; . ..1,,,,-.:41,,,,.i. F .. a * •t ►1 a • r v I .. ' "' . .., ,—':: '''-,:':v'''.:1', '. ''' , . : - r 1,f, ,,‘•,.' , . :.::. ,,;'.7:::::, ,...,..,, . • ' k-, . . ., , . . • ate,,- lul_i . cu Mi4► i Y .*•1•• :q 1 .,%...4'..,.„.,,,,,,,,,E .. F .+ J' , _ '4 ' C i 4 `"5yt1.¢} • <, n1. •� .. ' .' '''' '4 ! ... .,. ., ,,. .,:, Li,..i, ,,c,. ;,.,..,,..., , :,,..,,.,..-:., ,,,,..:.,. " . • ° ,Y L `.` • '�Y" ' 1 '• . I a. C y A '''s•' 'Ti4. a r ` `v �. t Y,i ` .• ''� . 1.A .S- •t'� yR, „`fir r ?�+ ' �,r a q)^E *v ,?! ':' t 'yf�,, SY' FCS t,, 5 .. y7i` 1 -� :�"• H:A ;te Y•Prys • + .i y ! Lt �, �.qy r} � ' ��i .�f- � �a• y Y+ _ y . .'o �f ,. }`fin' Y + e ! ):� e 1 4� f, .f/V'�li" h'4- 1 ,.; C ': - .r . • b r .{. { v +`:. - .3 a'S,• .%;,;.:44.Y1',-- r`,. ,..1!.i - 4,.: ...t. . ..:. ...i y- • ., -.,..r. . ., 4, 'lit is- "4: ii„..1. ,‘::";•- - 1.-..c "i Alfl ,r: ',.,:'‘' ' 'i% '' --t:' A� '�.- •, s r •' - / .� Y °, c _ a 'f . 54 •t+r.i N ~ t �` I a+i ''" . y RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER V I 59 Synthesis & Concept Frameworks Development of concept plan alternative scenarios began with a series of synthesis workshops intended to tie together information generated by the baseline evaluations and through preliminary discussions with the Community and Technical Advisory Committees. From these synthesis exercises, a framework was developed to identify key components that would be fixed within each concept plan alternative and those that could be flexible. For example, one fixed element of both River Terrace West and South was that each would include supportive commercial centers and employment lands. The location, size, and composition of these commercial centers were flexible elements that could be explored in the three different scenarios. Other fixed elements included: • A variety of housing types will be incorporated into all neighborhoods • Connections for pedestrians, bicycles and other non-vehicle ways of travel will be prioritized • Land use patterns will be transit-supportive • Development will be "feathered"(gradually transitioned) at the natural edges • Parks and open spaces will be provided throughout • Protection of natural areas will be prioritized The goal was to create three viable concept plan alternatives for evaluation, all of which were consistent with the Guiding Principles established at the outset of the project. Baseline ' ! Synthesis Concept Three Concept Evaluation / Select Preferred Conditions + i Workshop Framework- Plan Alternatives Stakeholder Alternative Analyses j Fixed and Flexible Feedback RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER V 160 Concept Alternatives Concept A ConceptA-3-D Model Concept A included three large commercial centers in ,k' fY tthy•, highly visible locations at the edge of the neighborhood , ` >', ,, , ' �:. ', _ ',./ f along major roads. Community parks were located near • /. the nodes. Larger housing types surrounded the centers P �` 1*(8 ' ` and taper to smaller housing at the natural edges. ifP,E / ;, � . Housing ,,. .'% • Larger housing forms around the commercial nodes. '; i' • Smaller housing forms at the edges ' ,' 1 ,/ Commercial Nodes - ,,,, 4.• Commercial centers at edges, next to major streets / . • Greater potential for large grocery store and -, employment uses ` ' /' / Transportation • Maximized transit access at edges on busy roads Legend • Commercial centers were more auto-oriented with Commercial / Mixed-use Node parking that can be shared Neighborhood Concept A-Building Form Profile • ' CI 0 Crriaib ciimncir:bcribnn-Th Commercial/Mixed-use Node Neighborhood Edge RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER V i 61 Concept B ConceptB-3-D Model Concept B emphasized three internal main street corridors "' that connected to the major perimeter streets. Community 0 �. ,� `t- . ' ., , , / , parks were typically located at the ends of corridors and 4 �, .00 rh N /. provided connections to natural areas. Housing sizes and ed ,,, �f ,� P , a , forms were generally more uniform throughout, although , ` `0- " ,, d there is variation from block to block. r � ' , % Housing # `›,#0 "�. .� / / ,4 / ./ �► J. f ,. . • Housing is similar in size and form throughout • * , . T ,1` / I/ ' Commercial Nodes `i( y"�` r ,�_ mp f, • Distributed along internal corridors` ,,/'F 4 1 • Emphasized neighborhood-scale commerce like small T restaurants and shops A / , Transportation • Neighborhood main streets that connect to major streets Legend • Emphasized internal bicycle and pedestrian networks Commercial / Mixeduse Node • Transit service would be the most flexible, with service possible along major arterial streets or interior corridors Neighborhood Concept B-Building Form Profile criiilinn 0.4_,:ro rriti,"n , , Commercial/Mixed-use Node Neighborhood Edge RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER V 162 Concept C ConceptC-3-D Model Concept C focused on three smaller, internal neighborhood centers that connected outward to major , ,> streets. Parks were located near centers and provided connections throughout. The largest housing forms were 4/'1 1 ,' I near the centers with lower-profile housing at the natural ,.J / edges. - , 101 ,-,4a0,----,,, 1 i ,. f . ,' - _ , 1 , Housing i ? /' 1 +/ , i • Larger and taller mixed-use housing forms near the central _ /� � � . „nodes" �` J • Smaller, lower profile housing forms at the edgesz` fi�. ,, ,- 'Y Commercial Nodes ��' , • Smaller internal "nodes"at key intersections ,, ti q, '' . !`` )� / " • Most likely small retail and office spaces I`;1, ,` f , • Connected outward to major streets Legend Transportation Commercial/ Mixed-use Node • Maximized walkable access within neighborhoods Neighborhood • Possibility of internal transit network connecting"nodes" Concept C-Building Form Profile I 1 i — — 1 _ CD ri-lcciann rn r---}-1 rTh-16--1 on ori 0 Commercial/Mixed-use Node Neighborhood Edge RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER V j 63 Selecting a Preferred Alternative The three concept alternatives were reviewed and evaluated by different stakeholder groups. The goal of these reviews was to receive input from a range of sources to understand which alternative, or which elements within the alternatives, best met community needs and desires. Input was provided from: • The Community Advisory Committee • The Technical Advisory Committee (CAC) • City staff representing different • An online open house and preference departments (Public Works, Engineering, survey, conducted in English and Spanish Transportation, Parks, Economic • A Spanish focus group Development) As feedback was gathered, some clear themes began to emerge that helped shape the preferred alternative. • Ensuring opportunities for a variety of • There is a need for more employment housing, including affordable housing, land in River Terrace West to ensure was a top concern a complete community with balanced • There was less interest in large suburban opportunities for living and working. commercial centers and more interest in • Walkability and access to parks and smaller-scale commercial nodes internal open spaces must be part of any new to the neighborhoods. There was community. demand for one larger commercial node • The street network must be safe and with potential for a grocery store. comfortable for pedestrians and not create barriers in the neighborhoods. The preferred alternative was developed around these themes. Overall, Concept B, the main street corridors concept, was consistently identified as the favorite option by reviewers. While the preferred alternative is based primarily on Concept B, it also blends elements from the other two alternatives, including the larger commercial/employment node in River Terrace West(Concept A) and the internal neighborhood commercial nodes from Concept C. r i 41-• . . , 1100 " ' .i...,)-k , ,)-..- < •,.1 "7" 't--"4,..ri'. -- ,... , ft. Ji^4-.4-_, . n . • . . .. . ....._ _--...L--.:-1 ' . , .. , 'Mit .. __iv II • f ri, , )r 1• r • •( • 4 _. -. , .. i ITIE,- r." , n--.... .:- .,.. _. . ; .,.. . . 4 , . ,r, , ., ` ��77�'''�cFF �4 .7.-45.,..--___=-:---________ -;.----...---,-_---...-7.:= .•......__.... ..... '1.. 1,1.-43%' 1+3't may/`" : A: •- y'( t.."' 4 .. �' .,1.�L: .,..*-1."' 1 y, -7 pot + '• -,'k- 4` , ; s :.• Co oi • th - . . •e 0-F fir. !C : - - �..- - .4 - .r' r . ' litrili"liViiit• . . „. --- . ' -t",i.* • 4 . . .,.. .;‘... ..;:*;;;-',..-.,'cl.:_. •:„ :-...'' -**. ilt• '' • 1,-:• Zi•I -.% 7'''' '7.,-; . .7, ', . "A...t.,,ik V€,V.! , l'r • .1.. P VS, .,..4.-. , '4. ‘t 711 . , . , . , . ..,44- ' — '' n...jok-,,. ':'.,'.. , -,::., =; n'IVARkl'',',.. .'il,:-.'''•""'', :2*' . -; y _ 3 �i r -w... t..+i. . t RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 65 The River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan offers Figure 11-Concept Plan opportunities for a wide variety of household -1 types and sizes, along with places to shop, MOUNTAINSIDE WAY-+ High SchMountainof s work and recreate - all within walkable, well- � � 9 SCHOLLS FERRY RD Z. t` 73 connected neighborhoods. The concept plan c r----t-7---r realizes the project vision, guiding principles %A and community voices that guided this . effort. 1 r ____-�_ �'--.--1L N..."...i JEAN LOUISE RD Legend . . • - -_,River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 1 I Employment Area s I Commercial / Neighborhood Node .•[WEST] 1---- .;, -- 1,.,) BULL MOUNTAIN RD Main Street i Even Mix `... { Feathered Edge i I —Collector Road --- Street/ Pedestrian Connection 0 --- Minor Street Connection v. ¢; Mountainside Way Future Study Area o -' Beef Bend Road Future Study Area Community Connection 8 ArtRutkin Trail Network Elementary School Stream SOUTH Wetlands I J . t Vegetated Corridor L LU 'a Park(Outside Project Area) LASICH LN .. t_. ... :.1,',..__A....0......, r School (Outside Project Area) = ��.�•` -�� iN 1 Tile Flat, Future Study Area - _ z _ ,,� -� y Framework B, See Transportation , BEEF BEND RD °oc Section W ® 0' 1,000' N W RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 166 Commercial / Employment Nodes Commercial and employment areas are planned for both River Terrace West and South to support the vision for complete communities where people can live, work, shop, and access local services - all within their neighborhood. Each commercial node is located and sized in response to its surroundings and adjacent developments outside the concept plan area. River Terrace West There are two commercial nodes planned for River Terrace West: one at the north end along SW Scholls Ferry Road and one near the center at SW Bull Mountain Road. The node along SW Scholls Ferry Road is the largest and includes a main street commercial corridor(about six acres) along the north-south collector street. The commercial corridor is surrounded by a larger employment node (upwards of 30 acres) intended for a mix of office, institutional, technology, and light industrial uses. This commercial/employment node will have visibility and access from SW Scholls Ferry Road. It is planned to provide complementary uses to the South Cooper Mountain main street area that is currently being developed to the north. The node at SW Bull Mountain Road, about four acres, is intended primarily to serve the neighborhoods within River Terrace 2.0 and developing areas across SW Bull Mountain Road in River Terrace East. It would likely also serve some regional traffic, particularly at the edge along Roy Rogers Road.This node is also envisioned as a main street corridor, with neighborhood-scale commercial retail and civic uses along a two or three block segment of the main collector street. While this node is more internal to the neighborhood, it maintains connection to, and visibility from, the major intersection of SW Bull Mountain Road and SW 175th Avenue. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 67 River Terrace South The commercial node in River Terrace South (about five acres) is envisioned as a main street corridor along the north-south extension of River Terrace Boulevard where it meets Beef Bend Road. It is intended to be a neighborhood-serving commercial node, with a mix of retail and civic uses,that has strong connections to Beef Bend Road. The goal here is to design a flexible commercial node that can reflect and complement the King City town center to the south, which is currently being considered through King City's community planning work. Housing Prototypes There are three different residential prototypes identified on the Concept Plan: Main Street, Even Mix and Feathered Edge. Each prototype is designed to provide a range of housing options that responds to and reflects adjacent land uses. The types of housing represented in each prototype are similar throughout; the difference is in the proportionate mix of those housing types and the specific forms they take (tall and stacked versus short and spread out, for example). Housing types common to all the prototypes include: • ADUs (accessory dwelling units, inclusive of what are often called duplexes and triplexes) • Cottage clusters • Courtyard units • Quads • Rowhouses Affordable housing opportunities are intended to be integrated throughout. More detail about housing prototypes,the number and type of housing units provided, and affordability strategies can be found in Chapter III of this document. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 68 Main Street & Even Mix Prototypes Main Street Even Mix This type is designed to be located near This prototype is designed to be located a commercial node or along a main in the middle, between the neighborhood street; it is intended to complement and edge and the main street or commercial support a small-scale, neighborhood- node. Even Mix developments are serving village center. The Main Street comprised of a block-by-block mix of a prototype is designed with taller, more variety of housing types, including cottage urban rowhouses at the ends of the clusters, quads, courtyard units and single blocks, oriented toward a main street detached houses with accessory dwelling or commercial center. Rowhouses may units. Housing forms may be in a range accommodate live-work space, or an office of configurations (stacked, attached, space on the ground floor. The remainder detached) and integrate opportunities for of the block is comprised of a mix of rentals and home ownership throughout. middle housing types and forms. , A+ 1 ," - , ,,' • Ai. , -if . - 11/1 - ' :. -- . 'Ilk *. 4 ,' 4 , ' •, . '. ,, '''''' - 'lig 11*.:011110 ' - = 1 4[ _ r Even Mix i ;` `i" , �� - Even Mix ,1 Main Street Main Street RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 169 Feathered Edge Prototype Feathered Edge The Feathered Edge prototype is intended to respond to the edges where development abuts natural resource and ; , open space areas. Housing types and e. ��' block configurations in the Feathered Y• \\., `, `; �'" Edge areas could take a variety of forms, r a *. • , ' - - ��-fir % '7 .- including: _ 't , "I' • Groupings of detached dwellings °• _ surroundinga common greenspace and/ - " ' b' ` - _ A. a �''' g p C: `s... or terraced down a slope t;t . ,,, • Lower profile (shorter and more spread \, `� out)forms of housing ,' • Varied lot sizes and shapes that reflect ' ,.'. , the variation of natural areas at theti l '�, edges , w • Access from alleys or skinny"woonerfs" to minimize paving and treat stormwater • Public trails around developments that Feathered Edge Over Three Blocks provide access to the natural areas • Public street at the edge of the natural area to provide a "promenade" and access to views and trailheads into the natural areas RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 170 Concept Plan Housing Prototypes Figure 12- River Terrace West Housing Prototypes River Terrace West � In River Terrace West, there are two Main Street s areas: one at the northern end adjacent to the MOUNTAINSIDE WAY Mountainside 9- commercial/neighborhood node and one near the J, Highschool center surrounding the main street commercial < � SCROLLS FERRY RD corridor along Bull Mountain Road. Generally, the 9� •., `-%"�" x Main Street areas are surrounded by Even Mix �� A i%� -1 ri areas. Due to theresence of natural resources in - 1 P n River Terrace West, there is a significant amount \1/4. . --..-'"":" #___ n 03 of Feathered Edge throughout. �_____�_ _� _ [ 1 ` v . A Legend _ 1 L--:River Terrace 2.0 Project Area ),-----�;--�--•�. `'+.. JEANILOUISE RD Employment Area �-- ,� , Commercial/ Neighborhood Node ! `% . .1,: Main Street E ; ; Even Mix 1,»' Feathered Edge i —Collector Road ---- Street/ Pedestrian Connection --- Minor Street Connection ir---1• ,. - '> T -0. Mountainside Way Future Study Area 1 r aim '�, Community Connection 1 Z —. Trail Network I ; Stream I 0 ~ Wetlands 1" i ° 0 Vegetated Corridor r Park(Outside Project Area) - School (Outside Project Area) co 1 Tile Flat, Future Study Area - Framework B, See Transportation 0' 1,000' Section RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 71 River Terrace South Figure 13- River Terrace South Housing Prototypes In River Terrace South, the Main Street type - extends along the north-south collector (River Terrace Boulevard extension), surrounds . the commercial corridor, and extends along a segment of major the east-west connection that — • ...,. connects to Roy Rogers Road at Lasich Lane. The � ii- Eementa'ry •• remainder of River Terrace South is filled in with School LLI Even Mix and Feathered Edge where there are `''"""�""h"�' ""-""'--`---` significant wetlands and drainages. 2 t ( O �1WLi.iJ..i•.- jJ CIA t_t.i..t. air„Lam.: . ' W iet LASICHLN. •-.,- .....s .. . . Q. . . .• ;BEEF BEND RD a W ® 0' 1,000' N W Legend River Terrace 2.0 Project Area Stream Commercial / Neighborhood Node Wetlands Main Street Vegetated Corridor Even Mix Park(Outside Project Area) Feathered Edge School (Outside Project Area) —Collector Road --- Minor Street Connection -0 Beef Bend Road Future Study Area Community Connection •••• Trail Network RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 72 Mobility Network Streets Planning for the future street network in 2040 with River Terrace West and Transportation Framework B: River Terrace 2.0 is based on forecasts South growth: this scenario assumes the This transportation framework assumes of travel demand resulting from future preferred levels of potential development all of Framework A, but with an extension population and employment growth, within River Terrace 2.0, with an estimated of SW Tile Flat Road between SW Scholls both within the study area and within the 4,541 households and 460 employees. Ferry Road to the SW Mountainside Way larger Tigard and the Metro region. The It includes the baseline transportation extension (referred to as Project B1 in objective of the transportation planning improvements, in addition to the street Table 7). The SW Tile Flat extension, SW process is to provide the information extensions envisioned in the Concept Plan Mountainside Way extension and an necessary for making decisions about how study area since they would be needed improved SW Bull Mountain Road are and where improvements should be made before development could occur. assumed as the primary collector route to create a connected, safe and efficient between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW transportation system that provides travel Two transportation frameworks were Roy Rogers Road in this framework. This options for all users. evaluated with the River Terrace West option is consistent with Washington and South Concept Plan growth scenario. County's URTS system connections For River Terrace 2.0, future traffic These transportation frameworks include planning. forecasts were prepared for the year 2040 various street extensions with associated for two scenarios: pedestrian and bicycle facilities, in addition The full transportation analysis for River to a trail network that is included under Terrace 2.0 is provided in Appendix E. 2040 Transportation System Plan (TSP) both frameworks. Baseline: this assumes the land use and transportation network currently Transportation Framework A: within Washington County's Financially This transportation framework assumes Constrained Regional Travel Demand that the SW Mountainside Way extension Model, and the baseline transportation and an improved SW Bull Mountain Road improvements. This scenario includes comprise the primary collector route 2,587 households and 200 employees in between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW the River Terrace West and South Concept Roy Rogers Road. Framework A does not Plan area and is assumed to match the include an extension of Tile Flat Road forecast of the current Tigard TSP. through River Terrace 2.0. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 73 River Terrace West Streets Figure 14- Transportation Improvements-River Terrace West In River Terrace West, recommended transportation " improvements include: SCROLLS FERRY RD 1. • Under Framework A, SW Mountainside Way would 't be extended from SW Scholls Ferry Road south into __ the study area and then east to connect with SW Bull }_ Mountain Road. This road is envisioned as a two to TILE FLAT RD CLEMENTINE ST Ni three-lane City collector street. , • Under Framework B,Tile Flat Road would be extended ; across SW Scholls Ferry Road east into the study area, c \ *+**+.+ JEAN;LOUISE RD then south and east again to connect with SW Bull w \...._ 4.4, ++., Mountain Road. In this framework, SW Mountainside o —1 `.** ; Way would still be extended south from Scholls Ferry --- *�-'--" -�; ce I.- 1 W Road, but this time as a two-lane neighborhood route, c ( ;a to connect with the Tile Flat Road extension. z I 1< z • Improve SW Vandermost Road (at the western edge of I im River Terrace West) as a two-lane City neighborhood ,y route. 1 c >01 • Extend SW Sabrina Avenue from SW Bull Mountain 1 r i 0 Z Road to the edge of the study area as a two-lane City : W neighborhood route. in cc . • Improve SW Bull Mountain Road as a three-lane o City collector from SW Roy Rogers Road to the SW - ----------- --- --- J Mountainside Way(or Tile Flat Road) extension. MOUNTAINSIDE WAY— D co • Upgrade SW Roy Rogers Road to a five-lane County ® 0' 1,000' arterial from SW Bull Mountain Road down to SW Beef Legend Bend Road. r:]River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 1 Tile Flat, Future Study Area - See Table 7 for full description of recommended --Collector Road Framework B, See Transportation improvements for River Terrace West. ---- Street/Pedestrian Connection Section - - Minor Street Connection "- Mountainside Way Future Study Area Stream RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 74 Tile Flat Road Extension SW Mountainside Way Extension Traffic modeling conducted for the The SW Mountainside Way extension Much of the traffic utilizing the SW Transportation Frameworks indicated that would provide the primary collector route Mountainside Way extension would the SW Tile Flat Road extension included in through River Terrace West(without the instead utilize SW Sabrina Avenue Framework B slightly improves operations SW Tile Flat Road extension) and would between the northern portion of the SW along the SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW be the only direct and continuous route Mountainside Way extension north of SW Roy Rogers Road segments adjacent to for pedestrians and bicyclists through Clementine Street and SW Bull Mountain River Terrace West.This alignment was the area with Framework A. However, Road. This segment of SW Sabrina Avenue analyzed as a collector type facility, with a River Terrace West includes topography would experience volume increases of design speed between 25 and 30 miles per and environmental constraints that make up to 100 trips in each direction during hour. With this design, it is forecasted to street connections difficult and costly. the p.m. peak hour. Although this level attract around 200 to 250 vehicle trips in In particular, the area along the SW of traffic is typical for a neighborhood each direction during the p.m. peak hour Mountainside Way extension between SW route, this segment was built slightly from the SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Clementine Street and SW Bull Mountain narrower, with 32 feet of pavement width, Roy Rogers Road corridors. However, it Road will require two bridge crossings and parking on both sides.The typical was found that with the SW Tile Flat Road that would result in an expensive street neighborhood route requires 36 feet of extension, the associated vehicle trips connection. For that reason, that segment pavement with parking on both sides. This that would take up the available capacity of Mountainside Way is shown as "Street/ scenario would remove the temporary along this segment would be back-filled Pedestrian Connection" on Figure 14. This parking along one side of SW Sabrina with other regional traffic. In other words, indicates the connection could be a full Avenue per land use requirements. future congestion on parallel arterials street connection or a bicycle/pedestrian routes (such as OR 99W) could potentially connection only, depending on future The Concept Plan also considers a cause drivers to re-route to SW Roy Rogers planning work and funding. further extension of Mountainside Way, Road through the River Terrace West and continuing south past River Terrace 2.0 South Concept Plan area. As such, the A sensitivity test was conducted to (shown as"Mountainside Way Future traffic operational results were similar analyze Framework A without the SW Study Area" on Figure 14). This extension between Transportation Frameworks A Mountainside Way extension between SW is highly conceptual at this point; it has and B. Clementine Street and SW Bull Mountain not been studied and is not included with Road. Overall, not constructing this the cost estimates for transportation segment as a full street connection has a improvements. Future planning work will negligible impact on nearby intersection include evaluation of this extension and operations (i.e., no change in intersection will determine if it should be studied and v/c ratios). included as a project. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 75 River Terrace South Streets Figure 15- Transportation Improvements-River Terrace South Recommended transportation improvements in c and around River Terrace South include: m • Extend River Terrace Boulevard from SW Potomac c �" u Road to SW Beef Bend Road as a three-lane City PATOMIC RD U, - uj collector. W — "� I— ____ W Ce • Extend SW Lasich Lane from SW Roy Rogers o > Road east into the study area as a two-lane City o . - oc neighborhood route. m WOODHUE ST • Upgrade SW Beef Bend Road from SW Roy Rogers L I ' Road to SW 150th Avenue to a three-lane County LASICH LN a arterial standard. -. 1 . . . .O... _. = • Multiple intersection improvements, primarily �� r along SW Rogers Road and SW Beef Bend I , „s...�-'' Road, including installation of traffic signals or '' roundabouts. BEEF BEND RD 14, .—ELSNER RD A future realignment of Beef Bend Road is also considered with this plan, shown as"Beef Bend Legend Road Future Study Area" on Figure 15. This r:]River Terrace 2.0 Project Area realignment is conceptual and has not been —Collector Road studied or included with the cost estimate for ---- Street/ Pedestrian Connection transportation improvements. Subsequent - - -Minor Street Connection transportation planning in this area will further °L'° Beef Bend Road Future Study Area Stream consider the Beef Bend Road realignment. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 76 Overall, an estimated $75 to $85 million Figure 16-Transportation Improvements in transportation system improvements A SW Scholls Ferry Rd are expected to be needed to support -----, growth planned for River Terrace 2.0 j OCD and the surrounding region. Forecasted traffic growth associated specifically SW Tile Flat Rd SW clementine A with development in the River Terrace nn„-' [ M1/EST] West and South Concept Plan area is „.:'::::,,',',1, L•rctIorri � �'• expected to drive the need for about $34 _ million worth of the total project costs 1—.—, '•�1�`W dean Louise Rd in Transportation Framework A and $33 e i'-- `- Q I million worth of the total project costs A4 C N 1 in Transportation Framework B. Those O 3 costs are nearly an even split between N , SW Bull Mountain Rd Q River Terrace West and South. For a full I 01 , listing and description of recommended I --• e e improvements and their estimated costs, 1 ;;� l see Appendix E. i..-_._.. „-,,,,,-,—, ,_ —1 aA 28 r N m o a, z ,, - ,, � SW Potomac Rd t- `w cc 0 [SOUTH] 0 I SW Woodhue St 0 Legend 0 `_._+--- ------�- -. ,J River Terrace 2.0 Project Area 0 SW Lasich Ln ..o 01 —Collector Road I r�----...L..—.I ---- Street/ Pedestrian Connection )4:•-- 0 - - - Minor Street Connection SW Beef Bend Rd ' =°Mountainside Way Future Study Area ® N '-,3° Beef Bend Road Future Study Area :1, 0' 1,000' tu Stream U) RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 77 Table 7-Recommended Transportation System Improvements SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER TERRACE TERRACE REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Transportation Framework A Projects Extend SW Mountainside Way from SW Scholls Ferry Road to A2 $2,480,000 $1,990,000 $0 $490,000 west of SW Clementine Street as a 3-lane City collector Extend SW Mountainside Way from west of SW Clementine A3 Street to the SW Jean Louise $3,000,000 $2,860,000 $0 $140,000 Road extension as a 2-lane City collector Extend SW Mountainside Way from the SW Jean Louise Road A4 extension to the SW Bull $3,000,000 $2,780,000 $0 $220,000 Mountain Road extension as a 2-lane City collector Subtotals $8,480,000 $7,630,000 $0 $850,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 90% 0% 10% Transportation Framework B Projects Extend SW Tile Flat Road from SW Scholls Ferry Road to the Bi SW Mountainside Way $7,880,000 $1,480,000 $130,000 $6,270,000 extension as a 3-lane County collector. Extend SW Mountainside Way from SW Scholls Ferry Road to B2 west of SW Clementine Street $1,970,000 $1,590,000 $0 $380,000 as a 2-lane City neighborhood route RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 78 SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) TERRACE TERRACE SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Extend SW Tile Flat Road/SW Mountainside Way from the SW B3 Mountainside Way extension to $4,220,000 $2,250,000 $30,000 $1,940,000 the SW Jean Louise Road extension as a 3-lane County collector. Extend SW Tile Flat Road/SW Mountainside Way from the SW B4 Jean Louise Road extension to $4,180,000 $1,820,000 $20,000 $2,340,000 the SW Bull Mountain Road extension as a 3-lane County collector. Subtotals $18,250,000 $7,140,000 $180,000 $10,930,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 39% 1% 60% Projects Constructing or Reconstructing Streets On-site (Transportation Framework A and B) Extend SW Sabrina Avenue from SW Bull Mountain Road to 5 $4,200,000 $4,200,000 $0 $0 the West UGB as a 2-lane City neighborhood route Improve SW Vandermost Road 6 from SW Scholls Ferry Road $1,220,000 $1,220,000 $0 $0 south to the UGB as a 2-lane City neighborhood route Improve SW Bull Mountain Road from SW Roy Rogers 7 Road to the SW Mountainside $2,360,000 $2,150,000 $10,000 $200,000 Way extension as a 3-lane City collector Extend SW River Terrace 8 Boulevard from SW Potomac $5,580,000 $0 $2,720,000 $2,860,000 Road to SW Beef Bend Road as a 3-lane City collector Extend SW Woodhue Street west from the UGB to SW Roy 9 Rogers Road as a 2-lane City $4,130,000 $0 $4,020,000 $110,000 neighborhood route Extend SW Lasich Lane from 10 SW Roy Rogers Road to SW $6,820,000 $0 $6,640,000 $180,000 Beef Bend Road as a 2-lane City neighborhood route RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 79 SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER TERRACE TERRACE REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST(2021) SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Extend SW Elsner Road from 11 SW Beef Bend Road to the SW Woodhue Street Extension as a $3,130,000 $0 $1,780,000 $1,350,000 2-lane City neighborhood route Extend SW Jean Louise Road west to the SW Tile Flat Road/ 23 SW Mountainside Way $460,000 $120,000 $0 $340,000 extension as a 2-lane City collector Subtotals $27,900,000 $7,690,000 $15,170,000 $5,040,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 28% 54% 18% Projects Upgrading Existing Streets to Urban Standards(Transportation Framework A and B) Improve SW Scholls Ferry 12 Road from SW Roy Rogers $8,300,000 $1,040,000 $40,000 $7,220,000 Road to SW Tile Flat Road as a 5-lane County arterial Improve SW Roy Rogers Road 13 from SW Bull Mountain Road to $13,150,000 $400,000 $70,000 $12,680,000 SW Beef Bend Road as a 5- lane County arterial Improve SW Beef Bend Road 14 from SW Roy Rogers Road to $10,470,000 $50,000 $850,000 $9,570,000 150th Avenue as a 3-lane County arterial Improve SW 150th Avenue 15 from SW Beef Bend Road to $1,290,000 $20,000 $90,000 $1,180,000 SW Rosario Lane as a 3-lane City collector Subtotals $33,210,000 $1,510,000 $1,050,000 $30,650,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 5% 3% 92% Projects Improving Intersections(Transportation Framework A and B) Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road intersection with SW 16 Potomac Road by installing a $500,000 $20,000 $20,000 $460,000 traffic signal (when warrants are met) Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road intersection with the SW 17 Woodhue Street extension by $500,000 $10,000 $30,000 $460,000 installing a traffic signal (when warrants are met) RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 80 SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER TERRACE TERRACE REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road intersection with SW 18 Lasich Lane by installing a $500,000 $10,000 $30,000 $460,000 traffic signal (when warrants are met) Improve the SW Bull Mountain 19 Road intersection with SW 150th Avenue by adding an $470,000 $40,000 $10,000 $420,000 eastbound right-turn lane Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection with SW River Terrace Boulevard by 20 $1,280,000 $40,000 $100,000 $1,140,000 adding a traffic signal or roundabout(cost assumes roundabout) Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection with SW 21 Elsner Road by adding a traffic $1,280,000 $30,000 $260,000 $990,000 signal or roundabout(cost assumes roundabout) Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection with SW 22 150th Avenue by adding a $1,280,000 $10,000 $140,000 $1,130,000 traffic signal or roundabout (cost assumes roundabout) Subtotals $5,810,000 $160,000 $590,000 $5,060,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 3% 10% 87% Total Cost of Recommended Improvements with $75,400,000 $16,990,000 $16,810,000 $41,600,000 Transportation Framework A Percent share of total cost 23% 22% 55% Total Cost of Recommended Improvements with $85,170,000 $16,500,000 $16,990,000 $51,680,000 Transportation Framework B Percent share of total cost 19% 20% 61% RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 181 Trails Figure 17-Proposed Trails The conceptual trails shown in Figure 17 would provide a SCHOLLSFERRYRD ' °°Y°° network of active transportation opportunities. Smaller, . ' neighborhood trails could connect residents in the 5 feathered edges and even mix areas to the main routes and commercial corridors, with connections to parks for i both passive and active recreation along the way. Multi- 1 — -' \ use community trails along the main roadways would `"--"-::-.\ provide connections between the neighborhood centers, , — 1 •v"�-- ,-----t community parks, and neighboring communities. These N °`F,,,, trails would also provide connections to the regional trail l I system with future connections to the River Terrace Trail, € p'1"---4- > BULL MOUNTAIN RD Roy Rogers Road Trail, and SW 150th Avenue Trail. s El [WEST] -=- ... 1 i d z W oxtrs"en r�xu tii ..,,,2 Iwu°Caen W — V .� . Art Rutkin 4 r•f , ,• ` G i- -- -- Elementary j, t! c School y,��. - L• •� • [SOUTH , a :?11! -- r -'! LASIGHLN..1.......az , „�u,�_�,. ...;.L._ ooe - " r a."- . •. 0' 1,000' i _1. r — i, ± ® BEEF BENDlRD Trail Examples Legend River Terrace 2.0 Project Area — Collector Road ... Trail Network ••. Street/ Pedestrian Connection • Trail Access Points (Conceptual) --- Minor Street Connection Trail Access Service Area (1/2 mi) — Community Connection Proposed Trail Stream For planning purposes, service Wetlands areas are shown as a radius Vegetated Corridor instead of along a street/trail - Park(Outside Project Area) network School (Outside Project Area) RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 82 Parks & Open Spaces Figure 18-Proposed Parks f %,4 A preliminary look at service areas for community, rr 'H:,� 4lAPvuO neighborhood, and linear parks of River Terrace 2.0 'r---tt � —— ----; is shown in Figure 18. Figure 18 shows service areas i4 for potential trail access points. These locations are ! [WEST] conceptual to assess potential coverage of park service. F - Actual locations of parks and open space facilities will 1 # be determined on an ongoing basis as infrastructure 1_ .,___. \ ,. ,,t; ,:;,,,. networks are further defined and as development occurs. .L.___ Service areas and access would usually be based on - l� I °i street, sidewalk, and trail networks without barriers. For I I planning purposes and in absence of a full street network, .. t f the service areas are shown as a radius. Community Parks are shown with a 1-mile service area and neighborhood �._..._ , Mt,e and linear parks are shown with a ' -mile service area. j A 1h-mile radius was also added to community parks to understand the 10-minute walk service areas. S Legend -- 1t2 mito _I River Terrace 2.0 Project Area • Trail Network }" "' " " Proposed Trail [SOUTH' t.------- _ M,i,„ Stream ,i Wetlands .__- . Vegetated Corridor i r.- Park(Outside Project Area) 0' 1,000' School (Outside Project Area) - - - Collector Road Park Service Area Legend — Street/ Pedestrian Connection Community Park: 1 mile -- Minor Street Connection Community Park: 1/2 mile .--.Community Connection Neighborhood & Linear Park: 1/4 mile For planning purposes, service areas are shown as a radius instead of along a street/trail network RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 83 River Terrace West r,,,zJ� j A 'f1, R9 114 M �fy ; The preliminary approach to parks,trails and open _ 0GWkotks"RR , - S y sCH0-1-5 FER0.Y X'. r--_ - '— — _. j space in River Terrace Wests anticipates: • Two community parks, one in the upper section and one in the lower section. The 'h mile service i I area (10-minute walk)for these parks would cover I j `," , almost the entire River Terrace West area, with the __ ., >\ - x!OUkE an --- ,t �, _.:r:.:anJ tO4JI5E Rb '�. �c., exception of a small portion of the neighborhood \1 .-^ ___ ___.___ in the center. That neighborhood would still a !.` o have access to (and be within one mile of) both ! 1 i community parks via the planned north-south .. I • , „ connection (multi-use path or roadway). 1""" ] ' "° • Four neighborhood parks, two in the upper section ; I . and two in the lower section. These parks would • :I ! .I be in the range of two to four acres in size and i. -_- ..__ -_.J would generally overlap with the community park West Community Parks West Neighborhood&Linear Parks service areas, providing additional park options for residents in those neighborhoods. • Four linear parks, evenly divided between the upper and lower sections of River Terrace West. Nti — r Linear parks are envisioned to be located near the iigirT 4 _ " ` commercial centers of each area and along the �„ , Ijille . natural resource corridors. € • , * . _. , •,:. "------� " '"' . a � , , ,. till 4' �., 4. t , ..,,,4-4 '""*i I % -4 ''141411411,1611"., Community Park Examples RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 84 River Terrace South Q The preliminary River Terrace South combination of parks ------- 1/2 Mile anticipates: • One centrally located community park, about 13-15 i -- 3 1 1 acres, providing 10-minute walk service to the majority ( ; of River Terrace South. With trail connections, this !'" `--L--- — / - ` `A park could be easily walkable from open space areas, C providing both passive and active recreation choices in • close proximity to each other. • Two neighborhood parks providing�/a mile service to .,,-" O 9° the western half of the area. Each park is envisioned << _ 1 - - -I _: ,'---- S to be about three acres and provide opportunities to 44, connect to natural areas and nearby trails. W i • Two linear parks providing service to the eastern South Community Parks half of River Terrace South, located along greenway corridors. These parks would allow opportunities - to connect across the corridors and link with majorsz routes and future regional trails such as the Tualatin River Greenway Trail. F i a . �� , 114 41 y P M r,.4 'a .1 ,- • , .. 7-.:i�'.v:rvvsry vvvr.tr•ata-atg'..-- . .....f: a xt t 'd 11C. ;Flai ' R• 1 j ' i _ —L t. __ .ye.. — �c*f 1c l'.. 4 ` Jul q' r this,....._744, ii - .1::::, ---- „..1401111M1M- -:: ---- - - ,______, ...- o 41 cc Neighborhood Park Examples South Neighborhood&Linear Parks RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 85 Land Use Association (Locate within or adjacent to) Employment Even Mix Main Street Feathered Edge Commercial/ Park Type Area Prototype Prototype Prototype Neighborhood Center Notes Community Served by arterial Park ✓ street with shared ✓ ✓ ✓ parking&retail nearby Neighborhood ✓ ✓ Could include dog Park parks Neighborhood Urban plaza or Park—Urban ✓ ✓ town square Pocket Park Neighborhood- ✓ ✓ ✓ serving.Limited use due to size Linear Park Contains elements of other park types, often ✓ ✓ ✓ follow streets or natural corridors Trail ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Connections to all land use types Open Space ✓ May also connect with any land use Table 8-Parks Land Use Association RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI I 86 Public Utilities & Services Sanitary Sewer Service The proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure needed to serve River Terrace West and South is based on the infrastructure assumed to be constructed at the time of development and does not account for connections of adjacent areas to the River Terrace areas. These recommendations consider previous feasibility studies and recommendations as well as the applicable standards and strategic planning guidelines. The proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure may be refined as connected service areas are more readily defined and provide guidance to sewer service for River Terrace West and South. For a detailed discussion of sanitary sewer infrastructure, see Appendix G. River Terrace West For the purposes of sanitary sewer discussion, River Terrace West is divided into upper and lower sections, as indicated in Figure 19. For the upper section, flows from developable land generated in that area were assumed to be conveyed to the River Terrace North pump station via gravity service and connection to the 24-inch sewer trunk that bisects the main development area. The main development and commercial areas in upper River Terrace West are assumed to connect into the 24-inch sewer trunk via a single 10-inch sanitary sewer collector. This project assumes 500 feet of 10-inch gravity sewer to provide service for most of the area. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 187 Due to topography, flows generated in lower River Terrace Figure 19-Recommended Sewer Service West cannot be conveyed to existing sewer infrastructure .,.� t )TAiP$ "F\1M , 11111 SW --110 5,>-FERRY RD ,-summrer.pc ,.. -- }+ by gravity. Flows will need to be pumped to Roy Rogers �� ,,1. -7-11045,>-FERRY Ti " — Road to connect into the existingCWS infrastructure to .'+_ t`� t-- RT,west NM 1 r., 1 flow via gravity to the River Terrace South pump station. 1 (Upper). ' ; . i t` ---N b�`.r`� I Sewers within the service area would convey flow to the 1t. 4� "---L1 Tigard ,,--- southwest corner of the service area to the new pumpfs F ;; station. Several projects are recommended for sewer I River Terrace (j f p J ILL North PS 1 � 1 � E.:41....1 .1.�„-...rh.�...yr--+ service in lower River Terrace West, including two new JJ '2 �,11)w rt Ss n'o ua pump stations (shown as T2 and T4 on Figure 19 and !��West ;;� "� , ! i ,.,.,,,r MOUNTAIN RD I. 1l approximately 500 feet of a 10-inch gravity sewer to . provide service to the new T4 pump station. All ,_-=° _ , r �"- i Pleasant View PS and area north of RT ,. south may connect to RT south or Bull I River Terrace SouthCC 1 Mtn Trunk in future.Connection points w I i and oversizing of SS in PT South not W . i analyzed and is shown for reference only. A majority of the flows in the west and central areas of t �._. River Terrace South can be conveyed directly via gravity cccc ` 'z,3 to RoyRogers Road and then to the River Terrace South o ( RT South _ Bull5Mountain• g te . n "` Connection to,8ult_, pump station,with topographic limitations for service to a s , � a o I r i Mountainf1'runk the developable areas in the eastern edge of the basin. IWestern and central area of RT !�"'---•yr i �..� ,,^• 1 South served via gravity to Roy 12 1 107 i —� Recommended projects for River Terrace South include Rogers Road and River Terrace p J T6 SW BEEF 6E16 RD } eastern area of RT South _'iii • 1�..._, new gravity sewer lines to serve the area, including 2,600 (LL °°th° _ ', will need deep gravity Ss I or local PS to proposed 5S King feet of new 10-inch and 12-inch lines along Beef Bend 1 — I l i i along Beef Bend Road or River TerraCB 1= (!:j / I service to Beef Bend South Road to connect to Roy Rogers Road at the western edge ; South Pyr i development.Area furthest l 0' 1,000' east assumed to tie into Bull of the plan area. ® Mountain 55.— - ,f, An alternative collector sewer has been proposed for Legend the Beef Bend South area near the Tualatin River to River Terrace 2.0 Project Area convey flows from that area to the River Terrace South Proposed Gravity • Existing PS pump station. This collector sewer could provide more Proposed Force Main --- Existing FM efficient service for portions of the River Terrace South III Proposed PS — Existing Gravity area and provide an opportunity to share costs across a Discharge MH cep City Boundaries larger area. This alternative has been discussed as part of recommended future analyses. Further coordination with King City and CWS will be required. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 88 Cost estimates for each project are provided in Table 9. Table 9-Preliminary Sewer Service Cost These do not include acquisition costs or local gravity •-_ - --_ • r.:eoi,ai. - .. COst • collection system from development and are assumed to provide a backbone of sewer(10-in diameter and greater) T1-River Terrace West (Upper) -10-in Sanitary Sewer $90,000 needed to connect to existing or planned infrastructure. It Collector to 24-in Trunk was assumed that road resurfacing and other costs may T2-River Terrace West (Lower) -Pump Station Service $924,000 to Local Collector be shared where utilities are co-located. T3-River Terrace West (Lower) -10-in Sanitary Sewer $261,000 Collector to River Terrace West (Lower) Pump Station T4-River Terrace West (Lower) -Pump Station Service $1,549,000 to 24-in Gravity Sanitary Sewer on Roy Rogers Road T5-River Terrace South- 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector $157,000 to Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road T6-River Terrace South- 10-in and 12-in Sanitary Sewer $469,000 Collector along Beef Bend Road to Roy Rogers Road Total Construction Cost Estimate $4,485,000 (Including 30%Contingency) Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $45,000 20%Engineering Allowance $897,000 10%Permitting, Inspections, and Administration $449,000 Total Project Cost Estimate $5,876,000 Notes: 1.Costs are in 2021 Dollars, indexed to the Engineering News - Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) of 12,845.38 for Seattle, Washington (January 2021). 2.Does not include property acquisition costs. 3.T6(Alt)not costed.This project identified as an alternative and will require additional coordination with King City as part of Beef Bend South Development. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 189 Water Service Infrastructure needs for water service were determined using a combination of planning criteria and a water system hydraulic model. Planning criteria were used to size future storage reservoirs, pump stations, and distribution mains. These facilities were added to the existing system hydraulic model along with the projected demands to verify adequate pressures, flows, and reservoir turnover. For the Concept Plan area as a whole (River Terrace West and South together), the draft 2020 Water System Master Plan (WSMP) indicates an eventual need for additional storage capacity to serve future development in River Terrace 2.0 and King City's Beef Bend South expansion area. Several new reservoirs are recommended in the WSMP, although the precise location of those reservoirs has yet to be determined. River Terrace West A large diameter(16-inch) backbone main is proposed to extend west along Scholls Ferry Road and then south along the new north-south collector street through River Terrace West. The backbone main will supply smaller mains (8-to 12-inch diameter) that branch off and connect to customer service lines. For the purpose of this concept planning effort, only backbone mains are identified. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 90 River Terrace South Table 10-Water Reservoir Cost To serve the River Terrace South area, a 16- Item Item Description Estimated Project Cost inch backbone main is proposed to connect a planned 1 Reservoir Structure&Appurtenances $2,580,000 main in the SW River Terrace Boulevard alignment that 2 Reservoir Foundation and Excavation $320,000 extends south to Beef Bend Road, then east to connect to 3 Yard Piping $288,000 the proposed River Terrace main at SW Taylor Road. The 4 Site Work and Landscaping $180,000 5 Electrical and I&C $50,000 backbone main will supply the smaller mains that branch 6 2,000 LF of 16 inch diameter pipe $238,000 out to customer service lines. 7 2,000LF of Surface Replacement $128,000 8 Mobilization,Bonds,Insurance,Shop Drawings $303,000 Cost estimates for water service improvements are 9 30%Contingency $1,227,000 provided in Tables 10 and 11. The cost of reservoirs Total Construction Cost Estimate $5,314,000 does not include property acquisition costs and 10 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $54,000 11 20%Engineering Allowance $1,063,000 assumes 2,000 linear feet of pipe will be needed to 12 5%Permitting, Inspections,and Administration $266,000 connect to existing distribution mains. Total Project Cost Estimate $6,697,000 Notes: The full water utility analysis can be found in 1.Costs are in 2021 Dollars 5.Sales tax included as separate line item Appendix H. 2.AWWA D110 prestressed circular concrete reservoir 6.Project will require local roadway resurfacing 3.No property acquisition costs 7.Engineering News-Record(ENR)Construction 4.No easement or right-of-way costs Cost Index(CCI)of 12,845.38 for Seattle, Washington (January 2021) Table 11- Water Backbone Pipe Cost Item Item Description Estimated Project Cost 1 RT West 410 PZ-7,320 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe $871,000 2 RT West 560 PZ-5,100 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe $932,000 3 RT South-4,590 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe $546,000 4 Mobilization,Bonds,Insurance,Shop Drawings $70,000 5 30%Contingency $726,000 Total Construction Cost Estimate $3,145,000 6 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $32,000 7 20%Engineering Allowance $629,000 8 5%Permitting, Inspections,and Administration $158,000 Total Project Cost Estimate $3,964,000 Notes: 1.Costs are in 2021 Dollars 4.Sales tax included as separate line item 2.No property acquisition costs 5.Assumes street resurfacing only needed for 560 PZ 3.No easement or right-of-way costs 6.Engineering News-Record(ENR)Construction Cost Index(CCI) of 12,845.38 for Seattle, Washington (January 2021) RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 91 Stormwater Management Figure 20-Storm water Concept Plan Diagram West $W GNU '`-r. tai SCHOLLSFEtRYIL;, For management of stormwater in River Terrace 2.0, a blend of strategies is proposed that includes combined regional - • facilities and smaller-scale low impact development (LID) ': ` r approaches. Regional facilities are recommended to be co- ` �' j '- located within existing wetland areas and would be designed ' ''7''�:; :` -"- ' ' �a to provide restoration and enhancement of the wetlands. =' } w J� av r 4 v~{1 0as 3B _ i..I '6. - P In general, conveyance of stormwater runoff throughout the "`'��` m .% RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VI 1 92 River Terrace South. Figure 21-Storm water Concept Plan Diagram South Stormwater management in this area is proposed to be Y1 ,_s j \ 1T a combination of four regional water quantity detention m4.44,:4 facilities and smaller-scale LID facilities that will drain into those facilities. There are also three proposed regional i' facilities that will provide both water quantity and water "" quality management. °` !% 1 .410.....- WI, dd The four regional detention facilities are co-locateda _ t within existing wetland areas to preserve and increase �` "'' ` ''y existing storage capacities. Stormwater facility design �1' ,, ' r in those areas would include wetland restoration and o �-- enhancement activities. Infiltration in River Terrace South - ' - r.l s\,'' l appears to have good potential, which supports the use of tip' ` .j�f ' s . t f -A" . t - mea_ LID approaches in that area. o ,n x14 The full stormwater management report can be found in °C ' , Appendix I. • ,, ) . . d F ;: < v.t, .,..,97i ....:.....:, ril • , ., ,.... • 4 . .• .. -. . • . 1 . . , . .,:,: -. .-..i4oz.,,;: . ,. .2 I T �,,70 s'1 ', • i • :Ann.... .1.. ... a a r v . ...-.6":":"1"."-4 _^w .."..."*.v... _.-:.r b T-4•••.,-....-......,+zyttk„ ,.. _ _ , •,1% s• . i 7 i Z:4. ''''' >I" "' .. J } - - . - ,w. �•'�'r°r• __ .4..w.r...•..i•. iiiY 1111111 II .,±_n-e • .- ..*••••:41.. ...... .• _ ter_ ...'Y • . ., - r • • ,,.rti�..:'�Y"ls-'-"�.71"�':_. y y _• - , <. Zr". .`•,e4...t. ,er..:!•_ ` _'';°Y.?14' _ •.r,-.. _ .. *��Y1�..�.�. ul l MSA I �I� �... '��. . • q _ T- �`'•.mow. 4�.Y.,... ""•� �"'�M`""'aY;.:«�^��^:��='!�k'�ivS_ _�-+•,;.x,,. � �`• te�s^iIC�°i. '."11'1./69 1.sJ \�� :;i1.`+ ., . r t .. er '"t"' "}`'"tl" da .:+- is-T,,, ;...,i +ifiN1 .s`R'�•e4'r4.7.1.Q.VS" 'ar r--Z:" ,- r4..'A t _ kr rw.i-«4�:riii► .. Apiritiettioft r� •. w --'---.''..:'r'*'"' y !y � - ..;rev::^.�Y:` "sty:....!.y7.-..r.-s-C^.aztve.� fM •.-.. y .. ".'_�,.�,,,,t�..,�..r:-rtY-�a '�--^-syrrr % ,.. -rrY--. -V fi;,.-•"'r *'!'�. h 01/ - - -- - '~'. /..__.. •.?. _ I -, •_�.��..,,,,c'`.. a. s • +11�,91kr - ""`4r�~'+'+s`�i 'rf' :wa.' s.• ._ :: •; .may `•I t ' � r"+r,, . : .,:i,•74.1v••• .****-01. dew•«,, f,� ill = +1a1!R :'"•..�!y, .,.(Y��,I'+'.Y„r:.v+,:n.._e,.r....«. y.,,,s,.«.,.,.rw.-�e'a• '.;+1� :... - ... ,. . 1 —r tld�+1.r."-a� ....i..��r..��. ...•f.,.,,wr,,.�1,,i,11,,,-`..-- _ ' 01/.0:y: , •..,, ,d,- - -+. lwl, %*4.-^.+..,•.,.•. .*',MrwrMK_,–*.eyw,..,rti...-".r'C!!!-._ 1.Y �r^ r'1' —:'+� , . 1IPA VA '.'111 \�,Aq-_:r- :4:- _ _ --"."3.•i 1 i a { ,� ma y - j:, ,,' '.- i! J._ ,744a`•` ,F�, 1' -!� � e '. Jl ' gii/4.:,.t.i. 1 ..= lemisiort.WINikiitillii;.:‘ , - f y�,,;,., 1.. `i - T :,mo+. If >. t +- �' a _ .y i.'. 1 • „ r1 '''rat _ ,may .r. r. a V•9� r ' -�yW N.•r - - 'wtr •C�" r,,r .. •. - lig .,'•A ' '!""i 't ,ti4• 1 -Vh. ' '– .Rj. a ra ,. '� rye -4:!4 .� i- .♦ ' .� • }J� 1. i `S i _ .. A _ '<r •u, , - 7•' L..�,•c..7-..--•_.-.__y 't ^. teem RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 194 Infrastructure Costs The evaluation of infrastructure services Table 13-Infrastructure Costs for River Terrace 2.0 included preliminary identification of needed improvement Infrastructure Type Estimated Total Cost MU projects and their associated costs. Each of the public infrastructure analyses Water Service $10,661,000 conducted for this project included a project list and associated high-level cost Sanitary Sewer Service $5,876,000 estimates. These cost estimates were combined and used to prepare the Funding Strategy Stormwater Management $33,559,465 summarized below. The full Funding Strategy is provided in Appendix J. Parks & Trails $35,534,426 As shown in Table 13, the total cost of infrastructure to serve River Terrace 2.0 is Transportation $75,400,000 estimated to be $161 million. This figure does not include the cost to Total $161,030,891 build out the local street network or provide local service connections; those costs will be born by the developers of future projects within the Concept Plan area. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII I 95 Funding Sources & Strategies Transportation Funding for transportation District projects have an "oversize" improvements depends on the scale of component; they either have a wider improvement and the size of the area right of way(and therefore greater cost of it is intend to serve. For the purpose construction, land, and other costs), more of evaluating funding, transportation expensive design features, or a special improvements are grouped into three feature such as a bridge. For district categories: developer-built projects, projects, developers are also expected district projects and major projects. to pay the total cost of all projects. The Funding Strategy recommends an area- Developer built projects are localized specific, River Terrace 2.0 transportation projects -their size (e.g., right of way supplemental fee be put in place to cover width) is no larger than that required local oversize costs. This is comparable to as a condition of approval, and they the approach taken in River Terrace 1.0, do not require any unusually costly where transportation system development components, such as a bridge. charges (SDCs) are higher than those in Developers are expected to pay the the rest of the City in order to pay for total cost of all local projects out of district-wide infrastructure. The additional pocket. transportation charges to developers of River Terrace 2.0 are referred to here as a supplemental fee, as the methodology used to calculate SDCs may vary from a supplemental fee. Developers who make district/oversized infrastructure improvements would receive credits against the River Terrace supplemental fees, and therefore would pay lower(or sometimes no) supplemental fees. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1 96 Major projects are all within right of way The area-specific supplemental fee is not This comparison is made for informational controlled by Washington County. On shown here since revenues and expenses purposes only. The fees generated by average, transportation demand (trips) associated with this fee are expected to River Terrace 2.0 will not directly pay for generated by River Terrace 2.0 will make remain within River Terrace 2.0. As shown, the major infrastructure, but rather, will up about nine percent of all trips in the transportation fees to be generated be directed to the two agencies, which these arterial roads and intersections; are about $11.3 million greater than the have a plan to divide the costs of certain the remaining transportation demand cost of the major infrastructure, even infrastructure and build it over time. will come from travelers from around though River Terrace 2.0 will make up a the County and perhaps beyond. Table small amount of the trips on these roads. 14(taken from the Funding Strategy) compares the estimated costs of the major infrastructure associated with River Terrace 2.0 with the two main transportation fees that will be generated by development in River Terrace 2.0: the Washington County Transportation Development Tax(TDT) and existing City of Tigard transportation SDC. Table 14-Comparison of Major Infrastructure Costs and Transportation Fees Revenue: Transportation Fees Generated by RT 2.0 Washington County TDT $24,833,847 Tigard TSDC (Base) $15,908,074 Total $40,741,921 Cost of Major Infrastructure WA. County MSTIP Cost-sharing Program $29,386,000 Surplus or Deficit $11,355,921 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 197 Parks Funding for parks and trails development See table below from the Funding in River Terrace 2.0 could come from Strategy. The strategy also assumes a a variety of sources. Some park certain amount of grant money will be improvements (primarily trails)will be secured to pay for parks, similar to the paid for a built by developers. The Funding approach used in River Terrace 1.0. The Strategy estimates that approximately $35 strategy also assumes cost reductions million in parks improvements will need to will be achieved and some other funding be funded outside of what will be provided sources will be made available to cover the through the development process. The total cost of parks and trails. primary source for funding is the City's SDCs, which will pay for about 90 percent of future parks in River Terrace 2.0. Table 15-Parks Funding Sources Funding Source Assumptions Amount Parks SDC 90% of SDCs generated within RT 2.0 are dedicated to RT 2.0 $27,597,006 Grants Based on RT 1.0 Funding Plan, plus escalation $1,200,000 Cost Reductions Due to lower costs of privately built parks, design refinements, and/or value engineering, $6,737,420 completed during RT 2.0 Community Plan and/or project build out. Other Other regional, state, or city sources; see below. - Total $35,534,426 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII I 98 Stormwater For stormwater facilities, the Funding surcharge to fund a range of enhanced developers would take on less financial Strategy considers two funding stormwater management efforts. The risk. While some developers could pay approaches. One assumes that each City could allocate money from the more on a per-door basis for stormwater regional stormwater facility identified for Stormwater Fund to build one or more management, the approach will appeal to River Terrace 2.0 will serve a relatively regional stormwater facilities. The City many developers because the cost will be small group of property owners; therefore, would then create reimbursement districts known and fixed in advance rather than those property owners/developers can be to be reimbursed in part or in full as unpredictable,variable, and potentially required to take on all of the associated development occurs. large; and they will not have to initiate and capital costs. Some facilities may be built pay for regional detention facilities. by individual property owners. Others The City could also opt to utilize the CWS may be built via a cost-sharing agreement Regional Stormwater Management Charge by multiple property owners. Still others (RMSC) program. This option will be could be built by one or more"early-in" available because the city will ask CWS to developers who set up a reimbursement approve the River Terrace 2.0 stormwater district that later-in developers must strategy as an approved "sub-basin contribute to. In any case, this approach strategy." In this scenario, CWS could build does not assume any City or public multiple stormwater facilities, serving funding. some or all of River Terrace 2.0, and then be reimbursed by developers via a (RSMC, The second scenario assumes a more similar to a reimbursement fee or SDC. An assertive, pro-development approach RSMC is currently being charged in North by the City and/or Clean Water Services Bethany and CWS is considering applying (CWS). The City recently completed a the approach elsewhere. Stormwater Master Plan. Following on This CWS-led approach should benefit the that plan, the City raised its stormwater City and developers, as both the City and RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 199 Sanitary sewer CWS is the sanitary sewer service provider The City has responsibility for maintaining This funding analysis assumes that CWS for the River Terrace area and funds gravity lines under 24 inches in diameter; pays for most of the sanitary sewer costs projects for gravity sewer lines that and developers built and paid for 10- in River Terrace 2.0. CWS will generate are larger than 12 inches in diameter. and 12-inch lines. The funding allocation significant funds from River Terrace 2.0, The River Terrace 1.0 Funding Strategy identified for River Terrace 2.0 is a primarily via its Sewer Construction SDC. proposed that the CWS Capital Fund continuation of the City's approach in River Developers will pay for the remainder of provide a majority of sanitary sewer Terrace 1.0. costs, associated with collector lines. See funding, and in particular, funding for table below from the Funding Strategy. force mains and pump stations. Table 16-Sanitary Sewer Projects and Costs Lead Agency and Project Total Clean Water Services T2 - River Terrace West (Lower) - Pump Station Service to Local Collector $1,561,640 T4 - River Terrace West (Lower) - Pump Station Service to 24-in Gravity Sanitary Sewer on Roy Rogers Road $2,617,840 Subtotal $4,179,480 Developers T1 - River Terrace West (Upper) - 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to 24-in Trunk $152,100 T3 - River Terrace West (Lower) - 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to River Terrace West (Lower) Pump Station $441,160 T5 - River Terrace South - 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road $265,420 T6 - River Terrace South - 10-in and 12-in Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road to Roy Rogers Road $792,640 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $45,000 Subtotal $1,696,320 Total $5,876,000 RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1 100 Water The City of Tigard is the service provider be paid for and built by developers as for water in River Terrace and is expected development occurs; in some cases to fund and build project Reservoir 19, developers will be eligible for SDC credits as it is a large project that will serve River for oversize costs. One variation may be Terrace 2.0 and other areas. This project project P2, which is a 16-inch water line is in the City's 2020 Water System Master be constructed largely within existing Plan and the City is best positioned to roadways, including the Roy Rogers and collect fees from the multiple service Schools Ferry(arterial) rights of way. For areas to fund it. Funds for this project are this project, it may make sense for the City expected to come from a combination to construct this improvement and create of water utility fees and water SDCs. A either a reimbursement district or City conceptual split-with 30 percent of funds water meter fee surcharge to recoup the coming from utility fees and 70 percent cost. of funds coming from water SDCs is anticipated based on the cost split shown in the River Terrace 1.0 funding strategy. For the remaining water infrastructure projects identified for River Terrace 2.0, the Funding Strategy assumes they will RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1 101 Potential Phases of Development Development in River Terrace 2.0 will most likely occur in In River Terrace 2.0, readiness indicators are primarily phases; the timing of those phases will be dependent on many focused on the extension of public water, sanitary sewer and factors including overall economic and market conditions, transportation infrastructure to serve new development. property owner readiness, construction costs and City priorities, among others. As an indicator of potential phasing, Figures 22 and 23 show the varying levels of readiness for this plan evaluates development"readiness" based on physical River Terrace West and South, on a scale of 1 to 4. Generally, factors that may make development more or less challenging a readiness level of 1 means that area is essentially ready (and therefore, more or less expensive)to implement. for development now; public infrastructure is available and could easily be extended to serve new development there. A level of 4 means that significant and potentially challenging infrastructure improvements are needed before development can occur in that area. . 2 Oil" \..._._ . °'Lf `i1 ' ..4 n I. r ' •4 ! F 4 Laiiiiillipp , ._34 Y J Y Figure 22-River Terrace West Readiness Figure 23-River Terrace South Readiness RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1 102 River Terrace West Readiness Assumptions River Terrace South Readiness Assumptions Upper Tier 1: Most of this subarea can be served by Tier 1: This area is a relatively narrow sliver of land on the existing sanitary sewer pump station located in the the eastern edge of River Terrace South that could be existing River Terrace East development. Water for most served by existing sanitary sewer in W 150th Ave. Water this area will be provided from an extension of existing connections will be to an existing facility in Bull Mountain service in SW Scholls Ferry Road. Road. Upper Tier 2: Sanitary sewer will flow north to an existing Tier 2:This area extends north of Beef Bend Road to an main in SW Scholls Ferry Road. The extent of developable east-west line roughly parallel with SW Lasich Lane. It land will be determined by topographic constraints. There extends from SW Roy Rogers Road eastward to a point will likely be some challenges to providing sewer service where topographic constraints make sewer service toward the southern edge of this subarea. Water service connection back to Beef Bend Road costly, requiring deep to this area is available via extension of service from SW lines or a separate pump station. This area will gravity Scholls Ferry Road. flow to a future line in Beef Bend Road, then west to Roy Rogers Road and south to the existing River Terrace South Middle Tier 1: This small subarea adjacent to existing pump station. Proximity to Roy Rogers Road and the River Terrace development could be served with existing pump station will have an impact on the cost of infrastructure by linking back to existing development to extending services to parcels north and east. Water will the east, connecting to the existing pump station in River be provided by new system extensions in Beef Bend Road Terrace. Water service will be provided from an extension and the future extension of River Terrace Boulevard from of future service in Roy Rogers Road. the north. Lower Tier 4: Extending Sanitary sewer and water Tier 3:Two subareas are labeled as Tier 3, the areas north system infrastructure to this area is challenging. The and east of Tier 2.The eastern portion is topographically lower portions could require one or more pump stations constrained and will require deep lines or separate pump to pump back uphill to an existing force main in Roy stations to reach Beef Bend Road. The northern portion Rogers Road, or a costly extension across a drainage that of Tier 3 will gravity flow to Beef Bend. For both areas, the separates the two portions of this subarea. Water service availability of water will depend on future development in will be provided from an extension of future service in Roy Beef Bend and Roy Rogers Roads. Rogers Road. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1 103 Housing Policy and Actions Key messages from the 2021 Housing Needs Analysis highlight Strategies Tigard can explore to better encourage middle the need for: housing development, including affordable middle housing • Increased capacity to accommodate projected growth development, include: • Affordable options in all neighborhoods • Revise System Development Charge (SDC) Structure.Tigard • A diverse housing mix to meet resident needs on price and could revise its SDC structure to reflect different costs for preference different unit types and sizes, thereby reducing charges for smaller home types. Under the revised structure, SDCs would • Proactive approaches by the City to achieve housing goals vary by square footage, with larger homes having higher SDCs. As highlighted throughout this document, housing is a • Develop a City-Supported Loan Program for Small Housing Types. Using construction excise tax (CET)funds, affordable foundational element of the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan; it housing bonds, or other funding, the City could fund a is the primary reason this work is being done. Planning for a revolving short-term construction or bridge loan fund for small new neighborhood that integrates a broad range of housing developers building affordable or market-rate middle housing choices and offers affordable options for all household incomes who are not otherwise able to access more conventional forms requires special implementation considerations. The Housing of financing. chapter(Chapter III) of this Concept Plan includes strategies for accommodating affordable housing throughout the River • Market Middle Housing Opportunity to Small Housing Terrace 2.0 neighborhood. This section highlights additional Developers. Similar to the recommendation related strategies that will support the housing objectives inherent to outreach to LIHTC developers,Tigard could develop to this work. These strategies are taken largely from the 2021 relationships with affordable and market-rate developers with Housing Needs Analysis (HNA)that was prepared for Tigard by a history of successful middle housing development in metro Mosaic Community Planning. Portland. The City could develop a packet of information about available development assistance (SDC waivers, loan programs, etc.) and vision for middle housing in the city, including prime areas like River Terrace 2.0, the Washington Square Regional Center, or the city's urban renewal districts. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1104 • Incentivize Attached or Detached ADU Development on The 2021 HNA also recommends implementing amendments Existing Single-Family Home Lots. Tigard could consider for the Tigard Comprehensive Plan that will serve to support extending the SDC exemption for accessory dwelling units of the housing concepts established in this Concept Plan. Those 1,000 square feet or less past its sunset date or making the amendments include the following policy language: exemption permanent as the City of Portland did in 2018. Tigard could also collaborate with local nonprofits such as • The City shall continue to develop, dedicate, and administer Craft3 to provide affordable loans to homeowners interested in funding resources (such as the Construction Excise Tax adding an ADU to existing single-family home lots. Craft3's loan and others)to support affordable housing for rental and programs offer interest rates that vary by household income, homeownership, including new construction and preservation with the lowest rates for homeowners who agree to rent their of existing affordable housing. ADU at an affordable rate to households with incomes less • The City shall provide opportunity for a mix and range of than 80% of the area median. housing types and sizes in all low- and medium-density residential areas, including single detached houses, accessory dwelling units, quads, cottage clusters, courtyard units, and rowhouses. • The City shall enact policies that provide for equitable housing opportunity without discrimination or disparity based on tenure, familial status, or household composition of the occupants of any type of housing. • The City shall encourage the development of mixed-income neighborhoods and ensure opportunity for economic mobility and intergenerational wealth through affordable homeownership programs. RIVER TERRACE 2.0 CONCEPT PLAN CHAPTER VII 1105 More Planning to Come Once the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan is adopted and • ':fir�w...�,,h, ; t' approved by Metro,the urban reserves will be brought into ; Teo ( .'f . ': -‘,. y � the UGB and additional planning can occur. In the next phase, the City will prepare a community plan for River Terrace 2.0 j i.‘ +j that will build from, and refine, the work done as part of this h`• t4. �', *.+ :' Concept Plan. Similar to the concept planning phase, theIL r� .� w -- iV:, . community plan will engage a broad and inclusive group of " 0 .' '. " ., 1h .1` stakeholders and residents to prepare a more detailedguide �° �� :� t P P i � t o ,' . for future development in this area. . �` "" i ..- -,••=n--,,i• . i f Z. 14;,0=, 74" The community plan will: iiiiiiiir,_ ,.. • Create a neighborhood master plan that is informed by the i work in the concept plan /I ?' • Further refine housing strategies, including affordable t , '`A,. housing strategies �',ir � i • a' I ' ' • Explore zoning concepts, articular) for housing provision '`' `` 14 ... '� �_ p g p particularly g p ' � `�� • �.r ... and design .fir-,;" ' . . ' • Conduct additional transportation analyses and identify - ' street alignments and cross sections - IIIIIIMM • Refine project lists for public improvements and fundingar * ' ' ' . : ,ii -- ` . approaches , ,:,� r . ._ win, , , '40, :,,,,..; • Determine details for parks and trails (size, type and ir, ,� . `' f, • ,- , ' Al locations) • Once a community plan is developed and adopted by the City, __ ,_-..J.",, _ .1 f' �''''' '� % . annexation can occur and zoning can be applied to land within ., ',�--= _ . River Terrace 2.0. Ultimately, development will occur through ,> `'"' ik ;.{��, ; ., . ` land divisions, planned unit developments and site design . review. ' in• ", " t li-frig.ri;;Ift.;iii041-g;;;:,'s.„1,1 . • , . : F', tv.,..0 „,,ipiim.„..,:,_ . ... , ---, ..... '-he ”-- r 7:..-.1/4•"".....te•'.• ' 'gl • ' :;%•fr ;.°0'.%'' % .i'. '; i''.ie ' " ' .';''"' "'iv - . , It .."•. "0, 'of : I,•:;:rtt' . •IP ''' . • r „. • ;-3 ..,_. .". ** 1' jet • ..' f f•i!„ic .„.•,„_ • $ .1 , 4 • o • y .• p r A 1 ri,41.f IP ii- ...p 0 •fl:7" 7..* * ! V 4'70; p i 9 1$11 it.6,1t.ir 'P 't, .•PA? -. r. ......f4AAA...:., ..f,..-..:„‘-'4...,(:::, ro- •-z, Ae li''.0.$'1'. 6 ' . :. : ' :',' i' ..: r • ' .ç &'6,1 ,..,,,- .1r- II:. it.re•I'''... , -' . -.'-.. ••••1 .. : ...i , ..,Ff.. •• .!. .;, "i:'. ; r;ii IV -" b•z„ ..., ii•6.! •o• iv • • jet' •• '•'t , ••;', , • v.g., r• t..,-, I,,, ;4,4.. • .•• „..P.I.r• , , ••-' ......-, ---4, . Ifs. ,. . ,., r .„ , . ,' .i • F• ' .5jer4,4• • -•%* 1_' '•t!I . ..:.- !• Z". : , ,; ,. I • •T • 4 . 11 ..--- ...*, .. . ,1„„ - -•`....... '-r:I.4>It`'• I .'''' 4'kil „. wi „ - . ...'„:. . /, • -• '.4-1-'4'4.'"''-zc14-41,v;; tilv't tr../.• ' ,"111,.• :...../.',j, , : ' . -•° oP *.,# ..6 .Np..0 Volrir 14 „,i • •„r :k., A :,t, .., , jv P. , .4, • . r.,:... .irp I 4, 4 I P. • ..,ff :,,rf,:: ; , . ' .••••.• jp '.0.$ ilk. .e p. r.,...... .. ....0-...4<, • ;2? T.,! 01•001.0, 4 •• ; •....;•! 11 f'' , • . . . ' r •,.° • -: 0? i *.s'.• ;Ir. ' k- s. t$ .f iv., ' 0; 1 '• ' • •• 4 P, iip ••.• •g 1 . ' p : • "5"- - .t --- -10.1 •'' 1,1P.1••". ; 1." , .r:ti,„ ..„ FP . , ... ' I.,...,I • I., ..orn, 1. • 0. , •' fl r• ' t..1;6.-c.,;_, 4i' ' .. l 4", i' 'p:' 'or,, • • . P• •41 S.P,!.44.• ..01. •....-•.:-.-i:_'. • ,•r v f r : : • - P • •P.; .•! P P ' • •., . ..-" * .•..'"..1, •f r.' ' • • . . .r. ...ru, r: , -' A..-,,.. • - : -;=' I• -••.;„ -:r4. ,,r ; ; .ok- - -., ......—r.)-• ;'• 'S. r • , P 'r • -:.-,-_,4 . 4.,,, - %,--• •ro ••... 4... : V - • P ' " -."7- , p • - - •.- 1 ' • ' 0 , 0.0 P 0 0 •'I'. I ' P l• )'• ' 1•):'• * !', r t b • , p r , i.... .„,..- ' ..rif •:r t, . .42 , • .. , r t . "., P ., • 154 ..,:. -'!--' •' .. - .,. 4, r.: .rr' •.f• -.Vet' # • oi . .- -• ....,- p-vp - p • .• p I,-r A I p • I 'It oy --.. •• ' _ " • .1,• ; •.:„.;,. i„, i, irr OP ' i#r ' . . .• % •-+T:j i. •• " . . ,'..Ve ti j q ;i . ; l * •• *•• f•..,...,-, • p . -c; ...,' -.. • 1•Pt.,• • ti r „ , ...A"' r 'ry.fr • .r.'.' , t 1.11 P A p Oa. P • , .. . p„0 ,,* p , 01,:p , ,..1.51,1„1 - . P,.p,,,.1Pri!'.. , p'00p$: r , . Pp rc ,:1: or * 0 . ' .4 , 7t14 • , , ' :' . r ,pr ,. .. „„ I, r . ; , * '• ...• ; :I" i , 4 14! d dS#P4 . • p I. .0. ....• _..r. . .., °. .. ' -1r. •••,"4rrr- o r Afr P 0 _PP "•: -„Apr ika,..k., i - r•••••` r• tn, 0 I p, . , r • A„ r . . .-„,... .': • • ,p-„, !?..., `• 0'' r •' q ' . , A i„', •# ,, r•;0 of„ . 0 , nif F , ; •••r*. p 9 .,_' ip ' 4. " „ ,,Pis 1. , *a I,. • or ••• i k • . l', ! 0 err • . Pr 1,7 iv* • 4 k, - .44. 7 . r P ,r r. 0 le P • * P P r r • 1p., p,i• -.pp_ • I' ° i • , r :i." ' •r 1:•• ' ''' •Isr4i r , Jo •ip. - -,,,, •-• ,. ' Poi - , - - if • - _ 0 r f ''• J,•0 •P• 0 • . .0.11,. -.... .... 404 . p.: F • or '¢ "if pr•-i-4,1. -..' ' - ,,e0.. 00 , •/1•" p , r. • V P r s,';op, , 1 0 .N(' -- - yi.•— ,c,. _ ir , -'-' •.,,..- • ,_ v r IF Ai ; k f4, 7 7 i'l• — - • pp ,f', ipoiff 0 . -4.•,„*54,—w,.. . • _ u.,,,,,c,. ,., .... UNA ,..-.' , , ,10,,, , „ ,.. tr PPS ' '2.... 1..• rl Po P - ..t. ...-„....., .. „...- . . 1'.- -0-i., - ---•,''`v...-.,--‘.; z,- : - , ,• ... ;'- -...-e•---5- .i,,, - . ----...- - • YIN'. •4, ...:.• •• .. ,,• .,-**-- - .. -Ne • . • ...le 1 Pt=f , t I ..-= 4ii:',; .• 4..±....„ ...- •?Illik.: ' 111111 . 4 i-. '-- •;••••.- '', ' • • „re '', '. •'I , ."" -•7' - • • . ' c•''':: r•L••••'.,•%-- -"--zk.1. • , , ' ' - - 1., ' ,. ' . ./.,,,...- '•setl.%,. AL' 1----- ' ' .- " • ' 4r.-=',.'' • . 4„...... •'...-.1--%'-.44r-r '' :'..c.-e,-w.„.• -.,-e:-.7 - ..4:5-e-45• - _.......,..•.. .... _ - --- -• .. ....lot" - _.......',A,,. _ _ . _ -, -re 4&.., --.- "A„. molt 'r'`'IL ..„1-..:44. 4r'r"•- _ ___ , __ - _ - 1.4144..ct * ' 4 4'"•:-'.",.. ;5.-.- . .;*.'-'01 ' .4\ 41 . —4 , 4'1. 1`..%An 'If -•-Pi- - . ...PfTP..'••••- •np-,_ ... „-•• ••••••••......-.1-a-•• • - _ ••,• t , UM 11.1. ' • %" ' '16. 1... t '."'•.. '741141*. ... • ... .' • ''''.( .6-;jii,.._•tE .• VIVI _ l'i"..... .............". P••••• - ' '. leAe ..‘... -.11P.1/4 -A7."•IC4` ' .:‘. ". ' ......6,r.7.1t li: .•• '• - -• - - ot ..- 4, -4s • '',...f. t. s- -,• ..--.•—..—... _ . • Atli . , -...% .1.• \ \ \ lov,i ,Aii,:, . . .. __ =_ ..e_6,,,.";',,';':....•-.,_.<:-..- - Ava i r 'a . . . ., ••• • • 4., 1. •N::•.. ,, tt -*-, • •*"4'•''t.:-..• '- '' . • .....1.,,e.: ••t '.4..;_i'. 4-ZNIO••::15,-.1 ..,...‘, .. .j.,• • -P iirip,;;;:......:,...• ,...a.iSP.Ark..'`.......i-...1 \ ‘ - '.- \46,4''P N1 \ \t_. - '-''''b'....... ...- " • .,, .PP•. " P 0 n'6.L......7%'''.. - ''N%'': , -S . \ .6 .• \ • •,, -- • .. 6 .I. '.- "Orf to' •''''‘r......, \ - t•14:_i' -17 t .. . .. _ , • 410.,.......„42;.% " ".7.'t '',.. . . 1k7.... '.-.•'- 4, ' . Ilk .k. . .421'••:- \\\ -",••,... la . '15. %NIX '‘‘I. \ .N.S2.\''N.:.:4No: --- 1:1: ( - t:." `''4:1;..::)454j.-:..-Al?. -: :A}..-i' N' . . 4.'•-'" 11004, . \\ • •••-•,. .%. •, , 'S N, Na\ .14 i . . , :r1 7,,...,....:„..:,... ... ,,,,:..._ , -.),t,... 'a.,_ .._ .-,..... _ / , II ie•A,.,..4,•-,,, • . ' I I • ' d ...., .... I. il› b.' • k‘‘I‘T\1 ‘ •i' I 1 ; • •.'L'AVt‘...t •,,..._.• P • ., 4 41.41.11• .va;:.„"A'F.d.'.- -fri,',,'-'cr 4i-f ›,,,4 ,.., . .. !- . - 4' .. .im,,,, „..7-..\:-. , '. :,,.,r. .-.0.il:' ',..., -41)5, L‘,., #1,•� r i` *"��`^ .. iS -a''f'f-L''C!!''�FF.Ff . + !; ••?a :.Y ,y ' f4 5 ti. M . irost 7:;:izi:•05: •. Lp, ..; ... ..[t, ,+ GF { r +"•f I �f lifirkip RI� } Rys 6t1- IP •', i i .. - .. Wii `i : � - r 0 .,Vio IlLatixs. 1 • d kilo . • . . 1•117, . • ''''. alb 4 . , ) i 1 4 . A. n., 44 � it I - r i+it # .'r Li.* I. . t •Wil, , .•F # J 41_f .4'1`r ' • - - ....1. •• .4.• .--titirta i- ct ..., 4,,I, , ' .r4tZiji '• 11" , 1 IY.�' ''71t 17,41 , ,._ '^ Y. t ` '.• i ..- .. ; ' tia,5:��{ r1• ' )•i4 • 1�• ; � • ;, ,14 ! } F Cf t. . r`1, .7 , p p r + i II' SDI •.. . • . .i. :. • • - , •- wir ' i illap , i c.: rir ••••.! ...a_• ii. -a, 4144 "dr ' , i.e. • A .0....ir:jr, .., /_ . . ,.., Jt ir F . ' . ."_i..4,4 •. *A. ' Li`. . - .,'; '.' ..- r ,-rmpt - .. 441 d. .: .g , • ip it,. 4, -li I :t1, . i,./i .._ .4,",k,,,h,g', 0,P1'•'V t t.--..- -'-' •".‘ at :Pe r, '.. .fi-14'... $. 0 . 1:' .' 11.. - °. % '" _ 1,. * - w. r ti* _ ' ;• '� • + : 4....'fi,3'''y '11 ■.�"4.-`'` }' .tI J.-}7,i f iv I '} a ..,....::10.... ' +�' k r ti# ,�,'' L F'i I y,yy'•`#'Z -moi, tj • .d ,4 .,r4 :# F .." .•+ "k' '7, - iRI P. 1 4 .�7 f1t.;� kLf�:,..._iii" `• ..r `:.1 * M`r a rr�. �ti 1.1,41:'"I Otak jla �., Pub!c1n nE eniw+ T1GARD 1� �1/-{'°`� �� - , hr.ra-,ohry cr.., 111 :10i) AL� River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan PUBLIC OUTREACH EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Tigard conducted public outreach between October 2020 and March 2021 to share information about the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Planning project and to gather input from Tigard residents, stakeholders and interested parties to understand the near-and long-term goals of the community related to housing, economic development, and public amenities. Feedback received through this outreach period helped the City of Tigard and its consultants to refine and create the Concept Plan for River Terrace 2.0. Over 300 people were engaged through a variety of outreach opportunities. These opportunities, as well as highlights from the feedback received, are summarized below. Opportunities for engagement - survey to determine housing preferences and needs (126 participants) - online open houses offered in English and Spanish with a total of 159 responses �, r:_ o Online open house #1 participation: 125 participants - provided comments in English with 99 unique viewers, 2 participants provided comments in Spanish with 69 unique viewers � •„ �� o Online open house #2 participation: 32 responses in English —"""-m with 290 unique viewers, 0 responses in Spanish with 11 unique viewers ti •'_ m - drop-in office hours with the City's Project Manager to discuss .f; t ilk the project (9 participants) - 5 Community Advisory Committee meetings with 13 members, that included Spanish language interpretation and translated materials - 1 Spanish-language focus group with 14 participants - meetings with community organizations (St. Anthony's Church and CPO 4) to discuss and solicit feedback about the project project website on Engage Tigard that received 818 unique page views River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan: Public Outreach Summary 1 Otak jia T1GARD ��. Publiclmnhrmeat How engagement opportunities were promoted - Overview video about the project Hier or,•.n Terrace 2,a • - Project overview insert in Tigard Life try - Cityscape articles - Social media posts on the City of Tigard Facebook page, • �trnrGPenHMI.Fie.[FOUSI, I.Y,JUW.n 711 ' Nextdoor, Twitter, and Instagram J it Weigi inDe*.br.y112 - Updates on the project website • * Tr. Cosa rain..,Linen.•N Mr.,S,r,Sc.21 d..n.r.t - Postcards mailed to over 27,000 City of Tigard residents - Emails sent to interested parties, stakeholders, and eis.tr+rtx-e.p community organizations - Press releases for the online open houses - Media coverage in Tigard Times publication - $20 gift cards were provided to 20 random participants of the housing survey Key themes of what we heard Most people agreed that the project vision for River Terrace 2.0 describes a great neighborhood. Project vision statement: `River Terrace 2.0 is a neighborhood for everyone and a complete community.It offers housing opportunities to the full diversity of Tigard's families and households. This community is made complete by providing space for small businesses and a thriving local economy,a variety of housing options,and accessible parks and open spaces. The transportation system treats all modes equally,with walking and biking trails throughout the community,a road system that emphasizes safety and regional access,and a development pattern that supports an efficient public transit system.Public spaces and parks offer places for the community to gather. Natura areas are protected and enhanced to emphasize habitats and scenic views.Public utilities are designed to maximize cost-efficiency and long-term fiscal sustainability. The costs of necessary infrastructure are shared in an equitable manner." People think that a great neighborhood: - Includes accessible commercial areas and - Includes community services within grocery stores walking distance - Has smaller scale retail that serves the - Fosters community neighborhood - Promotes diversity - Has unique characteristics - Has affordable and creative housing options, with a mix of housing sizes �.! 0 - Provides housing options for seniors and disabled people - Has good schools that are not overcrowded - - Is quiet, safe, and has well-lit streets ,' - Provides access to nature = I - Li? - Is climate resilient "°�- - -� -� �-° ��••�� - Has protected bike lanes and separate bike paths - Provides adequate public transit River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan: Public Outreach Summary 2 . • Otak ' j.ia TIGARD People were concerned about: - Whether or not there would be a mix of - Housing density and houses being too housing types or if the neighborhood close together would truly be diverse - Traffic congestion and increased noise - Road, public transit, and bike path pollution connectivity within and external to the - Lost agricultural space neighborhood - Not having enough small businesses in the neighborhood Additional Feedback Themes - Most respondents agreed that Tigard needs a greater variety of �� ; housing types, Tigard lacks affordable housing, and that single \ \ people and families have difficulty finding affordable housing. - People want the concept plan to feel "balanced" and to provide access to nearby nature or include "feathered edges" along the outskirts of the neighborhood. Who we heard from Community Advisory Committee: 13 Community Advisory Committee members, 3 of which identify as Hispanic or Latina/Latino and are native Spanish-speaking community members. Online Open Houses: The majority of participants identified as white. The second largest racial or ethnic identity selected was Asian. While over half of respondents were 50 years old or older, about a quarter were between the ages of 18 and 39. More than half of all respondents had a household income of$75,000 or above, owned the place where they lived, and lived in Tigard. Who supported project outreach - City of Tigard staff - JLA Public Involvement - Otak Team - Verde What's next? The public adoption process of the concept plan will begin in late Spring, early Summer 2021. Afterwards, the City will begin creating the community plan for River Terrace 2.0, which will include several opportunities for public engagement. River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan: Public Outreach Summary 3 Tr.. . • 41 al s!',1•.:... A9c.).-.-Fri,'-s,,,._.-"74 ' .14 >444," - . - 4' , :i, tF le. 4� y .7:,%., } a , h.4)._.... yry ` ,�/ ` { �, I 0 ,1 1 _f-Y i` *"��`^ i +pi,+S�. -a.'ff','C!!''�FF.FfI. + !; '•?" ':.Yii«.� ,y ' •f41 # 5 tit M }' . ,i, ' .1{ •a . - ' , fir, •. 1'. 3 ,' - - - JJ . . i} 10 + * ._ , * ,•may Ike ; k s Y • �' 1 � - _ - �� 1.: n .•o_. i : j • A i - - • ' `r _ -7-1' I.1;; * 4 " FBF 'i . I i 4I� } 'Jiys� - ^' • y, .10 * r .1 ' "I r .. f,,,„--„I ., : ..,4, .„ . ..., , .N 1 • iirii, • 4) ki V, 17 rid.- ,, • ,,. - a=- • '41.4"14441 i t Wil, • a•, * « Ate' �`. 1.•-sIfr 'ri iiL i.t 1- '..-glov‘ , i- 'I. ..ev. iv ii itki ir , itt .. ' ;7, . ,,A 7, , .,. .. . l f 1 ' • *c K l �►;¢! SF # ftia.ti:� i.. ' )�4 �' ' �. tel � t ` *.i •� .. ` ' {14. 4 • a i.1 1 :a-' , }tc' - +t:rJ � i vt 4 L.: ..._ i ir il it,. ", r. : . - arr''k`- - - r4)2 il ,.. 40; .i., r: 'LIN, !I, 4. I r ,t _ ,...3.; �. :( ', � ' .'f.••• * i`. Y7, re • ' ' ,e r r r At-.14 , ...- , -... .,.. 1, , . ....., . tn, i i v.v. ,:. ,_06.i , , .. , , . ., it: .,,.. 7,-.4 ilt..Aft.r• ;III ,. . * � ' +' 'r' 1' ,i � _ mak *' I. i ' 1,4 , illi, it r • • _ I#` ti w. �, * - r ice' s -�' t . f I>r 1114 'h "1* a ' .7 ..i a �` ,P'i I , K Ny}`#z ` W . Il' le • ' , r '1, l'.#4 + U l • +f yM '!. -' AL, • .'fir. 7s h ,' .y�r�.i * fid,. iiipli +A' 'a, ,',P.,• /,r4 :# F .j,, + •`k' 'a _ • iR i. IP , 1 4 ..�7 f1h;) wit: ' I ar ,.4 •1 yid M`t e *�. '` ' .L �ti tl{It 4114. , 'r `h .i .. i +' •- • ti!~moi ... # �RfiR .!f '�J. r ,i RIVER TERRACE 2 .0 CONCEPT PLAN IN • TIGARD PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT & COMMUNICATIONS PLAN Prepared for: Otak and City of Tigard Prepared by: JLA Public Involvement 921 SW Washington St, Ste 570 Portland, OR 97205 j1- Pabik Involvement September 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 Project Overview 3 Project Objectives 3 Project Area 3 Anticipated Project Timeline 4 Demographic Data Review: Title VI Populations 4 How This Information Informs Public Engagement 4 Total Population 5 Age 5 Sex 6 Disability 6 Race & Ethnicity 7 Language Spoken at Home 8 Income & Poverty Status 9 How does this analysis inform outreach? 10 Public Involvement Purpose and Goals 10 Community Input Desired 11 Key Messages 12 Outreach Schedule 14 Concurrent Efforts and Coordination 15 Key Stakeholders 15 Project Team Member Roles and Responsibilities for Public Involvement 16 Technical advisory committee 16 Community advisory committee 16 Public Involvement Strategies and Schedule 17 Measurements and Monitoring Outreach Activities 21 INTRODUCTION This Public Involvement and Communications Plan (PICP) will guide stakeholder and public involvement during the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Planning project. The PICP reflects commitments from the City of Tigard, Otak, and JLA Public Involvement to carry out public involvement activities designed to keep stakeholders and the broader public engaged and informed about the project and its goals. This project presents an opportunity to create a vision for growth and transformation of the River Terrace 2.0 areas that can improve the way people move through and live in Tigard. To implement an effective plan, public input is crucial for understanding the near-and long-term goals of the community related to housing opportunity, economic development, and public amenities. PROJECT OVERVIEW Project Objectives The primary objectives of the Project are: • Identify a diverse mix of housing types including a variety of prices, sizes and types that can fit within integrated neighborhoods. • Implement a transparent and inclusive process that incorporates meaningful input from a wide range of community members and stakeholders. • Create an infrastructure strategy that provides for efficient extension of services and is coordinated with surrounding jurisdictions to establish regional solutions. • Integrate transportation network planning that weaves together neighborhoods, commercial centers, parks and open spaces and provides a multi-modal approach to movement through and around the planning areas. Ultimately, the transportation network should work towards making Tigard the most walkable city in the Pacific Northwest. • Identify important natural resources that should be protected, enhanced and integrated into public life. • Create a market analysis that highlights the best mix of uses for both planning areas and the viability of a town center. • Consider opportunities that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote sustainable urban living with housing types, building materials, and connections to the places people go. • Develop an implementation plan that is achievable, grounded in financial reality, and that meets the city's goals and policies. • Carry forward all of the above objectives with a creative and innovative approach that feels unique and inspiring to the Tigard and River Terrace communities. PROJECT AREA There are two primary focus areas for this Concept Plan, outlined in red on the map below. The plan will consider opportunities for both the western and southern portions of River Terrace, and how they connect to the larger area and region. (map shown on next page) 3 ''.-----,z._/ IKIN'[ON ! ' i } F ' " ''25 FiuLn✓a Siux1 I �/ z I !._.* E each P15.1 5 ve>4--___ Wu*kor I I cJ1 7 a •a ( I 3E ia /„... -, I' sosgr • III 1. - f I - t I1. I ' 41:14P) I.— �yiyr.i._.i I I\ t if r ,•' w .r Anticipated Project Timeline This effort is anticipated to take 12 months and will conclude early summer 2021. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA REVIEW: TITLE VI POPULATIONS As part of the outreach to engage citizens and stakeholders in the River Terrace 2.0 Concept Planning project, the project team will make special efforts to involve historically underrepresented groups as well as the priority populations recognized by the 1994 Executive Order (E.O.) 12898. The demographic data below compiles Census tracts within Tigard, Washington County, and the state of Oregon overall. The following demographic analysis used various tables from the 2013-17 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) estimates and population forecasts from the Population Research Center at Portland State University. How This Information Informs Public Engagement Demographic information can inform the best ways to engage the various community groups that live within a project area, including language translation and interpretation needs, public engagement activities that match the community's age and/ or backgrounds, and providing appropriate accommodations for disabilities. The following demographic data includes information about Washington County to reflect the needs of those who may relocate to Tigard in the future as the overall population in the region grows. Note: The percentages included in this report are estimates incorporated by Data USA, a comprehensive website and visualization engine of public US Government data, and the American Community Survey(ACS), the premier source for detailed population and housing information in the US. Each number comes with a margin of error, or an over/under range by which the estimate could be off. In some cases, the percentages will not add up to exactly 100% because of this margin of error. 4 Total Population Table 1. Total Population Estimate (Total population) Tigard 55,514 Washington County 601,592 Oregon 4,217,737 Data from the Census Bureau (July 2019) Age The median age of Tigard is 37 years with 45% of its population falling between age 25 and 54. This percentage is consistent with Washington County (44%) and the state of Oregon (40%). The percentage of the population of 65 and older are 14.8% for Tigard, 13.5% for Washington County, and 17.7% for Oregon as a whole, similar to the percentages of individuals between age 5 and 17. Table 3. Age Tigard Washington Oregon County Total 55,514 601,592 4,217,737 population < 5 years 6.6% 6.0% 5.5% 5-17 years 15.4% 16.9% 15.3% 18-24 years 8.3% 8.3% 8.7% 25-34 years 18.3% 15.8% 14.1% 35-44 years 14.7% 14.8% 13.3% 45-54 years 11.9% 13.3% 12.4% 55-59 years 7.0% 5.7% 6.4% 60-61 years 2.7% 1.7% 2.7% 62-64 years 3.6% 3.5% 4.0% 65-74 years 8.7% 8.2% 10.7% 75 + years 6.1% 5.3% 7.0% Median Age 37.7 36.9 39.6 Data from the Census Bureau 2018 ACS 5-year Estimate. 5 Sex There are slightly more females than males in Tigard, Washington County, and the entire state of Oregon. Table 4. Sex Tigard Washington Oregon County Total population 55,514 601,592 4,217,737 Male (%) 49.4% 49.5% 49.6% Female (%) 50.6% 50.5% 50.4% Data from the Census Bureau 2018 ACS 5-year Estimate. Disability Tigard has a higher percentage of people living with a disability (11%) than Oregon overall (10%) and a lower percentage than Washington County (14%). The most common types of disability in this area are difficulty with walking (ambulatory difficulty) and cognitive difficulties, closely followed by those with an independent living difficulty. These percentages are similar for Washington County and the state of Oregon. Table 5. Disability Characteristics Tigard Washington Oregon County Total population with a disability 11.0% 14.0% 10.0% With a hearing difficulty 3.6% 4.6% 2.9% With a vision difficulty 1.7% 2.3% 1.8% With a cognitive difficulty 5.3% 5.9% 4.5% With an ambulatory difficulty 5.3% 7.0% 4.8% With a self-care difficulty 1.8% 2.6% 2.0% With an independent living difficulty 5.0% 6.2% 4.6% Data from the Census Bureau 2018 ACS 5-year Estimate. 6 Race & Ethnicity The predominant race and ethnicity for Tigard, Washington County, and Oregon is White (Non-Hispanic), with White (Hispanic) and Asian (Non-Hispanic) as the second and third highest percentiles. The percentage of individuals representing the Black or African American race and ethnicity make up less than 2% of the population in Tigard and the state of Oregon, with Washington County at around 2.5%. As the White (Hispanic) population (8.3%) and the Asian (Non-Hispanic) population (7.4%) are the two highest races and ethnicities other than While (Non-Hispanic), careful planning will be done by the project team to provide information and input opportunities to these communities in meaningful ways. Table 2. Race and Ethnicity Tigard Washington Oregon County Total population 55,514 601,592 4,217,737 White (Non-Hispanic) 73.5% 64.9% 75.1% Black or African 1.8% 2.4% 1.9% American White (Hispanic) 8.3% 10.9% 8.8% American Indian and 0.3% 0.4% 1.0% Alaska Native Asian (Non-Hispanic) 7.4% 10.4% 4.5% Native Hawaiian and 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% Other Pacific Islander Two or More Races 4.8% 4.3% 3.7% (Non-Hispanic) Some other race 2.0% 4.6% 3.1% (Hispanic) Data from the Census Bureau 2018 ACS 5-year Estimate. 7 Language Spoken at Home In Tigard,18.2% of individuals speak a language other than English in their homes. Of the languages spoken by people with limited English proficiency, Spanish is the second most common spoken language (7.5%) followed by Asian and Pacific Islander languages (5.9%). Washington County has slightly higher percentage of Spanish as a spoken language (12.5%), as does the state of Oregon (9.4%). Table 6. Languages Spoken at Home Percentage of population who speak a language other than English Tigard Washington Oregon County English only 81.5% 75.3% 84.1% Spanish 7.5% 12.5% 9.4% Other Indo-European 3.9% 4.3% 2.4% languages Asian and Pacific Islander 5.9% 6.7% 3.3% languages Other languages 1.2% 1.3% 0.8% Data from the Census Bureau 2018 ACS 5-year Estimate. 8 Income & Poverty Status The homeownership rate in Tigard is 60.6%, which is lower than the state's overall average of 61.9% and the Washington County average of 61.1%. Median household income is higher in both Tigard and Washington County as of 2018, compared to the state of Oregon. For Tigard, Washington County, and Oregon, the median annual earnings for females was significantly less than the median annual earnings for males. The percentage of person's living in poverty in Tigard (9.1%) is similar to that of Washington County (8.8%), both of which are lower than Oregon as a whole (12.6%). Table 7. Overview of Housing, Income, and Poverty Status Tigard Washington Oregon County Total households (2014-2018) 21,016 216,507 1,591,835 I � � Owner-occupied housing unit 60.6% 61.1% 61.9% rate (2014-2018) Median household income $75,795 $78,010 $59,393 (2018) Median Annual Earnings $61,621 $63,572 $51,627 (Male) Median Annual Earnings $47,880 $49,023 $43,586 (Female) Percentage of persons living 9.1% 8.8% 12.6% at or below the poverty level Data from the Census Bureau 2018 ACS 5-year Estimate 9 How does this analysis inform outreach? This analysis informs the project team that outreach activities should: • Keep the needs and interests of young families and seniors in mind. • Be sure that online engagement opportunities adhere to ADA requirements and are paired with ways for people to participate without a computer. • Be specific and tailored to reach the Hispanic and Asian communities living in Tigard, and include interpretation in online discussions and translated materials. Outreach materials and activities may also be reviewed by community partners for cultural sensitivities and needs before being released to the public. • Connect with renters and people that may not yet feel connected to the Tigard or River Terrace community. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PURPOSE AND GOALS The purpose of the public involvement program is to share information and gather input from current and potential future residents of Tigard, as well as other stakeholders and interested parties. The project's public involvement and communication goals are to: • Engage the community in ways that energize and inspire them to think about the future of River Terrace 2.0. This is an opportunity for the community to get aspirational, rooted in an understanding of what is realistically achievable and best meets the larger community's goals. • Specifically engage the public to help identify near- and long-term community needs and desires for housing mix, employment centers, transportation options, recreation, and sustainable living options. • Be transparent about the community input opportunities and how feedback will be considered with the Concept Plan. • Communicate complete, accurate, understandable, and timely information to the public throughout the project. • Proactively reach underrepresented community groups by partnering with community organizations to gather input in safe and meaningful ways. • Collaborate with interagency partners and support productive conversations with the Community Advisory Committee (CAC), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Planning Commission, and City Council. • Comply with Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI requirements. • Ensure that the public involvement process is consistent with applicable state and federal laws and requirements, and is sensitive to local policies, goals, and objectives. 10 COMMUNITY INPUT DESIRED The following is a list of the types of input this process will seek out. This list is not comprehensive, nor are these intended to be the exact questions posed to the public. They are the concepts that are essential for the community to weigh in on for a successful Concept Plan. Housing • What is the right mix of housing types, sizes, and prices for these areas? • What makes for a pedestrian-friendly street façade in a residential neighborhood? Transportation • In what ways can multi-modal transportation options better connect neighborhoods to commercial centers, parks and open spaces? • What makes for a successful multi-modal network? What kinds of infrastructure and amenities are needed to make users feel safer and more likely to use active transportation? • What should be considered to encourage movement of vehicles through these areas and prevent further auto congestion? Natural Resources and Access to Nature • What are the important natural resources that should be protected, enhanced and integrated into the concept plan? • What's the right balance of natural and urbanized spaces for these areas? • What's the best way to balance scale and distribution of natural areas and park spaces? Jobs and Economy • What businesses or town center options would be most likely to make these areas thrive? • What makes a commercial area unique or special? • What's the right balance between access, location, and size for commercial areas? Place Making (The following applies to all of the above topic areas) • What would make these areas welcoming and accessible to all? • What treatments or features would help draw people in? Implementatio • What should we build into the plan to help it be successful for the long-term? 11 KEY MESSAGES Throughout the project, the project team will use these key messages in public communications. These messages will be updated as needed to reflect the project's progress. • River Terrace 2.0 —A Neighborhood for Everyone Intro • River Terrace 2.0 is an exciting project that will be the first step in planning for the future of undeveloped land in the city's two urban reserves. • Totaling over 500 acres to the west and south of the current River Terrace, Tigard's newest neighborhood will feature a wider variety of housing options to provide more housing opportunity to a broader range of household types, sizes, and incomes, as well as new roads, recreation, and employment areas. Call to action • Planning a neighborhood for everyone is a big task and we want to hear from you! We're committed to reaching community members of all incomes and backgrounds, including those who are differently abled or who speak other languages. Let us know how we can accommodate you. • Join us in this planning process, speak freely about ideas new and old, and weigh in on the ultimate question... What makes a great neighborhood? • Equity First • It takes great neighbors to make a great neighborhood, and the city is committed to making this area accessible to everyone. This will be accomplished by making equity and inclusion a key component of the planning process, with the goal of ensuring that we develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. • Sketches of Tomorrow • This planning effort will set in place the broad vision for these areas and is the first step in bringing them into the regional urban growth boundary for eventual development. • The project will consider several key topics, such as the right mix of housing size, type, and price, transportation options, connections with natural areas, neighborhood-scale commerce, and more. • The outcome of this work will be a guide for future planning efforts that further refine the vision. • Local and Regional • The plan for these areas will bring together a vision for a neighborhood that is livable, walkable, and equitable. • But it will also plan for its place in the larger regional context, particularly newly-planned areas in King City and Beaverton, as well as connections to regional amenities, transit service, and trails. • As our region changes and evolves, the City of Tigard is preparing to meet the community's housing, commerce, transportation, infrastructure, parks, trails, and natural areas needs. 12 • Project timeline • Through spring 2021, the City of Tigard is creating a Concept Plan for River Terrace 2.0 SUMMER SPRING 2020 2020 2020:21 2021 2021 ■ • • • • N • �... /.! • / Kick-off Preliminary Analysis Alternatives Exploration Alternatives Selection Preferred Alternative i.oi,.rct r.;:f cp.• i Public Adoption Process Our team of technical Background data The planning and Project team,with Technical consultants The Concept The Concept Plan will consultants is gathering and preliminary urban design team will input from a range will refine their analysis Plan Report will go through a public background data and anatyses will develop alternative of stakeholders. and technical reports be developed adoption process at beginning their analyses be synthesized concept plan scenarios will select a to reflect the preferred and reviewed by the City ton transportation network, to provide the for the study area preferredaltemative alternative stakeholders environmental constraints. planning and urban utlllty needs,parks and design team with a open spaces needs, comprehensive took housing needs,market at the study area demands • Thriving neighborhoods for all • The City has adopted housing options in its development code that open the door to a greater variety of housing types, sizes, and prices. Planning for housing diversity in River Terrace 2.0 will be an important goal, but it's not the only one. The concept plan will provide a rough sketch a healthy, equitable, sustainable place to live, including: • Employment areas that consider commercial centers and other places where people will work, to expand economic opportunity and a more livable, walkable neighborhood. • A transportation system that furthers the city's vision to be the most walkable city in the Pacific Northwest, with an expanded network of sidewalks, trails and paths that get people where they need to go. • Transit-supportive development and transit connections to the broader regional transit system that make driving an option, but not a necessity. • Assessment of stormwater and wastewater management options to safeguard healthy conditions within developed areas and surrounding natural areas. • Opportunities to meet the city's strategic vision and state requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. • Collaboration with neighboring planning projects such as King City's Community Plan for King City West, to ensure a seamless and cohesive sense of place identity and quality of life throughout the area. • River Terrace 2.0 will be a neighborhood for everyone by creating a community that serves people at all stages of life and income with diverse housing options. • Housing should include options for homes with smaller footprints and simple construction have seen increased demand in the market as retirees and younger homeowners are seeking smaller, more vibrant, sustainable, and walkable places to live. • This neighborhood will planned to encourage housing opportunity for all. Thriving neighborhoods include a mix of housing that includes different sizes, a variety of types, from single detached houses to apartments and provides options for aging-in-place or starting a 13 family. A range of housing types will offer opportunity to first-time homebuyers, young families, and retirees with a goal to ensure a housing type that fits the need for all stages of life. OUTREACH SCHEDULE The following is the anticipated outreach schedule for this process: OUTREACH HEDULE River Terrace .0 Concept Plan SLIMMER 2020 FALL 2020 Public Public Public Kck OFF Outreach Outreadl Outreach Public outreach begiss- wfvtisthisproject and Aft CA(El(Octabes) hwwcan peopleweigh in_ Vkhxite Storyrnap Ccmmunity gaup Orlin Open House'I outreach Altematives Exploration Outreach xill erplorr alta rertiees aid big ideas •CAIC22 Qimxmbtr) Adeo feria,Neenletter#1.Spari6h- longuage focus grow.Online open Ohlinc Open House 2 h»sac 1 ccrnmunicatiora. Alternatives Selection The public helps na-ow down Semis-ter CC R30e 20211 Newsletter#244sline open '�7� hoax canmuricatians. Preferred Altemative A preferred altcmatve is presented for public far-feedback Newsletter#3.0nlin open hcuse canmsnkatims. • CAC id(Emig February) • Online Open Hausa 3 Concept Pla n A ri,FtCuncept Phar...oil be minted by the Erik.Afro! version%VII be de doped based on dl public input Smkehddtrernaile and eth rcorrmunicatiorr to prcmate final plan. • CNC#t Worth) 14 CONCURRENT EFFORTS AND COORDINATION There are other regionally significant planning projects that have overlapping goals and activities occurring concurrently with this project. It is important to be aware of these efforts to ensure that outreach and messaging are consistent and, when possible, coordinate outreach activities to reduce public confusion and redundancies. These projects include: • Housing Needs Assessment Study (City of Tigard) • Urban Reserves Transportation Study (Washington County) • Tigard Transportation System Plan Update (City of Tigard) • Tigard Parks Master Plan Update (City of Tigard) • Tigard MADE (City of Tigard) • Washington Square Regional Center Plan District Update (City of Tigard) • Tigard Engineering Standards Update (City of Tigard) • Southwest Corridor Light Rail Project (TriMet; specifically, the Shuttle Service study) • King City Master Plan (City of King City) • Multiple Clean Water Services Project Managers from the City of Tigard projects listed above hold weekly coordination meetings to discuss project activities. KEY STAKEHOLDERS The public involvement process will seek to inform and engage the following types of affected and interested people and organizations in the project area: • Tigard residents • Bike and pedestrian interests • Department of Land Conservation and • Transit interests, including current or Development potential passenger transit • Metro • Culturally specific community-based • Washington County organizations serving residents of the • City of Beaverton project area • City of Sherwood • Freight interests • City of King City • Environmental interests • Tigard-Tualatin School District • Accessibility groups • Beaverton School District • Senior services • Clean Water Services • Tourism and recreation interests • Tigard Water District • Housing and community development • Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue interests, including affordable and • Oregon Department of Transportation assisted care housing • Emergency services providers • Tualatin River Keepers • Local event organizers • Tigard elected officials • Recreational interests and recreational • Nearby Washington County residents users • Tigard Technical Advisory Committee • Houses of worship, including those that • Agency partners working on related provide service in multiple languages plans or projects • Area businesses and business organizations 15 PROJECT TEAM MEMBER ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Tigard • Schuyler Warren, Project Manager— Schuyler is providing project oversight to ensure that the project meets project goals of reaching affected community members and organizations within the project areas in meaningful and productive ways. Otak • Serah Breakstone, Consultant Project Manager— Serah is leading the consultant team, providing oversight on the Concept Plan strategy, process and development. Serah will review all public-facing materials prior to being sent to the City. • Ben Bortolazzo, Principal in Charge from OTAK— Ben is providing strategy and quality assurance for all Consultant deliverables. Ben is also leading the design team for the Concept Plan. JLA Public Involvement • Jessica Pickul, Public Involvement Lead —Jessica is overseeing the public involvement plan and engagement activities, including leading the in-person and online project open houses and managing public comments. • Jenny Clark, Public Involvement Coordinator—Jenny is managing the day-to-day coordination of public engagement activities for the project. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE This project will include a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which is scheduled to meet four times during the project duration. The TAC will be comprised of City, County and other agency partners and will provide input on all aspects of the Concept Plan. They will also review project deliverables and provide feedback. It is anticipated these meetings will be held virtually. COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE This project will include a Community Advisory Committee (CAC). The City will lead the formation of the CAC, which will include an application process. There will be five CAC meetings between September 2020 and spring 2021. Each meeting will include a public comment period and be promoted through project communications at least five days prior to each meeting. It is anticipated these meetings will be held virtually. 16 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT STRATEGIES AND SCHEDULE Tool/Activity Description Responsible Anticipated Schedule Party (Lead) Public The PICP outlines public involvement JLA September 2020 Involvement goals, activities and key messages for Communications the project. The PICP will also include Plan (PICP) a demographic analysis of the project area. Social Media The City will develop, host and City of Tigard; Websites in and City Website maintain two sites: support from September 2020 Project website: www.tigard- content JLA to update • or.gov/rt2 Social Media kicks off • Engage Tigard: in Mid-October 2020, www.engage.tigard-or.aov/rt2 with 2 posts related to JLA will create the content and video submissions images for up to 10 social media posts on the City's social media platforms including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Nextdoor. The City will post all final and approved posts. JLA to follow City image design guidelines. Newsletters/ JLA will develop up to 3 newsletters or JLA— design; Newsletter#1: Factsheets factsheets that include a description of City of Tigard — • First draft 10/26 the project purpose, its goals, the printing and • Hits mailboxes timeline, the website, project updates, mailing 11/9 and ways people can provide input. Newsletters will provide an update on Newsletter#2: January the overall project and new 2020 opportunities for community input. Newsletter#3: Late The City of Tigard will print and mail February 2021 newsletters as needed. 17 Tool/Activity Description Responsible Anticipated Schedule Party (Lead) Video Series JLA will produce up to three (3) 3- JLA Solicit videos from minute videos around the topics of 1) community beginning housing, 2) transportation, 3) natural 10/9 resources. Close community Each video will include a project video introduction by City staff and feature submissions10/23 community voices discussing each Videos available to topic, and introduce ideas being public 10/30 considered by the project team. JLA will invite stakeholders to submit videos to be included, as appropriate. Stakeholder Up to 10 emails and 4 press releases JLA to create Email #1: 10/9 (intro, Emails and will be developed with project the content, send videos, upcoming Press Releases overview, updates, and impacts and City to send on outreach) will be sent out to a designated City platforms Email #2: 11/12 (intro, subscriber list managed by the City. online open house Press releases will focus on project launches today) milestones and promoting online open Email #3: 11/19 (online house events. open house still open) Print and Online JLA to develop an advertising strategy JLA to develop At each outreach Media Strategies for each round of public outreach strategy; round (shown on including online and print City to design, schedule graphic) advertisements. Ads may be purchase and considered in The Times, The Tigard place all ads Life, and other local publications. Community A total of 5 virtual CAC meetings will City— Meeting #1: Advisory be held with selected community formation, Oct. 7, 2020 Committee members. JLA will develop the communication; Meeting #2: Late Nov/ (CAC) Virtual agendas and facilitate these JLA— agendas, Early Dec 2020 Meetings discussions. JLA will create meeting facilitation, summaries for each meeting. Meeting #3: Jan 2021 summaries Meeting #4: Feb 2021 Meeting #5: Mar 2021 Technical The City will lead the formation of the OTAK Meeting #1: TBD Advisory Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Meeting #2: TBD Committee and hold a minimum of 4 virtual (TAC) Virtual meetings. OTAK will develop the Meeting #3: TBD Meetings agendas and facilitate these Meeting #4: TBD discussions. Tool/Activity Description Responsible Anticipated Schedule Party (Lead) Community JLA will support the City with JLA Kicks off November Groups community group outreach by sending 2020 Outreach up to 15 customized email updates to key community groups. Key community groups will be identified by both the City and JLA. JLA will organize up to 5 online meetings or phone calls with key community groups and document findings and feedback from these conversations. Spanish- A Spanish-language focus group to be Verde/JLA/ Winter 2020/21 language Focus coordinated by Verde to discuss a City of Tigard Group range of topics to be considered with the Concept Plan. The community partner will recruit community members to a virtual discussion. One $25 gift card will be given to each participant of this discussion (up to 15, managed through RSVP's). Note: This new task would be paid for using the additional grant money from Metro for COVID-19 outreach support. Spanish JLA will hold up to 4 meetings JLA/Verde Calls and meetings to Language (virtually or by phone) to gather begin in November Outreach feedback on key project 2020 considerations from the Spanish- Ongoing, as materials speaking community. are developed Participants will be identified and recruited by Verde and JLA. Additionally, JLA will translate all written communications, including newsletters and mailings, and all online open house advertisements into Spanish. 19 Tool/Activity Description Responsible Anticipated Schedule Party (Lead) Online Open JLA will develop and manage up to 3 JLA At project milestones Houses interactive online engagement (included in schedule opportunities over graphic above) the course of the Project. OOH #1: Launch JLA will produce an event plan for November 12, 2020 each Online Open House event that (post-election) includes key dates, event content, an event promotional strategy and project team member responsibilities. Note: Offering incentives for participation would likely encourage more people to provide input on the process. This new item could be paid for using the additional grant money from Metro for COVID-19 outreach support and managed by JLA. Public JLA will prepare a Public Involvement JLA Summer 2021 Involvement Summary Report summarizing Summary Report outreach activities, input received, and how the input was used and responded to. 20 MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING OUTREACH ACTIVITIES The project team will evaluate the public involvement process on an ongoing basis to determine the effectiveness of the outreach effort. At key milestones, the project team will assess how well the program is meeting the public involvement goals listed in this plan. While evaluation of these goals is necessarily subjective, the team will also consider the following more measurable objectives as the team assesses program effectiveness: • Number of participants that participated in online events and those that provided comments. • Number of comments provided in languages other than English. • Number of website visits throughout the project and during outreach rounds. • Number of people who have signed up for the project stakeholder list. • Number of project comments received (phone, email, comment cards, online). • Whether the comments are relevant to the project (indicates project understanding). • How project decisions have been modified as a result of public input. If the original outreach approaches prove to be unsuccessful, the project team may discuss new strategies to reach community members more effectively. 21 if4;:.;11.7)- -fri,'-'-"7.4 11 .14 > 44, - . - Art, 4.1. rrli i 4� y • .'I�' a , �yry r ,�/ `s { �, I ,„ 1 -4:,..- f-Y - i` I..:- .. i +pi,iS. T.1144-'1'!!''g!f AI ''+ V..1; 1"a':.;.,-, � Pit:',.•1. Vb # 5 tit .a M }' • . . i} • . , * -4 1 * i• y Ike ; k s Y �' 1# ' - �, _ - �� 1.: .•,_. i : j • — .;�f4 iiiri * ii 'R` r mo`''t ' j' a� ` . i • `r ,meq Fes ' 'i t _ I T� 4 I. I ��}.:r 'J[i yrs , - • ,, y .peI • *-7%, ii•.:11rI'.n i lit4 .•-' . "/P4 . 1 I "• ' *ri r .40 r lir. ml I . • p irig, ! •s y}' * I',4.,. - � I k1 irOr) a 1� r ..:01ri 16• ill ett a .•1.' ,� I, r'• '•• . i =+' * r.`` ° Pyr •'° PAL 1. 1/17 i t 'Wil, • , .•F # J _f **''i`r • - 11 LAO •fin ', w i'. '�{.�'`' . �y 'A , - ...rit• L• — i -r.,• '. • '- • '. " . , ' 'ii, . i li t ,10.1.,..:::114 i :4'2lit A 11 1- Ai ti 7 I ' rnni , r''' '11 , air ,,11 Ai IRFue # ht rri -�1 11 1 ° r 1.1 it 4 � _ S * ri *.l • Dir ,10 41117 4.. r,1. .S nti ezi• Ili? ;}, ' ;' �' -IF. - �f '. r _ - «i it ;ail . * . 4: ren k, f ',.li r•15,1 ".1• Y7 ime 14. it 1MI' 1?It 4 ic ill,ar 41 ', , 4 _•••• if... -; I it' ;,.. .1„............,-.1 , .4:.•-.1e•art,•• „ , • ' 1.... 4.4t'' ••• . 'it' . V iPm"r1014....1 'r''''. ....2V , '•' ...._. .;',J °,mk. i it di ' 1.. 3i.,47dija I ' 4 1,,,` -11. y1. ' + *4—'�yy,� # +. # T j Tom• '.� L l I • f' 'C. '4AL 1 !'.. 7s ' aj d - r • ,P ile 4 "iir P P p:;iiiipild 'a, . .r. .,r4 :# .j,,. ., ka _ iR i. tip 1 4 '%Ill iv.) k it i' �y ^ '� • s 3R ices:.111 ..l•: R il.Ii ..II I I. ` .r1 �.� * M`r a *�. '` ' .L �4 till I '•` ,� IR qui firia '. �y 'r `t .I .. 1 +' •- • iti!~moi .., # �RfiR .!f '�J. � P AH •ii PACIFIC HABITAT SERVICES, INC 9450 SW Commerce Circle,Suite 180 (800)871-9333•(503)570-0800•Fax(503)570-0855 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Date: April 7, 2021 To: Serah Breakstone, OTAK From: Shawn Eisner Re: River Terrace West & South Environmental Technical Memorandum PHS Project Number: 6955 Pacific Habitat Services, Inc. (PHS) completed a full inventory and assessment of natural resources in the River Terrace West and South Planning Areas during the fall of 2020. The field and assessment phases included the inventory of wetlands and tree groves. A mapping analysis of Metro resources was also conducted. The results of these studies are presented on several maps included with this memorandum. Additional documentation includes datasheets reflecting the results of the tree grove and wetland assessments. The tree grove assessment datasheets are also included with this memorandum. The wetland assessment datasheets are included in the Local Wetland Inventory (LWI) report (see below for further discussion on the LWI). The following outline reflects the focus of each natural resource inventory and assessment. Statewide Planning Goal 5 • Local Wetland Inventory o Field work to LWI standards o Determination of Significant Wetlands • Tree Grove Inventory and Assessment o Field work o Documentation of Observations Metro • Title 3 o Mapped Water Quality Resource Areas boundaries • Title 13 o Confirmation of previously mapped Metro Habitat Conservation Areas o Revision of HCA mapping where necessary to reflect changes in land use since map completion. Wetland Inventory The goal of the wetland inventory was to address the requirements for Statewide Planning Goal 5 (Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces) Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) Section 660, Division 23. The objective of Goal 5 is to "protect natural resources and conserve scenic, historic and open space resources for present and future generations."The complete results of the wetland inventory within the River Terrace West and South planning areas General Contractors • OR: CCB#94379 River Terrace—Environmental Technical Memorandum Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. April 7,2021 Page-2- are documented in a Local Wetlands Inventory(LWI) report under preparation by PHS. An outline of the process and findings pertinent to the River Terrace Inventory are included below. PHS worked with the City of Tigard to request and obtain access to private property within the South and West planning areas. All landowners were sent a letter requesting access to map and assess wetlands and tree groves. A total of 12 landowners representing 16 parcels responded. Additional responses were received through a real estate brokerage. PHS ultimately was granted and able to obtain access to 9 parcels; totaling approximately 78 acres. Field work largely occurred the first week of September 2020, though two parcels were not accessed later in the month. PHS had previously completed the Bull Mountain Local Wetland Inventory for Washington County in 2009, which was approved by the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) in 2012. That inventory included the entirety of River Terrace South, as well as adjoining lands to the north. As the granting of access for that project was quite high, and few changes are evident as of 2020, we are confident that the results of the 2009 work remain representative of existing conditions in the area of overlap between the current efforts and prior work. Though some small wetlands were identified in the River Terrace West planning area in September 2020, none exceed one-half acre in size and by state protocol these features will be identified as Potential Wetlands in the wetland inventory. A total of 8 wetland units were identified, with a combined acreage of approximately 16.6 acres. Each wetland unit was classified according to the Cowardin system, with many wetlands including more than one Cowardin class. Cowardin classes documented within the study area included palustrine emergent(PEM),palustrine scrub shrub (PSS), and palustrine forested(PFO). Table 1 lists each wetland unit, its area, dominant Cowardin classification(s), and whether the wetland meets locally significant wetland criteria. Significance was determined through the utilization of the Oregon Freshwater Assessment Methodology(OFWAM) on each wetland. Table 1. Wetland Summary Table Wetland Acreage Cowardin Class Locally Code Significant? RT-1 1.41 PFO No RT-2 6.94 PFO/PSS Yes RT-3 1.95 PFO/PEM No RT-4 0.89 PEMf No RT-5 1.60 PFO/PEMf No RT-6 2.71 PFO/PEM Yes RT-7 1.08 PFO No TI-1 0.01 PFO Yes In addition to mapped wetlands, which for inventory purposes exceed one-half acre in size, Potential Wetlands (PWs) encompass areas of wetland that are less than one-half acre. The total acreage of PWs identified in the South and West Planning Areas accounts for an additional 1.03 acres of wetland. Though these areas will likely meet all necessary wetland criteria, for inventory purposes they are not identified as wetlands and are not assessed for local significance. River Terrace—Environmental Technical Memorandum Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. April 7,2021 Page-3- Nearly all identified and assessed wetlands greater than one-half acre in size are in River Terrace South. The exception is T1-1 in River Terrace West, which represents a very small portion of a larger wetland located east of the study area boundary. Wetland TI-1 was identified in the West Bull Mountain Area LWI. Though the portion of TI-1 within this study area is much less than one- half acre in size, its connectivity to a previously identified wetland supports its being identified as a wetland for the purposes of this LWI. The presence of fewer wetlands and probable wetlands in River Terrace West is not believed to be correlated to reduced access but rather reflects increased topography and stream gradients. Higher slopes generally correspond with decreased presence of wetlands, due to increased capacity for runoff and decreased capacity for the retention of surface or shallow groundwater sources. Tree Grove Inventory Tree Grove identification and assessment occurred in concert with field work completed for the wetland inventory. Tree Grove assessments were completed according to protocol developed for the prior City wide inventory, as well as the more recent River Terrace Tree Grove Assessment Report, completed by Winterbrook Planning for the City in 2013. The planning areas include large acreages of agriculture lands and rural home sites intermixed with forested stream corridors and isolated woodlands. Assessments were performed on tree groves more than one acre in size. In conjunction with onsite work(where access was granted), aerial photographs were reviewed to identify locations that met the City's one acre size threshold for a tree grove. When possible, polygons were visited on the ground to conduct the assessment. Permission for access obtained for the inventory resulted in the capacity for a total of six onsite assessments. An additional four groves could be assessed in part from adjoining parcels or public roadways. It was necessary to complete three assessments without any current physical access or reasonable view point. However, for groves TG-16 and 17, PHS had been on the property in 2009 and some notes of prior conditions were available to inform the current work. The City of Tigard Tree Grove Assessment form was utilized to score a total of 13 groves. The assessment investigates ten separate functions or characteristics, rating them as high, medium, or low. These ratings are applied points (5 for high, 3 for medium and 1 for low), resulting in the capacity for a high score of 50 and a low score of 10. Groves 10 through 14 are in the West area and account for 75.69 acres of forest, the groves in River Terrace South total 28.69 acres. The assessment has allowed for a determination of scores but the City has yet to establish a score threshold for the identification of significance. Table 2 below shows the scoring break down for the assessed groves, as well as grove size and a general habitat description. Greater detail is included on the assessment forms included in Attachment 2 of the memorandum. River Terrace—Environmental Technical Memorandum Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. April 7,2021 Page-4- Table 2. Habitat Polygon Type Tree Size Assessment General Habitat Description Grove (acres) Score 10 20.80 40 Mixed Douglas fir and hardwood;primarily riparian 11 10.95 32 Mixed Douglas fir and hardwood;primarily riparian 12 34.47 40 Douglas fir dominated upland with riparian areas along tributaries to the Tualatin River 13 2.04 34 Douglas fir and black cottonwood; isolated upland forest 14 7.44 38 Douglas fir dominated upland with riparian area along tributary to the Tualatin River 15 2.30 30 Mixed deciduous and Douglas fir upland tree grove 16 1.32 24 Oregon ash dominated forested wetland 17 4.25 28 Mixed Douglas fir and Oregon white oak upland forest 18 3.64 24 Mixed Douglas fir and big leaf maple forest 19 1.80 28 Oregon ash forest;mixed wetland and upland(with Oregon white oak) 20 10.62 34 Mixed upland(Douglas fir and big leaf maple) and riparian(Oregon ash) forest 21 1.16 20 Mixed upland(Douglas fir)and riparian(willow)forest 22 3.60 32 Mixed upland(Douglas fir and maple)and riparian(Oregon ash)forest Oregon white oak Not reflected in the Tree Grove inventory because of how their habitats develop are the more dispersed groupings of Oregon white oak(Quercus garryana)within River Terrace South. Oregon white oak makes up a substantial portion of the tree cover in Tree Grove 19 but is otherwise only a subdominant where present. Oak trees are present along the boundaries and upland habitats adjoining Wetlands RT-2 and 6. The largest remaining concentration of Oregon white oak are in the southeast quadrant of a single tax lot, west of RT-5. Oak trees continue to the western limits of Wetland RT-5. RT-5 and adjoining areas to the north were formerly dominated by oak trees before being cleared for farming in late 2019 or early 2020. Metro Title 3 Identified Title 3 resources are identified on the River Terrace West and South: Title 3 Wetlands and Vegetated Corridors map. Title 3 resources are common in this section of Tigard; especially in portions of the River Terrace area already annexed within the City of Tigard. However, there were in fact no previously mapped Title 3 resources in either River Terrace West or South. This is because at the time of the original Metro analyses these areas were located beyond the Urban Growth Boundary that existed at that time and as such were not included in Title 3 mapping. The lack of previously mapped Title 3 resources required detailed analysis of existing stream and wetland resources for the current study. The identification of Title 3 resources throughout the West and South planning areas included the following: River Terrace—Environmental Technical Memorandum Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. April 7,2021 Page-5— o Identification of Protected Water Features • Primary (all rivers,perennial streams, and streams draining greater than 100 acres, Title 3 wetlands, natural lakes, and springs). • Secondary(intermittent streams and seeps draining 50-100 acres) The previously discussed LWI was utilized as the baseline for the mapping of Title 3 wetlands. Though state LWI protocol as well as Metro guidance only require that wetland meeting criteria for local significance be identified as Title 3 wetlands, the City of Tigard has determined that all wetlands are to be considered Title 3 resources, with extra protections provided to Locally Significant Wetlands (LSW) in accordance with the Sensitive Lands chapter of the Tigard Development Code (section 18.510.100). Additional steps included a determination of stream flow duration (perennial vs intermittent). o Map vegetated corridors associated with Protected Water Features (per Metro Code Table 3.07-3) Following the identification of stream and wetland boundaries topography was utilized to identify the limits of both Clean Water Services (CWS) and Metro-defined vegetated corridors. To ensure that topography was as accurate as possible, Washington County LIDAR was utilized to generate a one-half foot contour map of both the West and South planning areas. Detailed topography is important for the identification of vegetated corridors because corridor widths increase where average slopes are greater than 25 percent, and the point where average slope drops below 25 percent marks the offset point for the outer boundary of the vegetated corridor. As CWS and Metro vegetated corridor widths differ for certain intermittent streams as well as the identification of the outer boundary when steep slopes are involved, the mapping efforts include a hybrid analysis whereby the wider of each jurisdiction has been identified. This avoids the presentation of apparently conflicting boundaries and corridor widths on the maps and assures that otherwise regulated areas are not overlooked because of the decision to map one jurisdiction's boundaries instead of the other. In River Terrace South the vegetated is 50 wide around every identified wetland and waterway. In each case dominant vegetation in the corridor reflects adjoining land use. In each instance the corridor reflects ongoing or recent agricultural activities; including actively farmed grasslands,pasture, or recently vacated pasture. It should also be noted however that except for PW-7 that every Title 3 vegetated corridor also includes at least some native tree cover. In contrast to River Terrace South, the corridors in River Terrace West are generally much wider than the standard minimum width of 50 feet, and generally associated with streams, not wetlands. This is due solely to the increase in topography and the resultant increase in both stream gradient and adjoining hillslopes. The Title 3 buffer corridors in the West average around 300 feet wide, with the streams located roughly in the middle of the corridor. The narrowest corridors are associated with the eastern extent of a tributary to the Tualatin River that begins east of Tree Grove 12. The widest corridor is located at the west end of River Terrace—Environmental Technical Memorandum Pacific Habitat Services,Inc. April 7,2021 Page-6- Tree Grove 12, where a maximum width of 200 feet to the north and south of the stream result in a corridor fully 400 feet wide. Metro Title 13 Unlike Title 3, which only extended to the UGB as of the date of assessment, Title 13 mapping extended into rural and urban reserves beyond the UGB. As such, existing Title 13 mapping in the vicinity of the West and South planning areas is extensive. These resource areas include the presence of multiple tributaries to the Tualatin River and large acreages of intact forest cover(see the Title 13 Significant Habitat Areas map). Mapped Habitat Conservation Areas (HCA) have existing assigned habitat value designations based upon their distance from a waterway, existing land cover, and planned land use (zoning). These designations correspond to High, Moderate, and Lower Value Habitat. As baseline mapping was completed utilizing 2002 and/or 2005 air photos and represent conditions at the time of assessment, including land use and zoning, the current review of existing mapping required some adjustments to habitat boundaries based upon changes in vegetative cover status since the early 2000's. Changes included the removal of trees in the north-central portion of River Terrace West(between identified Tree Groves 10 and 11) as well as the south-central portion of River Terrace South; south and west of Tree Grove 20. Updated mapping now reflects the removal of these trees, resulting in an overall reduced acreage of High and Moderate value resources. In each case, as the area was altered from mature forest cover to either replanted forest (in the West) or cultivated field(in the South)these habitats were simply eliminated, as opposed to be replaced with a lower value habitat designation. Current HCA mapping reflects underlying zoning, which is Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) throughout River Terrace South; with EFU across the south extent of River Terrace West, and Agriculture and Forest(AF-20) in the north. It is important to note that current habitat value is dependent upon existing zoning and that habitat values will need to be adjusted when zoning designations reflect more urban categories. Final designations of habitat value within the planning areas will be affected by future Urban Development Value (UDV) following annexation into the City because UDV is ultimately tied to the zoning designation. Observations A thorough examination of all identified natural resources in the River Terrace West and South planning areas reveals a mosaic of tree groves, wetlands, and stream corridors. The River Terrace Natural Resources map includes an overview of all identified resources; to a large extent resource areas frequently overlap, with the larger tree groves often associated with Title 13 High Value Habitats and/or Title 3 vegetated corridors. The West planning area includes fewer wetlands but greater tree cover. Overall, the location of natural resources throughout both the West and South Planning areas means that complete avoidance of many of these resources areas will be difficult. As such, the minimization of impacts should be part of the overall planning process; limiting impacts to where necessary, and where the benefit of development can be shown to justify impacts to natural resources and the associated reduction or loss of functions and values. Attachment 1 Assessment Maps ‘Vi A � � J PHS Z 0 0 J J Lu o -9 a 0/, S LEMONGRASS ONEILL SCHOLLS FERRY FRIENDLY F EST HOLLOW I LUKE F _. LARKSPRING GRANITA 10 10 4 .•'`� I H AMELIA SNOWDALE k .`` a BIRDSONG FF/Nis «, APPLEDALE ��/.� +'�yill4 DF w dS!J " ' T ( SNAPDRAGON �( w . �i r G'ti STAHL in r r x ¢ TUSCANY �l +`A . ,~ H iY zMILAN z LORENZO c2 G.- _ PALERMO ROSy'9 - = CAMERON w + ec U COLONY cg gg •t- q x w H O� "C'' 13;'x, t:,�...� — > co H ZIS .e i I DARWIN fit' ` : •+�-- BULL MOUNTAIN - + " FiyN COOPER 9 a 0 4 �� BRAY Q ct DEKALB 51' e 0 = _, t a KESSLER m H v O HAZELTINE 7 CABERNET THAMES A1C. s ''!r ai H �- 5�\ DANUBE *. .%/0. HAWK RIDGE t (/)./ z DEEPBROOK r _ 1*'* 4 15 w 1'7• " 0 I ¢F- it w 16 . a . a r + 20HUNTWOOD r . «x ► i LASICH1g I` 21'. e ''2`2 rSre- ru6.. AP" y , t .6-Althea .. F BEND _ . d i ct w N z w - 1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet ' 011 w ii Mi Source:Esri, DigitalGlobe,GeoEye,agiligkir Geographies,ONES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN,clailiQ GIS User Community v River Terrace West and South: Tree Groves PHS- -"- , --- -11 QStudy Area Pacific Habitat Services Taxlot 9450 SW Commerce Circle,Suite 180 Wilsonville,OR 97070 Tree Grove 503.570.0800 phs@pacifichabitat.com 03/15/2021 Z 0 J O J Lu HO� s LEMONGRASS ONEILL cr v �� FRIENDLY I,,t0; (�:!• `. v.T FOREST HOLLOW 2 LUKE • _ LARKSPRING F- GRANITCO A < c•z AMELIA SNOWDALE KFFR a�y �� Pw i �• •• BIRDSONG SNS P- f��j O. - SS } y:•jtR ! 0R APPLEDALE •` " ••''i' \A r _ ,7 "O0.:♦•ei'�, Pwl' ' R A GO N e ° < SN w, i .0.;4. T"i G u) 4 i z .O J J O 0Oce -4 �,Q .P O, co • s 4IlkLEMONGRASS ONEILL Cr. ni`c_FF FRIENDLY ,,,1-1; �r�• -' :'' F• 'EST HOLLOW = LUKE , + , GRANITA LARKSPRING I- I w 4 `1 � AMELIA SNOWDALE K •,' ",e'.t '• BIRDSONG FFRpyS `_ � j al. cc` APPLEDALE D WON pN i'^ O SNAPDRAGON l'° Gf i STAHL o .. z = TUSCANY ... � v F z 1-- MILAN 0 > Q LORENZO cO • PALERMO ROS',Sq w i CAMERON o 7ro rhtz COLONY _ = O co r -„ri rn ~ ~ H X00 j N E DARWIN `D •I .-"Tr. .-••-• BULL MOUNTAIN ` 4‘i 4 COOPER 4/xi Y �� - BRAY Q DEKALB `D I I KESSLER m w v O J - CABERNET HAZELTINE � THAMES I 0 DANUBE HAWK RIDGE z DEEPBROOK Lu • O L.,, Ia= r? { LASICH ), . ;.' �. . 164 T Lirmmmm ce Lu N z ce co w 1,000 500 0ii MI 1,000 Feet ' 2 Source:Esri;DigitalGlobe,GreoEye, Earthstar Geographies,ONES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGR'IID, IGN,and the GIS User Corn pity River Terrace West and South: Title 13 Significant Habitat Areas PHS --� Study Area Taxlot Pacific Habitat Services 9450 SW Commerce Circle,Suite 180 i High Value Habitat Wilsonville,OR 97070 Moderate Value Habitat 503.570.0800 phs@pacifichabitat.com Lower Value Habitat 03/15/2021 z 0 0 J J w 6' CO O Q,Q S LEMONGRASS 0,P14111ONEILL0,P14111l7 fll I C FFRV ; a712EST HOLLOW FRIENDLY = LUKE — —• < GRANITA LARKSPRING o 2 m ff,1 I\'' 0 AMELIA SNOWDALE K t Q BIRDSONG FFRi/vS M'?_- .I �� APPLEDALE y0 0AHk_1A . - SNAPDRAGON 1'=". G ^ i , U)o , �i ./ ' z , = za TUSCANY a J z -e o 0 1 cn MILAN zz D VCO N V N �' 'A^° ,- a LORENZO C° m PALERMO 4OSy'9 ir $11 %�•••4 +` w F CAMERON x U co R1 x .< .?9,45,1,— cc a ° z COLONY N HI•t♦q Mai (I§ m 4 /:...',,s' f {i ce _> cn ;:if ' IIIIIII E DARWIN c° .'.404-4' - BULL MOUNTAIN l1,4,0 ,y4q Z COOPER SpA BRAY Q ..ie DEKALB IEt 0 1-- UJ = r z `, q KESSLER m w v • Li Lo _.— :NW,:. - `° HAZELTINE ' -, CABERNET THAMES F �L in v �\ 5 0,..... . . DANUBE gt•` VP HAWK RIDGE kallitV ;i z DEEPBROOK 0 w G. . �Y a X . eir,,� a b LASICH 3b. t .� I '1 • ti i.,, +w 0 ,, rl,• , i 1, a ifr j n. 4j , wo tBEEF BEND � tY N z cc A 1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet L. w :70 } Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographico GNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,AeroGRID, IGN,and the GIS User y River Terrace West and South Natural Resources . PHS ll f - - Stream Tree Grove Title 13 - Habitat Conservation Areas Pacific Habitat Services =Study Area ::;:;Z Title 3 Vegetated Corridor High Value Habitat 9450 SW Commerce Circle,Suite 180 Taxlot El Title 3 Wetland Moderate Value Habitat Wilsonville,OR 97070 Lower Value Habitat 503.570.0800 phs@pacifichabitat.com 03/15/2021 Attachment 2 Tree Grove Assessment Forms PHS CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-10 SIZE: 20.80 PHOTO: No SCORE: 40 LOCATION: SW Scholls Ferry Rd at SW MAP: OBSERVER: DATE: 9/3&9/25/20 Vandermost Rd and South CM/SE/MS TAX LOTS:2S1060002460,2S1060002501,2S1060002300,2S1060002200 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species: Thuja Plicata, Alnus rubra, Acer macrophyllum; north end is dominated by Pseudotsuga menziesii Secondary Tree Species:Fraxinus latifolia Understory Species: Corylus cornuta,Rubus armeniacus,Rubus ursinus,Crataegus monogyna,Physocarpus capitatus, Polystichum munitum,seedlings of Thuja plicata FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity X >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size X >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity X Unique natural or Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat X Diverse structure or Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 7 X 5 1 X 3 2 X 1 SCORE 35 3 2 TOTAL 40 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Though as narrow as 80 feet,this grove is variably 200 to 500 feet wide and encompasses the riparian area associated with a perennial tributary to the Tualatin River.The north end appears to be an overgrown plantation of Douglas fir.The riparian area provides ample shading,water retention,sediment retention/erosion prevention, nesting/roosting habitat,large mammal habitat,habitat connectivity.Low/moderate invasive species cover in more open areas but otherwise predominantly native.Lands between TG-10 and TG-11 was logged in 2016 and 2018.t MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Maintain existing habitat.Plan future development to limit the number of road or trail crossings to minimize impacts and retain habitat connectivity. CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-11 SIZE: 10.95 ac PHOTO: No SCORE:32 LOCATION: West of River Terrace. MAP: OBSERVER: SE/MS DATE: 9/3/2020 Northwest neighborhood TAX LOTS: 2S1060001901,2S1060001900,2S1060002000 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii,Alnus rubra;Acer macrophyllum near the north end Secondary Tree Species:Thuja plicata Understory Species: FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh X 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size X >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility Visible from arterial X Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ Between similar land X No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or X Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat X Diverse structure or Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 4 X 5 3 X 3 3 X 1 SCORE 120 1 9 1 3 TOTAL 32 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Lot to the west was clear cut in 2017/18. Bordering land is largely agricultural or forestry. East limits of tree grove abut River Terrace tree grove#8.Could not observe understory from the west on 9/3/2020.Western extent includes headwater of tributary to the Tualatin River. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-12 SIZE:34.47 ac PHOTO: No SCORE: 40 LOCATION: west from 14191 SW Roy MAP: OBSERVER: DATE: 9/2/2020 Rogers Rd to the UGB boundary CR/CM TAX LOTS:2S1070000400,2S1070000600 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii,Populus balsmifera,Acer macrophyllum Secondary Tree Species:Alnus rubra,Populus balsamifera,Fraxinus latifolia(along the outer edge of riparian corridor) Understory Species:Acer circinatum,Lapsana communis,Rumex crispus,Crataegus monogyna,Prunella vulgaris, Rubus ursinus,Taraxacum officinale,Agrostis sp,unknown grasses,Carex leptopoda,Plantago lanceolate,Plantago major,Trifolium repens,Ranunculus repens, :Leontodon sp,Hypochaeris radicata. FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity X >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size X >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity X Unique natural or Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare snecies)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat X Diverse structure or Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 7 X 5 1 X 3 2 X 1 SCORE 35 I3 2 TOTAL 40 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Great bird habitat. Eastern limits border residential lands. Otherwise, adjoining land is agricultural. This is the largest tree grove in River Terrace.It includes portions of two tributaries to the Tualatin River. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Consider future storm water quantity controls to prevent further downcutting of existing tributary.Daylight existing tributary by removing culvert located just east of this grove;grove could be expanded simply by planting a riparian area along both side of the stream. CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#:TG-13 SIZE: 2.04 ac PHOTO: SCORE:34 LOCATION: 14385 SW Roy Rogers Rd, MAP: OBSERVER: DATE: 9/2/2020 NW corner of property CR/CM TAX LOTS:2S1070000303,2S1070000302,2S1070000301 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii,Populus balsamifera Secondary Tree Species:Acer macrophyllum Understory Species: Corylus cornuta,Rubus armeniacus,Hedera helix,Polystichum munitum,Pteridium aquilinum, Rubus ursinus,Trillium ovatum,Tellima grandiflora FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity X >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size X 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or X Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 4 X 5 4 X 3 2 X 1 SCORE 20 12 2 TOTAL 34 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Small grove with visible signs of wildlife use — birds/quail, woodpecker marks, scat from small and medium mammals.Likely benefits from proximity to Tree Grove-12 as well as agricultural lands to the south and west. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-14 SIZE: 7.44 ac PHOTO: No SCORE: 38 LOCATION: West of Roy Rogers at SE MAP: OBSERVER: SE DATE: 9/5/2020 limits of River Terrace West TAX LOTS:2S1070001000 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Acer macrophyllum,Pseudotsuga menziesii Secondary Tree Species:Prunus avium, Salix sp. Understory Species:Acer circinatum,Rubus armeniacus,Prunus avium,Polystichum munitum FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity X >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size X 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity X Unique natural or Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat X Diverse structure or Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 6 X 5 2 X 3 2 X 1 SCORE 30 6 2 TOTAL 38 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Located across Roy Rogers Road from River Terrace Tree Grove#6. Observation limited to view available from Roy Rogers right-of-way.This is the northern extent of a large riparian grove bordering a Tualatin River tributary located in the adjoining rural area to the south. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-15 SIZE: 2.3 ac PHOTO: No SCORE:30 LOCATION: East of Roy Rogers Rd at MAP: OBSERVER: SE DATE: 9/5/2020 North end of River Terrace South TAX LOTS:2S1070001700 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii,Acer macrophyllum,Thuja plicata Secondary Tree Species: Quercus garryana,Pinus ponderosa,Alnus rubra Understory Species:Rubus armeniacus,Crataegus monogyna,Corylus cornuta, Salix sitchensis along drainage,Hedera helix,Amelanchier alnifolia, saplings of tree species Acer macrophyllum,Prunus avium&Quercus garryana FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity X >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size X 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health Appears healthy with X Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or Rare or uncommon X No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 3 X 5 4 X 3 3 X 1 SCORE 115 112 1 3 TOTAL 30 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Abuts Roy Rogers to the west. Mapping suggests intermittent tributary. This grove is bordered by agricultural fields to the northeast and southeast.A new storm pond is located just to the north. A residential driveway separates this grove from a smaller(less than 1 acre) grove to the south. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-16 SIZE: 1.32 ac PHOTO: SCORE:24 LOCATION: 15688 Roy Rogers Road MAP: OBSERVER: SE DATE: 10/1/2020 TAX LOTS:2S1070001700 TREES ®DECID.❑EVERGREEN❑MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Fraxinus latifolia Secondary Tree Species: Quercus garryana,Pseudotsuga menziesii Understory Species:Juncus tenuis,Schedonorus arundinaceus FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh X 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size X <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility Visible from arterial Visible from local street X Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or X Rare or uncommon X No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 2 X 5 3 X 3 5 X 1 SCORE 10 19 5 TOTAL 24 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Access was not granted for the current study.Observations reflect notes and data collected in January 2009.This grove includes the forested portion of a small wetland that continues into a mixed shrub and herbaceous corridor separating this grove from another larger grove to the east.There are additional Douglas fir and Oregon white oak trees to the south but the canopy is not continuous.This grove is located about 400 east from two other groves,though one is smaller than one acre and not part of the City inventory. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-17 SIZE: 4.25 ac PHOTO: No SCORE:28 LOCATION: 15688 Roy Rogers Road MAP: OBSERVER: SE DATE: 10/1/2020 TAX LOTS:2S1070001700 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species: Quercus garryana,Pseudotsuga menziesii Secondary Tree Species:Fraxinus latifolia Understory Species:unknown—no access FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh X 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size X 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility Visible from arterial Visible from local street X Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or X Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 2 X 5 4 X 3 3 X 1 SCORE 10 15 3 TOTAL 28 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) This property was accessed in 2009 for a prior local wetland inventory.Access was not granted for the current study.Observations reflect notes and data collected in January 2009.This grove is separated from a smaller tree grove to the west by a mixed shrub and herbaceous corridor 40 to 80 feet wide. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-18 SIZE:3.64 ac PHOTO: No SCORE: 24 LOCATION: North end of property at MAP: OBSERVER: SE/MS DATE: 9/3/2020 16295 SW Beef Bend Rd TAX LOTS:2S1180001700,2S1180001800,2S1070001800 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii,Acer macrophyllum Secondary Tree Species:Fraxinus latifolia,Prunus avium,Populus balsamifera,Quercus garryana Understory Species: Corylus cornuta,Rubus armeniacus,Toxicodendron diversilobum,Crataegus monogyna,Rubus ursinus,Rubus laciniatus,Polystichum munitum,Agrostis capillaris FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have X <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size X 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health Appears healthy with X Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility Visible from arterial X Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering X Between industrial/ Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or Rare or uncommon X No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or Good source of food, X Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 2 X 5 3 X 3 5 X 1 SCORE 10 9 5 TOTAL 24 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Overall habitat quality degraded by recent removal of some trees.The understory is dominated by Himalayan blackberry.Can view a bit from Roy Rogers Road only.Some buffering between Roy Rogers Rd and existing residence. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-19 SIZE:1.8 ac PHOTO: No SCORE: 28 LOCATION: 16295 - South end of Beef MAP: OBSERVER: SE/MS DATE: 9/3/2020 Bend Rd- TAX LOTS:2S1180001700 TREES ®DECID.❑EVERGREEN❑MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Fraxinus latifolia Secondary Tree Species: Quercus garryana,Acer macrophyllum Understory Species:Rubus armeniacus,Rubus ursinus, Spirea douglasii,Corylus cornuta,Cornus alba,Juncus tenuis, Carex leptopoda,Carex obnupta,Rosa sp,Symphoricarpos albus,Crataegus monogyna,Polystichum munitum FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have X <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size X <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or X Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 3 X 5 3 X 3 4 X 1 SCORE 15 9 4 TOTAL 28 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) This grove was formerly pastured.Conditions are similar to those observed in 2008,though the understory is now more dense, including dominance by Himalayan blackberry. The grove encompasses the southern, forested half of a wetland.The stand buffers the residential areas to the east from Roy Rogers to the west. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Control Rubus armeniacus and remove Crataegus monogyna. CITY OF TIGARD—RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-20 SIZE: 20.62 ac PHOTO: No SCORE:34 LOCATION: West of April Lane just south MAP: OBSERVER: DATE: 9/5/2020 of Finis Lane SE TAX LOTS:2S108CC00200; 2S1170000302; 2S1170000302 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii,Acer macrophyllum Secondary Tree Species: Quercus garryana,Fraxinus latifolia,Populus balsamifera Understory Species:Acer circinatum,Ilex aquifolium,Rubus armeniacus,mixed pasture grasses(fescue&bentgrass) FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh X 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size X >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. 1 Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility Visible from arterial X Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity X Unique natural or Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 4 X 5 4 X 3 2 X 1 SCORE 120 112 1 2 TOTAL I 34 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Grove borders or encompasses several homesites and outbuildings. Includes both upland and wetland habitats, as well as south flowing tributary to the Tualatin River. Also borders a pond near its southern limits. This feature could have been divided into several smaller groves but canopies largely overlap between them.The grove is bordered by farm fields and former pasture land; largely herbaceous and shrub dominated land. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-21 SIZE: 1.16 ac PHOTO: No SCORE: 20 LOCATION: Northwest of intersection of MAP: OBSERVER: DATE: 10/6/2020 150th Avenue and Beef Bend Rd SE TAX LOTS:2S117A00600 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Pseudotsuga menziesii Secondary Tree Species: Salix spp Understory Species:Unknown—offsite assessment from air photos FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity >50%of trees have dbh X 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size 2 to<5 acres in size X <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health X Appears healthy with Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats. high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility Visible from arterial Visible from local street X Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ Between similar land X No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or Rare or uncommon X No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or Good source of food, X Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;lg.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 2 X 5 1 X 3 7 X 1 SCORE 110 13 1 7 TOTAL 20 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) This was an offsite assessment.The nearest view point is located several hundred feet to the south.The assessment was based upon air photos and best professional judgement.The grove appears to be nearly entirely comprised of Douglas fir.Willow trees and shrubs are present along the south and eastern edges though it appears that these may not extend into the interior of the stand. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: CITY OF TIGARD-RIVER TERRACE Tree Grove Assessment Form SITE#: TG-22 SIZE:3.6 ac PHOTO: No SCORE:32 LOCATION: Northwest of intersection of MAP: OBSERVER: DATE: 9/2/2020 150th Avenue and Beef Bend Rd CR/CM TAX LOTS:2S117A00600,2S117A00400 TREES ❑DECID.❑EVERGREEN®MIXED Dominant/Codominant Tree Species:Fraxinus latifolia&Pseudotsuga menziesii with Acer macrophyllum Secondary Tree Species: Quercus garryana Understory Species: Corylus cornuta,Hedera helix,Diversiloba toxicodendron,Rosa sp,Acer circinatum,Pteridium aquilinum,Rubus ursinus,Crataegus douglasii,Holodiscus discolor,Mahonia nervosa,Amaranthus albus,Rubus armeniacus,Fraxinus latifolia,Polystichum munitum,Cirsium vulgare,Rumex crispus,Jacobaea vulgaris,Epilobium ciliatum,Galium aparine,Ilex sp,Prunus avium,Oemleria cerasiformis. FUNCTION/CHARACTERISTIC HIGH MEDIUM LOW Tree size/Grove maturity X >50%of trees have dbh 25-50%of trees have <25%of trees have dbh Scenic and habitat values increase with age; of 14"or more dbh of 14"or more of 14"or more mature trees are difficult to replace Grove size >5 acres in size X 2 to<5 acres in size <2 acres in size. Vitality,resilience of grove generally increases with size. Health Appears healthy with X Some dieback or Extensive dieback or General condition and signs of dieback,threats, no visible threats or potential threats. high disturbance disturbance low disturbance Visibility X Visible from arterial Visible from local street Not visible from street Groves that are clearly visible from larger streets street or public or private common open or open space or public lands have greater value park/open space space Screening/Buffering Between industrial/ X Between similar land No(or very limited) Groves may serve as land use buffers,depending com.and res./open uses buffer function on size,location,nearby uses space land uses Accessibility Unrestricted public Some physical or legal X Privately owned or Greater access provides more opportunity for access access limits;or part inaccessible public use;but inappropriate on private lots public,part private land Rarity Unique natural or X Rare or uncommon No uncommon features Unusual features(e.g.,large grove or tree size,or cultural features features rare species)or historical value Educational/Recreational Potential Accessibility and Accessibility and Rarity X Accessibility or Rarity Accessible groves with unusual features offer Rarity are high or are both medium are low recreational and/or educational values medium Wildlife Habitat Diverse structure or X Good source of food, Few habitat functions Habitat functions for terrestrial species, species mix;high cover,and territory for with no(or minimal) connectivity,diversity,patch size connectivity;1g.patch some wildlife groups habitat connectivity Existing Development X Undeveloped(<1 unit Partially developed Developed Groves with development per acre) (surrounded/enclosed) SUB-TOTALS 3 X 5 5 X 3 2 X 1 SCORE 15 15 2 TOTAL 32 COMMENTS: (e.g.,land use context,development potential,unusual characteristics,invasive species,clarifications on assessment) Threat is primarily due to English ivy.Fraxinus latifolia dominated wetland defines the western third,with Douglas fir dominating the upland forest that defines the east portion of the grove. MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Needs ivy control,choking trees and dominant in understory. _,,,:,.:,....;41 ;. ..eL • liejk .10,117:,rrt.,,,..-"7.7 il 41-1 >,,..4...rttel - . - ir - t• 4� r ',�'} " h r ,�/ `' { �, I ,-.1 1 _,-Y" y��, ' "• { :. ` � � t ;`" 11.3 "I' _ - ' - ; • i #.1t*Iff. "1. " Ii r' _ • ' `r " ipii. F 'i*IIPp _ I T1. 4 4 ir ‘ 1 ' r li. r ...e„.. ,t} r 'J`[i yrs , - ^' • y I bi.14'4 -.' 4 r / .. .,,. .; ... ..,,,,,, rii.„ .„ ..,.,.. T . a' 'i_ I d fil''0-4 _ • ir ., i vrpf- Lir: 11.6d : .I. r kilo . P 1 yr ' -i :tet'' - •' ..*-e,'..',w1 ~ -- r 11 4 Pe r . �:'4"-14.1:p'-Sqq I. T C t' I I " �': "43 'O„- rr ' � f r - '57•4,..1,-...,w.� +,( ' ' Nom -1-- A ,N'" i - 3 - I1h pit w+L #' # ''r,w i a, Wil, . R ;" 4111 X 't {a ,. •-:"` "itc...: :, i t 1- ..., . lit - - " AL 1 ' ..II,- . i .--nirta ,.., ,t 10 t.': lird ..**,... • .i .i—•.1 I T. , , ,1‘, tn. , " , • , . al . 1' 1 iti1/41 w_ 1 3►_ a iA J • `,f i� :� r,' Joe , il' ; ''ie, Yr . '� tom'.` •a'# i._ a r *'. .i �-.. I� • ; 41. ..,k Y `f L h :._,...6„0. .trixtt 7 -r' :•• 4�In' F- WI" • ' ' ' •r -y'V'.A 'ti a X11 ,. i � I �a RF Cf # . r`w x - , • t 1' i144;44 t 21 ;': W r..i.% Filig.A - - !.. si 1fLai I c, ,i ' ' '. a 1l ri -, " ;p• . '7 1 ':' .. `• Y7 F vit a ` 1 '-{ , J' is 14.. r A�r i't}�. i a #` - 'r I. . .. %,.6 i ..'‘-'a ult., 1 1 1 iSvi..4 H . :S. - 1 t'Ll. 1!1' "11:1".'1(8'.1:1.IH '-:2111 lillW". 4 1% '4±- ' .y I. s! , * fiiiid'„ ,4 i,r4 :# F j, . . -.•k' •a • iR Pi. 1 4 '.17 AP.) k i ' I �y ■■s�^ '� s 3R �.r r:. r I ..l•: R il.II ..II IN I. ` aYi ..',.,1.'R! .ral !`L f Irk. '` ' t' - -} _ �a. VII'r �y 'r `h .I .. i +' •- • iti!' In ... # �RfiR .!f '�J. r ti a LELAND CONSULTING GROUP River Terrace West and South Concept Plan Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Date March 2021 To Schuyler Warren, City of Tigard; Serah Breakstone, Otak From Sam Brookham and Brian Vanneman, Leland Consulting Group Subject Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Introduction The City of Tigard has initiated concept planning for River Terrace 2.0, two urban reserve areas to the west and south of the current River Terrace area. Concept planning will provide a high-level vision for how these areas eventually develop and connect with the rest of the city. It is the first step in a three-step process for planning for these areas. The concept plan will result in a vision for a complete neighborhood, with equitable housing opportunities, accessible parks and open space, diverse transportation options, supportive commercial services and employment opportunities, and the needed infrastructure to support development. Purpose This Commercial and Employment Market Analysis describes the market trends impacting commercial and employment development prospects in the River Terrace West and South study areas. Specifically, this memorandum summarizes: • Data on regional commercial market trends • Information about town-center and neighborhood-oriented commercial development, • Forecasted market growth and absorption rates for commercial uses, including retail, office, and light industrial, • Strategies and recommendations to support private development of commercial uses, and • Information on precedents projects. The analysis uses data from the US Census, state employment department, Costar's real estate database, Metro's Regional Land Information System (RLIS), and other sources and publications. The analysis is also informed by conversations with brokers and real estate experts from Cushman &Wakefield, Capacity Commercial, Macadam Forbes, Brooks Resources, and Gramor. www.lelandconsulting.com 1 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Outline/Contents Introduction 1 Executive Summary 6 Case Studies 11 Socio-Economic Analysis 23 Market Trends 32 Trade Areas 35 Commercial Market Analysis 39 Employment Market Analysis 67 Commercial and Employment: Combined Market Potential 80 Market and Geographical Context This report describes the context and potential for commercial and employment land use types.These two types of land uses are related in that they are both non-residential, they share some locational similarities, and because there is overlap in the activities that take place within them. However, they serve different users and markets, and the developers who build them make development decisions based on different criteria.Therefore, this report evaluates them both together and separately. Examples of commercial activity include the following locations northeast of the study area: Progress Ridge Town Square, Murray Scholls Town Center, and Village on Scholls. Examples of employment activity include the Tigard Triangle, Kruse Way, Providence St.Vincent's Hospital, and Intel Campus/Ronler Acres. Figure 1 below shows that, as defined in this report, commercial development provides patrons with a wide variety of goods, services, and employment opportunities. Importantly, there is overlap between commercial and employment development. A significant share of the space in most commercial centers fits just as comfortably within the concept of"employment" as commercial space—including professional office and service businesses, healthcare, and others. When this report refers to commercial space, readers should recognize that employment and jobs are taking place in those spaces, including jobs that are family-wage and non-retail-oriented. For example, one of the anchor tenants at Murray Scholls Town Center is the Kaiser Permanente Murrayhill Medical Center; other tenants include financial advisory services and other dental and medical offices. Typically, such tenants provide a range of middle- to upper- income jobs for nearby residents. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 2 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 1. Commercial, Employment, and Other Land Uses Commercial Employment Other 1—Grocery Home Goods (ProfessionaI \ Purpose built, Hospitality/ Restaurants Clothing Offices and largely single use: Lodging Services Office Specialty Pharmacy Electronics (E g.,finance,accounting, A&E/design.personal care, education/daycare. Healthcare General Office Supplies civic/library,fitness events) Merchandise, Theater) Healthcare Industrial/Tech Other Retail Entertainment Coworking Flex/Tech/ Craft Industrial Last Mile • Distribution Employment can also take place within buildings and campuses that are typically purpose-built and single-use. These buildings are typically less amenable to short-term trips by nearby residents and have less of a connection to the surrounding ground floor and sidewalks.They are office buildings (e.g., Kruse Way), healthcare (e.g., hospitals, clinics, and medical office buildings), and dedicated industrial buildings (e.g., warehouse, distribution, industrial, manufacturing). Other non-residential land uses such as hospitality/lodging are mentioned in this report but not covered in depth. Typically, these are "following" uses that are most feasible following significant residential, commercial, and employment development that build demand. The market area for commercial land uses is usually smaller than the market area for employment land uses. Patrons of and employees at commercial centers most often come from the surrounding 1, 3, or 5- mile areas. Most commercial transactions in this area are a result of residents visiting "local" businesses like pharmacies, restaurants, and fitness clubs. The economic activity generated from employment land uses tends to draw employees from a larger area—often the entire metro region—and also sell their goods and services regionally, or even nationwide or worldwide. As shown in Figure 2 below, River Terrace lies within the City of Tigard and the Portland Metropolitan Urban Growth Boundary. It is bounded by unincorporated Washington County to the east and west, King City to the south, and Beaverton's South Cooper Mountain to the north. River Terrace is one of three urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion areas in the southwest of the metropolitan region. Others include Beaverton's Cooper Mountain and King City's URA 6D. How and when these competing areas develop are important considerations for future commercial prospects in River Terrace. Both UGB expansion areas are described in more detail later in this report. The following map shows River Terrace West and River Terrace South: the two study areas for this project. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 3 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 2. Regional Context Cornelius Hillsboro 0 f I I I I i ................... Beaverton i f . �. '� 1 I4,..... i ‘.% Tigard 's, ! f 1 L .. : ; L , . , I Is ----� :� -" -- :MI am i I 2 3,. ile e , I .l I --- i "31.„:.6 Matin / .................4. Sherwood -• . I 1 ' i 0 1 2 mi rq,,,,hr..rrr Washington County Source:Metro RLIS, Leland Consulting Group Tigard is part of the Metro region. All cities in Metro share one regional urban growth boundary. This boundary is the line between urban and rural uses and development. Figure 3 shows the location of River Terrace 2.0 relative to the current location of Metro's urban and rural reserves, denoted in blue and green, respectively. Understanding the timing of the development in both of these areas is critical to determining the extent of the demand for various uses in River Terrace 2.0 in the near- and mid-term, as well as how much land will be needed to serve longer-term growth. The reserves designated by Metro in 2007 are the best guess at land supply needed over the next 50 years. However, the Portland metropolitan region has experienced higher-than-expected economic growth and housing construction since the designations and a reassessment of land needs is likely to be River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 4 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis triggered much earlier than 2057 due to the fact that there will likely be a higher percentage of developed land than envisioned in 2007. In short, it is safe to assume that areas to the west will be developed at some point.This analysis, therefore, takes a phased approach to assessing development potential in River Terrace 2.0. In the near- term, River Terrace will continue to be an edge location. As development occurs over the longer-term, it will become increasingly central to surrounding neighborhoods. Figure 3. Metro Urban and Rural Reserves 1 ,... .. i ''•- ---, 0'y17,:-.7 ill ■ an1I Lmi..11.ltiall!lfr1! 11111 -- MINBASimullos liagiontim , niartzlirr owe, , OIL 0 F " lik: I414 II - ... ,....,w till ' _ Ili tap lr. . ' 'ASII NO,Wil item.AA ' allINIP llitio — �- ,fmowig , 4iiiim,orriprzteekowp iimmi .... AilW .° '‘ \YAE4 Will pprikm Ardit . .l .II— . it ' N A '-' air - "Lir c 0 ., . ■" a 1 { Ko. t, ) .. . , _. , ' wb.. a 1 ,__. Source:Metro River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 5 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Executive Summary LCG's findings and recommendations for River Terrace West and South are summarized below. Demographic Findings Characteristics.As described more in the Socio-Economic Analysis section of this report, existing households located near the River Terrace 2.0 area are highly affluent and contain a higher proportion of family households (defined as at least two related people, e.g., married couples, parent and child, etc.). New housing growth in River Terrace 2.0 is expected to attract a more diverse range of residents that reflect the characteristics of Tigard's residents citywide (per US Census data). Notably, these residents are likely to be younger and more mobile than the existing resident composition, with a greater demand for local amenities and services, especially with regards to entertainment and nearby employment opportunities. Talent metrics. Talent is critical to location decisions for larger and traded-sector' employers and the single most important factor driving urban economic success is the educational attainment of a city's population. While residential construction will continue to increase the size of the local talent pool, River Terrace will face significant challenges because it will compete against more centrally located, established employment hubs in the southwest metro. Case Study Lessons NorthWest Crossing in Bend is one of the best models of a successful neighborhood node or main street development within a master-planned community in the Pacific Northwest, and some attributes make it a good "comparable." It creates a great sense of place within a small core commercial area (less than 5 acres), and its design shows how a pedestrian-oriented main street can coexist with adjacent high traffic arterials. LCG recommends that River Terrace South and West consider this model of neighborhood node- scale commercial development, with an emphasis on food, lifestyle, personal and professional services, and other commercial activities that serve as an amenity to residents and create a sense of place. The Villebois Village Center in Wilsonville is a cautionary tale. Despite the successful and rapid build-out of residential uses—at a relatively high density of 13 dwelling units per net acre—the Village Center has struggled due to its location on the periphery of urban development and adjacent to very low-volume streets, coupled with low rents, parking restrictions, and small lot sizes that prohibit scale. The City of Wilsonville is now considering adopting a Vertical Housing Development Zone program to help incentivize development in the Village Center. River Terrace shares some characteristics with Villebois— including a higher-density land use program, current location near the edge of the metropolitan region, and aspiration for mixed-use centers that can be accessed by residents on foot--and highlights the potential challenges and expected timing of commercial development. 'Traded sector businesses s are companies that sell many of their products and services to people and businesses outside the Portland region,nationally and globally.Traded sector businesses typically drive regional employment growth and tend to pay high salaries than "local"sector businesses.Also see:Talent is America's most precious resource...:https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the- avenue/2019/12/11/talent-is-americas-most-precious-resource-its-time-economic-development-organizations-focus-more-on- developing-it/ River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 6 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis The case studies demonstrate the potential phasing of different development types that might be seen in the River Terrace area. Specifically, they show that residential uses usually build out first, followed by retail, and office is typically a secondary use in edge locations (although there remains an opportunity to co- locate with other commercial uses and capitalize on employee preferences for higher-density, walkable places). Recommended strategies for attracting commercial and employment uses are described below. Additionally, industrial development is limited. Industrial does not generally locate in urbanized mixed-use areas (except in the Northwest Crossing prototype previously referenced), it has one of the lowest development values and struggles to compete with other, higher-rent generating uses, and it needs several characteristics that are not apparent in River Terrace, including access to major transportation routes, large flat sites, and buffering from residential uses. Emerging Trends 15-minute neighborhood. There is a growing interest nationally in the 15-minute neighborhood, in which residents and employees can take care of most daily needs within a 15-minute walk. River Terrace is poised to capitalize on these shifting preferences by providing a mix of commercial goods and services, employment opportunities, and other amenities. Covid-19 Impacts. The Covid-19 pandemic caught most of the world by surprise and has caused dramatic changes to people's daily habits and professional and personal routines. The pandemic has also had significant impacts on real estate development patterns. For example, industrial development is in much greater demand, due to a sharp increase in online shopping and the related needs for local warehousing, distribution, and "on shoring." It has also caused higher demand and prices for single-family homes in most markets. Impacts on rental housing have been mixed. The pandemic has caused significantly decreased demand for office, lodging, and retail, as people practice social distancing. A critical question, however, is how long Covid will impact real estate demand and development. Because this is a long-term plan (20+ years), and we expect that vaccines will enable some return to "normalcy" in 2021 and 2022, the long-term impacts of Covid are not expected to be as great as the short term impacts described above. Overall, though, LCG's view is that the pandemic will likely accelerate the trends towards less retail and office space per capita, and boost demand for suburban residential locations. That said, the City should be on the lookout for Covid-driven changes and willing to adjust the plan accordingly. To stay abreast of national real estate dynamics, LCG recommends that River Terrace stakeholders review the Urban Land Institute's annual Emerging Trends reports. Commercial Considerations Commercial Centers. LCG's analysis indicates that there is likely potential for two, or possibly three, grocery-anchored Neighborhood Centers in the following five urban growth expansion areas River Terrace West and South, River Terrace East, South Cooper Mountain, and King City URA 6D. The other two (or more) commercial and employment nodes would be either neighborhood nodes, main streets, or corner stores or employment hubs. Given the expected timing of development, other centers may be developed before River Terrace West and South. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 7 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis We recommend that over the next 20 years through full project build-out, the project team prepares for two areas of commercial development. River Terrace West should include one node along Scholls Ferry Road that can accommodate 80,000 to 90,000 square feet of commercial space, and may include a second node on Roy Rogers that can accommodate 30,000 to 50,000 square feet. River Terrace South may include a node on Beef Bend that can accommodate 30,000 to 50,000 square feet. All of these commercial spaces may include retail, general commercial, office, healthcare, and other uses. Given the existing household concentrations, future growth trajectories, visibility, and access, we see River Terrace West along Scholls Ferry Road as a prominent location for a potential neighborhood center or commercial center up to 10 acres. In the other two nodes, we recommend a main street approach, each with up to five acres of commercial. Equitable Commercial Development. Most new commercial development is built for large and mid-size chains, and not for businesses that are locally owned, small, or reflective of Tigard's relatively diverse demographics. The City is interested in encouraging more equitable commercial development. This can be a business opportunity since local businesses are by nature different and can capitalize on a market niche. This market analysis, therefore, explores a range of strategies that the City could employ to encourage equitable commercial development;these are described on page 59. Micro Commercial. Our analysis finds that that micro commercial spaces of the type envisioned by the City (buildings of 5,000 square feet or less) have not been a common type of development built by developers over the past 20 years. The primary reasons developers build very little micro commercial appear to be diminished economies of scale, preference for at least one larger anchor or credit tenant, fixed construction costs paired with lower rents, and locations with low visibility Assuming that the City and project stakeholders view micro commercial—particularly within the interior of River Terrace 2.0 neighborhoods—as a desirable type of development, LCG recommends a suite of approaches and incentives similar to those recommended for equitable commercial development in the body of this report. There may be considerable overlap between these two goals. Employment Considerations The City of Tigard's 2011 Employment Opportunities Analysis (EOA) indicated a need for 19 to 45 additional acres of commercial and mixed-use (including employment) land and 14 to 30 additional acres of industrial land between 2011 and 2031.While the addition of River Terrace 1.0 and other annexed areas has changed both the commercial and employment land supply and demand in the City, the City and LCG's assessment is that additional employment land, in particular, is needed.A new EOA will be completed by the City in the near future. To the extent possible, the City would like to see River Terrace 2.0 play a role in meeting employment land needs. However, few locations in the southwest metro suburbs have seen significant office development. The suburban metro locations that have been successful, including Kruse Way and others, are located along major highways, have surrounding workforces that are large and highly educated, are typically anchored by large traded-sector businesses, and have built out over decades. Despite stronger national and regional prospects for industrial development, the River Terrace area is unlikely to attract, or be suitable for industrial users, due to: River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 8 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis • A limited supply of large, flat sites, • Distance from a controlled-access highway, • Current and likely future proximity to residential homes, • Challenging development financial structure, given limited revenue potential from industrial tenants and higher costs associated with non-flat sites, • A location that is currently near the edge with a one-sided market area, limiting the employment catchment area in the near term, before additional population growth to the west. In order for River Terrace 2.0 to meet the employment land needs of the City, the City should consider setting aside land for employment development. The amount of land depends on the City's priorities and policy approach. A modest amount of dedicated employment land (e.g., 5 acres) will do less to satisfy the need identified in the EOA. A larger amount of land (e.g., 10 to 15 acres) has the potential to accommodate more of this land need and to potentially encourage a critical mass and industry clustering; however, absorption is likely to be slower for this larger area. Lodging.While the competition for lodging is strong to the south (along Highway 99W), a new hotel in River Terrace could capitalize on its position as the gateway to wine country and the lack of existing lodging facilities nearby. However, except where tourist demand is very strong, lodging is typically a following use and would occur after most other development is complete. Healthcare. There is an outside chance of attracting a major healthcare user to the area, simply because this part of the southwest metro is relatively underserved. Successfully doing so would likely have a significant positive impact on office and retail prospects. River Terrace Development Program In River Terrace West, LCG has identified two preferred locations for commercial development, which have good visibility and access from major arterials. One of these could be sized to accommodate a neighborhood center, while the other would be a neighborhood node or corner store. Or, they could both be sized to accommodate a commercial development at the neighborhood node size or smaller. It may make sense for plans to allow for up to 30 acres of combined commercial and employment land (15-20 commercial and up to 15 acres employment), though the market may demand a smaller area for the reasons described in this analysis. For this reason, allowing a mix of uses (e.g., higher density housing, healthcare, institutional) along with commercial and employment land uses, may be beneficial so that land does not sit vacant. The ideal location for development will have good visibility and access from Scholls Ferry and Roy Rogers Road. Stakeholders may want to continue to work with the City of Beaverton to plan for a multi jurisdictional, compatible center along Scholls Ferry Road. In River Terrace South, LCG recommends a neighborhood node or main street approach near Roy Rodgers and Beef Bend Road. Stakeholders may want to continue to work with King City to plan for compatible and complementary development along Beef Bend Road. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 9 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Table 1. River Terrace Development Program Summary RT West at Scholls Ferry RT West at Roy Rogers, and RT South at Beef Bend Commercial Anchored center recommended Main Street or Commercial space likely to include "Unanchored Center" retail, restaurant, employment, recommended. healthcare, and other uses. Models: Northwest Crossing TC, Models: Orenco Station, Bethany Village on Scholls Village 30, 000 to 50,000 SF 80,000 to 90,000 SF 3 to 5 acres Up to 10 acres Employment Employment center, including No purpose-built employment office space and potentially land is recommended. healthcare and other uses is optional. Models: Bethany Village, NorthWest Crossing 5 to 20 acres Combined Scenario Commercial and employment Main Street or center with a mix of uses. "Unanchored Center" 10 to 30+ acres 3 to 5 acres Source:LCG Recommendations • Remember that commercial development today is flexible and accommodates a wide range of activities, including food and beverage, retail, general commercial, professional services/office, healthcare, fitness, daycare, banks, and more. Commercial nodes should be locations where residents can secure goods and services, and work. That said, the market for large-scale, single-use office or industrial development is small or nonexistent. • Many desirable communities and commercial centers are mixed-use, and allow housing, live-work, educational, and institutional, within or adjacent to the centers. While the market for live-work space is modest, stakeholders may want to encourage or incentivize it. • Recognize the constraints imposed by market and development economics related to height, density, and vertical mixed-use. In keeping with other regional centers, initial construction is most likely to be at a 0.25 to 0.3 floor-area-ratio (FAR). Parking ratios of 4.0 to 4.5 per thousand square feet of commercial space are common. In the near term, horizontal mixed-use is possible and can create a great sense of place. Opportunities for vertical mixed-use in the near term will be very limited or nonexistent, though possible in the long term (10+ years). Most parking in the near term will be at River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 10 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis surface, though shared parking and on-street parking can reduce the need for large fields of surface parking. • Employment Development Strategy and Incentives. Given the competitive strengths of other existing employment nodes, the City of Tigard will need to be creative in order to attract major employment development to River Terrace, and to use the following strategies and incentives, explained in more detail on page 78: be both proactive and patient; ensure that buildable shovel- ready land is available for employment; invest in talent and quality of place; increase accessibility and visibility via the regional transportation network; consider land acquisitions; provide or expand existing incentives, such as the City's enterprise zone(s) and matching grant program, and seek opportunities to secure funds and incentives through a handful of state programs such as the business expansion and strategic investment programs. Case Studies This section includes brief case studies summarizing four different projects whose stories have some relevance to the study areas: Northwest Crossing in Bend, Villebois in Wilsonville, Bethany Village in Washington County, and Orenco in Hillsboro.All four of the projects are greenfield projects (built on land that was mostly previously undeveloped);were built within a surrounding suburban context; were thoughtfully planned with an emphasis on quality of place and community; and were intended to include one or more centers of commercial and employment activity (the focus of this analysis) as well as a range of housing, quality streets, open spaces, and other features. While each is unique in its own way, each also has unique and context-specific takeaways for the City to consider for the implementation of commercial development in River Terrace. Northwest Crossing, Bend, Oregon Northwest Crossing is a 500-acre master-planned neighborhood in Bend, Oregon. The master developer is Brooks Resources of Bend and the neighborhood is about 1.5 miles west of downtown. It is composed of a wide variety of housing types (single-family, cottages, townhomes, and apartments), over 80 businesses representing a range of sectors (retail, medical, professional services, manufacturing), and a highly walkable network of streets and trails. Commercial uses primarily center along 400 feet of Northwest Crossing Drive (spilling east from Washington Drive).This commercial heart of the town center is approximately three to five acres, depending on the extent to which surrounding roads, sidewalks, and parking lots are included in the count. There is a small amount of retail, yet the project creates a powerful sense of place, with both residents and visitors going out of their way to gather, shop, and stroll on the "main street."The street is connected to Compass Park, 500 feet to the east. Northwest Crossing Drive and the park both host a range of events around the year including Saturday Farmers Market, music, tree lighting, movies, and various festivals. Together, the commercial space, park, street network, range of housing, and other features create something distinctive and elusive— community and sense of place. While these attributes may seem conceptual, they drive financial returns, River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 11 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis particularly through very strong home sales throughout the community's twenty-year history, including during the recession, when home sales in other parts of Bend suffered. Figure 4. Northwest Crossing Land Use Map --. -r.f, -._Bryna ._ • .w y •,. _ M� :-"f .4-may+}_ . -,¶ : $ pP,dt((i; 1'Ii11r., �. . •�' � _ Zane =: p .,- w E:.,' ,.... ;11 1111 r. Y Commercial -:1.► initws�Inui•m ::•,.p. MIRHIM iiillr q- ME-Mixed Lk.. .� . 11111 Si s,111i�affil// 1' 0 ti-1,,,, -► 12�:gym 11ii1111i 1111 111i111I til 1rN*� i r Employment 4-" i,„,•.•,;„,. ;::.7.0 j 1.r. suilmeNstiaMm1111n shirt- r • 41 1- IL-Light industrial •;F. ,,� �,z.��. :+ =i p= 1111111 oAtir4' t M 4' Land Use -'�'”. �_. '_fir l'''41111 Deta ...;....,:••— ,.. .......; -4...", ;7 ! �'M" 2a 111t1114ip,/1+It�;O. ,.�sA��. I J Familyedsin9le �! ^' i_ Illet:1 /Xi.0 r�4 III I. ` Attached Single r. ,w. • ;�� , wd deli"Ili�rlli Pao; •�fs�s 1-iS w1 s ®Family 4 :Inuit? G 4C.:+as rAr10. ...'.ISP'-,,,... -Condos ....•"%. i.r , I 1911[I11ilr.. _ M Zi:-MIR.mama nit i%•-•.•:."-' * ,: - z-7- o.I.11141 . . r Apartments �-ry ip. +� 41:111/1111iRetail ` ,,.4 . , .,I ` ,yr. 4.' 0,4 ♦�i�� PrsRd . _Office w . 11�R cif Nt 'arPr r 0 cixEllin,• Industrial 0,,,,,. 1. L� Rim -School/Church ... it;1111 gyp' -Park r ' ■i.R1�' `� " • �'Vacant v -'1„,„*..-% Lnru.O,r :•i �. - r. h SM - 3i •y.fir+.• - NW skylInerslRd yrL!".l�r.fr•`., .\"' 3 Lr N y ` _ ++ +t.=� '__. T gd,4,: Yeifft '�;'R. .. ._ .. "'-. m Source:LCG The aerial images below show the buildout of NorthWest Crossing over time, beginning in about 2000. The town center commercial core is shown at left in several aerials while another area zoned for commercial and employment is shown at upper right. Note the rapid pace of housing construction between 2000 and 2006, in contrast to the limited commercial development. The northeast location remained undeveloped in 2014 but was almost fully built out by 2021. 2000 2006 , ♦ t s ? x. -1 e7ti ` iwit, .iuy , i17 i . ' .-. ,ur , a y 0 4_ q • !c.y• �,,�Ffir- p..7 .1 �,'�r,r •S: tea` ems-- � .1 1.•,, i 4i1 4.3pi 41 ;4h•'*'1.1� .rr ., �. i it 1 1411?,'"- 1 ,, .. • 116.,4p.. ?-.T.;).."1.:;'-'''%:' } :,, �v �I} ,1'. ''y, �.r +I , . • *. :-V(t ..,"7 +fes !i ;'J .l,.,r,•, •{'.' �` : `_� tea;: ;� 4,i 1 .li j , t 4 K...� . r 1tili6�, yy��■■W.W'' ,,.•sig l 1 - 4i ado, River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 12 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis 2014 2019 .'"" 4,.,:,-. o aw -S,,d,.�p-,C, ,15—�S";FTIP7-rt- r , p e.P " ••1--=_L'.s=,. P' _3_WW 4r \1{`i "?lel v Al g'-' `�, yiM r. •",•'c Pe 1 �'cs I�, rr --_._...„1 Y ',P.'? . f° ft-1.1,:..-.:i2;.:-` T .�' moi 4 - %. ,,:1 t d..r ��y. l"f .v im, I i f .. 1:-fiii,.fir .L. +.Fj�r�J'YiM1 ,.•".a.4� r- + iil/hi� , y • � �• •.. 1�4-7^ . 't tk !"' F'`• �L./a• r a��,r s : -i�'+�•' t '• k ! t' 4-jjy�ay{' q*i .• --1 4 - ! td' _ • _y! 4. • {• ; '.: + �k i rr'1.1 .ErAI..' R r; •� G• .. Source:Google Satellite Imagery Today, while many of NorthWest Crossing's most desirable commercial and employment sites are developed, some remain undeveloped (also see land use map above). Of 53.6 acres of employment and commercial-zoned land, 13% (7.0 acres) are currently under construction (i.e., built approximately 20 years after the project broke ground) and 25% (13.2 acres) remain undeveloped. Figure 5. Commercial and Employment Land Development at NorthWest Crossing Zoning Total Acres Developed Undeveloped Under Construction CL - Limited Commercial 15.2 61% 27% 12% ME - Mixed Employment 21.2 33% 43% 25% IL - Light Industrial 17.2 100% 0% 0% Total 53.6 62% 25% 13% Source:Deschutes County Assessor So, is this a commercial and employment success story? It depends on the point of view. Many developers seek to build and lease-up commercial and employment space within several years of land acquisition; for them, having some vacant land after 20 years of development represents an opportunity cost—the land could have been zoned for another use (typically housing) and been rented or sold in earlier years. Likewise, renters and homeowners could have had homes to live in. However, from a policy point of view, if a city or other authority is seeking to ensure adequate land for commercial and employment development, and associated jobs, this can be seen as a success. Northwest Crossing's commercial town center serves as an important reminder that: • Creating a strong sense of place is possible with a small amount of commercial development when it is carefully and deliberately built. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 13 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis • While commercial space needs exposure to high-traffic arterials (Washington Drive), pedestrian-oriented places should be created on main streets that are 'I� 1v - ftt perpendicular to the arterials. It is often not .:-_ d: . * ..;. 'r y comfortable for pedestrians to walk and talk s0 , a . " or dine outside, along arterial roads, so creating a pedestrian-friendly environment is 7 %i1 easier on perpendicular streets. • Commercial development takes time in less • traditional locations (i.e., those without large populations and traffic counts). Housing was faster to build out at NorthWest Crossing—commercial and employment followed. • A commercial main street is one important amenity that can make the rest of the community more desirable. • LCG believes that the size, scale, and design of NorthWest Crossing's commercial center is a good model for one or more "nodes" of development at River Terrace 2.0. Northwest Crossing has had relative success in attracting significant employment development. Capitalizing on Bend's quality of life characteristics, concentration in outdoor recreation and "maker" industries, and emerging start-up culture, Northwest Crossing has been able to attract several small manufacturing and mid-size headquarters to its employment area. In total, about 16 acres of office development and 15 acres of industrial development have been built. This makes it one of the most successful greenfield communities in Oregon in terms of attracting employment uses, and an upper end to the amount of employment development that River Terrace is likely to be able to achieve. Development by acreage for NorthWest Crossing and other case study projects is shown in the Key Takeaways following the case studies. As mentioned above, NorthWest crossing was led by master developer Brooks Resources, who purchased the entire 500 acres in the 1990s, used a phased buildout approach for the residential component and was willing to be very patient on the development of commercial and employment sites. The other case studies described here were also led by a single master developer. LCG cannot say at this point whether this will be the case at River Terrace 2.0. The property is currently held in numerous disparate ownerships and no master developer is known. One reason that a master developer is significant is that they are more likely to "over-invest" in amenities such as commercial and employment centers, because, at least in theory, a desirable commercial center will make the entire neighborhood more attractive and desirable and enable the master developer to "internalize" the greater revenue generated by faster home sales and more valuable homes—even if the commercial center is expensive to develop and has a low return on investment.When a property is controlled by many owners, each owner has far less incentive to view commercial and employment areas as loss leaders that drive the success of the overall community. Villebois, Wilsonville, Oregon Villebois is a 500 acre, mixed-use, master-planned community in Wilsonville, Oregon—a city in the very south of the Portland Metropolitan Area. A range of residential units was planned at a target density of 13 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 14 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis dwelling units per acre (not including open space, right-of-way, or school sites).The residential areas have been built out as planned. About 200 acres was previously owned by the State of Oregon and was the former Dammasch State Hospital. In 1997, the State authorized the property to be sold. In the early 2000s, the State sold the Dammasch property to master developer Costa Village Center Pacific Communities, and in 2003 Costa Pacific and LAND USE DENSITY" UNITS ACRES the City of Wilsonville completed the Villebois - SpeaallyCondos 50 127 20 Concept Plan, which showed how homes, schools, n1 ed Use Condos 40 104 2.3 parks, roads, the commercial Village Center, and - organ Apartments 35 s0 2-4 other elements would be developed throughout the Condos 30 124 39 area. - Village Apartments 30 411 13-1 Neighborhood Apartments 22 31 22 The Concept Plan called for the Village Center to - Rowhouses 16 314 24-3 provide space for a wide array of uses, including a - small Lot Attactied 12 205 14-9 plaza, mixed-use development, and numerous - small Lal single Family 10 604 36.0 commercial uses, including bookstore, clothing, MIR Medium Lor Single Famity 10 343 34 D jeweler, specialty grocery, bakery, hardware, bank, Standard Lot Single Family 6 138 31.8 hotel, research and development, and more. No Large Lot Single Family 5 132 22.7 surface parked commercial space was planned for. Instead, the Concept Plan identifies a Estate Lot Single Family 3 22 72 Commercial/Employment Overlay area of about 30 RESSDENnALUNITS TOTAL 13 2645 196.6 acres of buildable land, in which lower-floor srXDDlsile [ExcIudes3acolcammunity¢arkl 7.0 commercial development would be provided as one open space SExGudeSdelenb0npondFJ 158.9 component of mixed-use projects such as higher Area R OW (Includes delenlbnpdnds) 118.9 density, mixed-use condo, apartment, employment, PLANNING AREA TOTAL 451.6 or lodging projects. While much of Villebois—including the single-family detached and attached homes, schools, and parks— have built out rapidly and successfully since the early 2000s, the Village Center has struggled.According to Costa Pacific Communities CEO Rudy Kadlub and City officials, retail development in the area is challenging due to high construction costs, low retail rents, parking restrictions and small parcel sizes, among other challenges. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 15 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 6. Villebois Land Use Map .m _ .de; a Land Use lid I Detached Single Family :iti III. u1 7_ 1 4 E-1 Attached Single Family ►11f=.7..... _ '#` 11' ' ➢ MI Condos ::V, = Apartments air r;:--2 12-5;7,.. 4 •.' - -. _, . Commercial __ �`� ' =Office ,• f,+,,� ': • _+ I - Hospitality ,�,-c` _ • � 7.. ,_ r== l MI Park [r. J1 = :! ill / � _� il r C Vacant .. .- / _ .,, - Agricultural '1+ ✓. +, ,..,-_- _f_„,...: °..-/-J;.�;oL11,.,1M: IM 11'1,/71.:.�;;•• ►' 11:,-. MSchool �qGj`y.•l+•gi ,��.,4�// .,„.,„„1n11E ii it Il'u'Ilu�wn4[,iii' = I� ir 4. a[amour ��' ��j ii aur 1[tlllrii, °- .1' • "�+' 1�. 1=a~�=�._'�ulifiFll�F: 3 i.27:uomur 1[[InFl4� '�� I ..-- .., . • , , , • , •t7,,, : i - 4%r dili - .S i. 'liit+feu IP E. , • , ,rt„, 8 E3C7SZ Source:Metro RLIS, LCG Villebois remains on the periphery of urban development and does not draw from a broad residential base outside of the community. This limits the number of"rooftops"to support commercial development. There are less than 4,000 households within a five-minute drive of the Village Center. High construction costs coupled with low rents, parking restrictions, and small lot sizes that prohibit scale have further contributed to a challenging environment for commercial development. There is a small amount of ground-floor commercial space _ Southeast side of the Piazza in the Domaine at Villeboisu, apartment project. These spaces have been slow to lease and M- `tc '_''R`- intermittently vacant for years. Another major factor that negatively impacted Villebois' -; ' commercial prospects is Wilsonville Old Town Square, which k I ,. was built in 2011 in a superior commercial location (adjacent' � ' 119 _, ,21 1-.I 1. to I-5 and on Wilsonville Road) with higher population • rp counts, auto visibility, and traffic counts than Villebois. Old a, ,e f'° -- - - 4. • ' Town Square includes a Fred Meyer Grocery store, food and 'i �i beverage, and other retailers, whereas the Villebois Village = Center is relatively hidden and has low traffic counts.While there has not been an exhaustive study comparing the two locations, it is certainly possible that Old Town Square reduced the feasibility of commercial space in Villebois. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 16 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis To help incentivize development in the Village Center, the City of Wilsonville is now considering adopting a Vertical Housing Development Zone program, where Oregon cities provide developers with a 10-year partial property tax exemption for mixed-use developments. Bethany Village, Portland Figure 7. Bethany Village Location Bethany Village is a master-planned Bethany community with rental and for-sale „^ c, housing, parks, and commercial uses, fv• _ including retail, office, education, and =Iryhealthcare. The construction of Bethany • Village began in 1991 and it continues to build out today, although most of the • commercial uses were built between 1995 and 2001. Commercial uses today include additional retail, office, and r ' healthcare, educational, and recreational Ptst? facilities. Like River Terrace, the Bethany area was once an undeveloped, agricultural area on the edge of the metropolitan urbanized area.As residential development spread north from Highway 26 in the 1980s and 90s, demand for commercial services and other amenities also grew and ultimately Bethany Village (or Central Bethany) became the commercial and employment heart of the larger Bethany community. Unlike River Terrace, however, Bethany Village's commercial center has little nearby competition and can capture a high proportion of household spending from nearby households. The four satellite images of the area below show the growth of the area within a 20-year timeframe. Since 2010, higher-density (and more expensive construction types) have been built. While Bethany Village could still be considered an "edge location," rapid residential construction has resulted in a relatively high household density. In fact, there are approximately 21,000 households within a one-mile radius with a median household income of$133,310, and 99,372 households within a three-mile radius with a median household income of$106,086.As shown in the Commercial Market Analysis section, these household density trends are consistent with other grocery-anchored centers in the region. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 17 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis 1990 1994 ire....401 I r .pagat- . ,t . ,, . _____ 4 + ..... ...„..... .. , , ... . , . awl: t V aht F v .'i } y f ` r ina.a.c4 . sp: ., „, _. . 2001 2010 Fig Bila. ., '} Alli Ti,T� I It Mgr oto„," 4i,s1:011',..- 1)4 VW:re • b .• Ins 11 - s,.. eil4 at . -* eta g .- • i }. ..+• F i. '..7. y�.J „yam - �' -. ;:'_._ J....7, ' ..', -i fc: ,o,.. %,., , ., t , . -_,,- ;,,..., , ••i Source:Google Satellite Imagery The commercial and employment core of Bethany Village is modest in size and surrounded by medium and higher-density housing, including attached homes, townhomes, apartments, condominiums, and a senior living facility. Commercial and employment uses comprise 20 aces, or 10 percent, of the 208 total acres that LCG defines as Bethany Village, and 300,000 square feet, or 6.6 percent, of 4.54 million total square feet. As a percentage of the entire Bethany community, the commercial and employment components are much smaller, and the residential components are much larger. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 18 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 8. Bethany Village Land Uses • est- Imonica GE, Ci? Land Use •. i Detached Single Family •.. �' [ ] Attached Single Family sBethanpy C�:� 0 mi Condos Aga* • ,� 4, . _ Ilk Iia r ' Apartments + 11 i1= ,x« .= 7 IM Commercial t = ,'11.lq�µ{p1. ;.r rr. . • ramProm W nc.o. la MB) uueN Med K. . v,...,—.-= .a.3rF��. 4 ... ME Office y o�rx >» m x w � -+aurN•.ek 6Hh.1 Beiharry � �ti„��a^Y: / � MI Hospitality 11p�U��■�•, P _�`hei8thriy ~ v lUll Park �?t�t.` IP.* � t'. 5 ti' ma o 0 Vacant = - orsi 1. TA ON 05, +.r. t8u7 0 - - 9 - r'07.. i► il►1:Lai a 1111 l T� u131tunlu.IH1+- 4111 4e cit Spm =111111E II ItnpIIM1 "' �Ck , !'a O r C i Yet•f`: • Somerset - 'Idruiidiit Qpw - Meadows - , Sillif S kIMG Source:Costar, Metro RLIS, Leland Consulting Group There has been a sequence of development types, starting with single-family residential. Retail has been phased over the course of more than 10 years as residential units (single-family, attached, and multifamily) were built. Condominium and higher density apartments (MFR or multifamily residential below) units were the last residential type to build out. Office, while generally limited, was the last non- residential type to begin construction, and followed a similar 10+ year construction trajectory.There is no industrial development in Bethany Village. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 19 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 9. Central Bethany Development by Square Feet per Year 800,000 SF Detached SF Attached •Condo Multifamily •Commercial • Office 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 • I • 11 . . I : _ N m Ln r m rn o N m 1-n LCDr co al o N m 1-n r co rn rn rn o) rn cm al rn o1 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 of Cn of of Ol of o of Ol of O N O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Source:Costar, Metro RLIS, Leland Consulting Group These trends demonstrate the potential phasing of different development types that might be seen in the River Terrace area. Specifically, they show that residential uses usually build out first, followed by commercial, and office is typically a secondary use in edge locations. However, there remain opportunities to co-locate with other commercial uses and capitalize on employee preferences for higher-density, walkable places. Additionally, industrial development is limited. While the reasons for this are not explicitly stated, industrial does not generally locate in urbanized mixed-use areas. It has one of the lowest development values and therefore struggles to compete with other, higher-value uses. It also needs several characteristics that are not apparent in Bethany Village, including access to major transportation routes and isolation from residential uses. Orenco Station, Hillsboro Orenco is a 190-acre master-planned community in Hillsboro, Oregon, developed by PacTrust (master developer, Town Center lead) and Costa Pacific (residential developer). Centered around a light-rail station, the development is transit-oriented and is considered pedestrian- scale, featuring a mixed-use town center with offices and housing above ground-floor retail. Orenco has more than 2,000 residential units, including single-family homes, townhouses, apartments, accessory units, live-work, and loft units.A traditional retail shopping center was more recently built to the east of Cornell Road. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 20 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 10. Orenco Station Land Uses Land Use 4411 Detached Single Family Attached Single Family �QG33 =Condos go- fr �c61t't,Q 8wlerw -- OFA: 0 , .Apartments G� S a tfr► e . e:a�r.rs• 4r p�S �;: r r =Commercial ; um=C" t:z z;ink�s;►►s►v*sur►►► 4- OFflce tut i WTie If • r ® X11--! =tie _ - j Hospitality :1111:1 _ _ ►. _4'' =Park -y ��: :f=E == ,1 Vacant 111111x, i `-'- �W • ' ' -., ` - . . .. 1i� p i- HE WalnrrdgelvQ Forest Sri v 11 4, :. . __:;i.. . • . 11,# ` . , .4 -.- ..... ''"7" f 14"*MP "Ve. a • .. i Mt=QM mrnmao l � Ei aalstDrenco Malo In order to simplify the development timeline and analysis, Orenco Station can be thought of as taking place in two major phases. Phase 1 (as defined in this report) is north of Cornell Road and includes the Town Center, which serves as an amenity and center that helps to sell nearby homes. PacTrust has stated that they do not see the Town Center as being financially successful in its own right—due to the higher cost of development associated with high-quality streets, sidewalks, landscaping, other placemaking elements, and mixed-use buildings; and moderate rents—though it was extremely valuable to home sales. Initial development types were wood-frame and surface-parked. Phase l's popularity amongst residents enabled "Phase 2" (south of Cornell Road) to get built and paved the way for more expensive development types (e.g., stacked flat condominiums, mixed-use apartments, structured parking). Over time, the market became proven, rent premiums were demonstrated, and developers took on these more expensive and ambitious projects. a 91. . .-ear.'—'‘. _ Y 1i.y1 q' the.. ee f'ir l :�'T;-r?_.� • . •y I. 1.1 � ._I Viii ,j, ei �r 5• . ome7 ripirsi,--1 ` --."vidl 2612-1014 1y90, 1948 2002 The o The Platform District Master Plan Groundbreaking Town Center Condominiums with Mixed Use Apartments Zoning Single-family and Two and three stories moi°''""grade parking 4-6 stories Entitlements attached housing two and three stories One and two stories Orenco is generally perceived as a success in the marketplace, both by residents and by the City of Hillsboro, and demonstrates that developing dense, walkable, mixed-use places takes time. In the case of River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 21 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Orenco Station—which is centrally located and served by high capacity transit—development has taken more than 25 years. Case Study Summary Figure 11 below shows the current net acres of development by land use at the four case study projects described above. Three of the four projects have a built commercial component; two have an employment component; one has an industrial component and one has a hotel. Northwest Crossing's "unanchored" commercial center is about 3 net acres (private property area, not including roads, sidewalks, or other ancillary areas). Figure 11. Net Acres of Development by Land Use at Case Study Projects NorthWest Villebois Bethany Village Orenco Station Crossing Wilsonville WA.County Hillsboro Bend Timeframe 2000–2019 2005-2019 1990-2019 1997–2016 Years of Data 20 15 30 20 Detached Single Family 147 116 124 20 Attached Single Family 12 9 Condos 0 1 8 16 Apartments 8 2 32 52 167 133 187 97 Total Residential Acres 83% 100% 90% 89% Commercial 0 13 6 Office 16 0 7 2 Industrial 15 0 0 0 Hospitality 0 0 0 4 34 0 20 12 Total Corn. & Employment Acres 17% 0% 10% 11% Total 201 133 207 110 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 22 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Sources:RLIS;county assessor parcel data;CoStar;Leland Consulting Group. Some figures may not sum correctly due to rounding. The Orenco and Bethany commercial areas both have a grocery anchor and range from six to 13 acres. The office components of Bethany and NorthWest Crossing range from seven to 16 acres. Bethany Village probably represents an optimistic/aggressive model for a large commercial and employment center at River Terrace 2.0, but as discussed above, Bethany Village has little nearby competition, while there are many competing commercial centers near River Terrace 2.0. As discussed further elsewhere in this report, LCG believes that the industrial component of NorthWest crossing will be hard to replicate at River Terrace 2.0. Socio-Economic Analysis This section provides an analysis of demographic and economic trends in Tigard and the surrounding region to better understand the makeup of, and factors that affect, commercial real estate in the River Terrace area. Demographic Trends This section includes demographic information that impacts commercial real estate, including population, income, densities, and household composition. As Figure 12 shows, the population of the immediate River Terrace area has increased much faster than the broader region yet pales in comparison in terms of the total population, reflecting its current situation as a new growth area at the edge of the metropolitan region. Figure 12.Total Population 2020 (left) and Population Growth Rate (right) 2000-2020 151,998 3.4% 57,757 56,073 1.6% 1.2% 1.4% 9,088 RT 1mi buffer RT 3mi RT 5mi Tigard buffer buffer RT 1mi buffer Tigard Wash.Co. Metro Source:ESRI, Leland Consulting Group Figure 13 shows the location of River Terrace West and South relative to the region's existing population clusters.While there is currently little population to the immediate north, west, and south of both River Terrace West and South, the near- to mid-term development of adjacent areas—including South Cooper River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 23 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Mountain, King City, and River Terrace 1.0—is expected to greatly increase population density in the area. In the much longer-term—likely beyond the planning horizon for this study—development will occur further west in the areas currently designated as rural reserves. Figure 13. Population Density, 2020 ,,,:i!:H 414443 .44/ 114-Or- I , .% ' lglak. ., carne _ alli 4, E- `..L. .,. ......� r ~- _.. L...-' ,:;,, S4, f �y VOA G . .� gf•e r—i irt4,44)r -.. 1 ;1.T%, 1 IL I . Pop. per 5q. Mi. E -:' J mi Aft tt ratff Irl ' . 54- 10,000 -, .. n 1;i• 1170 *154 rI L=_ ,. tiii. Iri a-- 2 • 10,000- 25,000 1 il . - ._ • . - 1 1111 25,000 50,000 .; F,'Y(: MP ,zpsa 50,000 100,000 I.,,,, , „,,„..ak,4, „R..' "�., % .Dswego - P.41:4NP- IP"' ...,cAlirti4t • 100.000 + k Kin.111k rmir 4 ''''u rook I a _ .5 r I ro '0 .,_-, .. ,Ri rove CP i l - .4'4-•' 7— West t m 111 r + ° I' • .� erg rrJ - 41i , Aldik. j !f�+'_;_ivy. 0 ti 5 10 mi ,_ i?ypdee Canby Source:ESRI, Leland Consulting Group As Table 2 shows, the River Terrace area has attracted a greater proportion of households occupied by younger residents than the surrounding area, with significantly more residents under the age of 18 and fewer senior (65+) residents. This potentially indicates that the area has attracted a greater proportion of young families than the general population. Despite the higher proportion of younger households in the River Terrace area, the total number of households remains relatively low due to its peripheral location on River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 24 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis the edge of the metro region. However, if the area continues to exhibit similar age trends in the future, employment and commercial prospects will increase. A higher proportion of children and young adults has significant implications for commercial development prospects. For retail, the consumer habits and purchasing behavior of Generation Y and Millennials, in particular, are well-documented. Both tend to be health- and lifestyle-oriented, devoting a greater share of spending to food, health, and beauty retailers, specialty apparel stores, and clinics. Households with children drive demand for childcare and child-focused retailers. For employment uses (office, industrial), companies are increasingly chasing young, educated workers and choosing to locate their businesses in central locations with access to these groups. Over time, this has resulted in an increasing concentration of employment centers in central cities rather than the suburbs. Table 2. Population by Age, 2020 RT 1mi RT 3mi RT 5mi Tigard WA Metro buffer buffer buffer County <18 28% 23% 23% 23% 24% 22% 18-34 17% 22% 21% 22% 23% 23% 35-44 15% 14% 14% 14% 15% 14% 45-54 15% 14% 14% 13% 13% 13% 55-64 13% 13% 13% 13% 12% 13% 65+ 11% 15% 15% 16% 14% 16% Source:ESRI On average, there is a greater concentration of higher-income households in the immediate River Terrace area than in the wider region. Income characteristics are important because prospective commercial developers seek areas with higher median household incomes because they tend to have a better chance of attracting retail and office tenants. Additionally, income and educational attainment are strongly correlated, and employers now prioritize locations where they have access to "talent" (skilled workforce). River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 25 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 14. Households by Income (2020) SRT 1mi buffer RT 3mi buffer RT 5mi buffer Tigard — •Washington County--- Portland Metro 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% ♦♦ • 10.0% ♦ 5.0% 0.0% $15k- $25k- $35k- $50k- $75k- $100k- $150k- <$15k $24k $34k $49k $74k $99k $149k $199k $200k+ Source:ESRI The following chart shows a high proportion of households with children in the immediate River Terrace area. Family households and households with children have different consumer habits than nonfamily or single- person households, and often display greater potential to patronize local retailers and professional and medical office space. Tapestry segmentation data provides a good framework for understanding these behavioral preferences concerning spending and employment. Esri's Tapestry Market Segmentation is a geodemographic system that identifies 68 distinctive markets in the US based on socioeconomic and demographic characteristics to provide an accurate, comprehensive profile of US consumers. The top tapestry segments for River Terrace and the City of Tigard are described below. Figure 15. Households with Children, 2010 Percent of Households with Children 50.0% 40.0% 7% 30.0% 35% mom . 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% RT 1mi buffer RT 3mi buffer RT 5mi buffer Tigard Washington Portland Metro County Source:ESRI The top tapestry segment for River Terrace (one-mile buffer) is Affluent Estates (97 percent of households), described by ESRI as follows. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 26 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis • Established wealth—educated, well-traveled married couples • Accustomed to "more": nationwide, this group comprises less than 10% of all households but accounts for 20% of household income • Expect quality; invest in time-saving services • Participate actively in their communities • Active in sports and enthusiastic travelers • Household budget indexes across all spending categories exceed the average amount spend by US households, reflecting the group's relative affluence and spending capacity for various amenities and services. • Categories include housing, food, apparel services, transportation, healthcare, entertainment and recreation, education, and pensions and social security. The top tapestry segment for Tigard, on the other hand, is Middle Ground (25 percent of households; Affluent Estates is second with 18 percent of households), and clearly shows the difference between current households in River Terrace and the rest of Tigard. • Lifestyles of thirty-somethings • Millennials in the middle: single/married, renters/homeowners, middle class/working class • The urban market is a mix of single-family, townhome, and multi-unit dwellings • The majority of residents attended college or attained a college degree • Householders rely on cell phones rather than landlines, reflecting a greater comprehension and use of technology • Highly tech-savvy and mobile, using the internet for entertainment, social media, and employment • Leisure includes nightlife, travel, and recreation Economic Trends Tigard exists as part of an interconnected economy in the Portland Region. Several major employment hubs exist throughout the region which attracts commuters from around the metro region and even beyond. Major employment hubs tend to have greater "activity density," which is the combination of residents and workers.A greater activity density improves prospects for commercial uses. Daytime population is a similar metric.The concept of daytime populations refers to the number of people, including workers, who are present in a city or town during normal business hours. Daytime population refers to all the people who are typically present in an area during normal business hours and may include the following: workers, children in school, people staying temporarily in hospitals or hotels/motels, customers in retail facilities, and non-commuters (i.e., people who are not employed outside their homes). Counting and reporting customers based on where they work and spend their day is a critical component of a competitive community's marketing strategy to grow its commercial base. If an area shrinks during the day, more residents are leaving the area than people coming in and vice versa.A balanced daytime and nighttime population ratio would insinuate a more complete neighborhood than a traditional suburban edge location, with a mix of commercial, employment, and residential uses. River Terrace 2.0 is River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 27 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis envisioned as a higher-density, urbanized, mixed-use neighborhood. The following map shows the daytime population by census block group in the southwest metropolitan area. The immediate River Terrace area (one-mile radius) has a ratio of 0.8, indicating a relative lack of jobs. The ratio for the City of Tigard is 1.2, showing a significantly greater employment focus, at least at present. As the following pages demonstrate, however, residential uses are typically the first to develop, followed by retail and, lastly, employment. Strong demand for residential and, secondly, retail uses will likely exist in the near- and mid-term, while demand for employment uses (office, industrial, healthcare) may come later. The scope and scale of full employment and commerce opportunities are explored more in this memorandum. Figure 16. Daytime Population Density, 2020 Cornet- • s ` .... v :'saw H ''> `'„' 'i, ,L, i-----1 „' „,,,,,,. ii,„ ,,_, ., . iii. ....,... ._ allillpi --ft- A.60_,___Pli 1V/1$ i ,.-, ,,1114r. 11"1:ii.'1 Olio PI 1111.15--ILL.-2/110 ft , ilp - -,ME _- - .t•- .._:=aS,�. ` +' r 5- �s �'IL to : .,,- r- ir' . --- . 49W ` . e e lilyilik, '• 1 swag ` ` t s� King tityl PO '��lri �W . 1 '� �r a 1 1xi i J I f e![rove .■' TuaialifY w. -•_` in al - Sherwood _ r ti 1 .- ' West Lir! --- —_std 0 as R 1 i43 g 12 qg • L.L4.1,— illif 0 `lc 5 10 mi )undo:. Canby Source:ESRI, Leland Consulting Group River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 28 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Another key metric used by commercial brokers and prospective tenants is educational attainment, largely because it can demonstrate an area's potential for higher income capacity. Median income, comparatively, can be more indicative of age and household size. There are high levels of educational attainment closest to River Terrace—significantly higher than the region at large.This is a positive indicator for commercial prospects. Figure 17. 2020 Population (25+) with a Bachelor's or Advanced Degree 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% RT 1mi buffer RT 3mi buffer RT 5mi buffer Tigard Washington Portland Metro County Source:ESRI, Leland Consulting Group Access to Talent Talent is critical to location decisions for employers and is the single most important factor driving urban economic success is the educational attainment of a city's population.2 Economic development partners and employers talk about "Talent" in terms of(1) the size of the skilled labor force in the market area, (2) the size or percentage of the population with a college degree, and (3) industry composition. The data shows the current limitations and disadvantages of River Terrace relative to other employment areas in the southwest metro region from an employment growth perspective but also highlights potential opportunities. • The River Terrace radius is consistent in terms of the total population and the number of "working-age" residents (aged 25 to 64) with peripheral locations like Intel and Bridgeport. However, these are very large, purpose-built developments (Intel, for example, exceeds 350 acres). • Typically, having 44.2 percent with a college degree would indicate high educational attainment, but other employment areas generally exhibit much higher rates. • Prospective employers in River Terrace would have current access to an educated workforce. • The data reflects Portland CBD as the premier employment hub, with the highest number and proportion of educated residents and traded sector jobs of all the comparison areas. 2 https://citvobservatorv.ora/talent-and-prosperity/ River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 29 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Table 3 provides a comparison of these metrics for a five-mile radius around River Terrace and a variety of employment centers in the Portland metro region. The data shows the current limitations and disadvantages of River Terrace relative to other employment areas in the southwest metro region from an employment growth perspective but also highlights potential opportunities. • The River Terrace radius is consistent in terms of the total population and the number of "working-age" residents (aged 25 to 64) with peripheral locations like Intel and Bridgeport. However, these are very large, purpose-built developments (Intel, for example, exceeds 350 acres). • Typically, having 44.2 percent with a college degree would indicate high educational attainment, but other employment areas generally exhibit much higher rates. • Prospective employers in River Terrace would have current access to an educated workforce. • The data reflects Portland CBD as the premier employment hub, with the highest number and proportion of educated residents and traded sector jobs of all the comparison areas. Table 3.Talent Metrics, Five-mile Radii, 2020 River Terrace Nike Intel Portland Bridgeport Tigard 2.0 Campus Campus CBD Village Triangle Direct Hwy. Access No Yes Yes es Yes Yes Population Total 222,194 360,742 231,526 434,499 213,932 308,024 Population 25-64 118,867 197,056 I 126,287 262,348 114,339 164,176 %with Bachelors 44.20% 51.50% I 46.60% 63.10% 54.80% 56.15% Population with 67,074 126,468 71,054 205,418 83,022 95,813 Bachelors Total Jobs 76,846 120,818 78,302 370,322 I 120,427 146,152 Traded Sector Jobs3 26,079 37,435 26,753 107,944 I 40,350 45,089 Healthcare & Ed.Jobs 10,618 23,955 14,292 103,123 I 19,319 25,764 Source:ESRI. Note:Direct Highway Access is defined here as being within approximately one mile of an ODOT maintained, controlled-access highway. Household and Employment Projections While prospective commercial users consider the existing consumer base, future growth trajectories are just as important. Combined, this existing and future base impacts the overall purchasing power, consumer behavior and preferences, commercial space utilization, and access and visibility. As such, calculating demand for new commercial uses necessitates an assessment of population and employment growth. In "new" areas on the edge of the urban metropolitan area like Tigard River Terrace, 3 LCG's estimate of traded sector jobs includes the following industries:manufacturing,transportation and warehousing,information, finance and insurance,professional,scientific,and technical services,and management of companies and enterprises. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 30 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis projections are likely to mirror recent trends and are greatly impacted by the availability of developable land.These areas are usually among the fastest-growing areas in the region. The household and employment projections below inform LCG's approximation of market demand for commercial uses, as described in greater detail in the following pages. Table 4. Household and Job (all industries) Projections, 2015-2040 Households Jobs,All Industries 2015- 2015- 2015 2040 2040 APR% 2015 2040 2040 APR% Beaverton 37,808 47,100 9,292 0.88% 57,053 78,471 21,418 1.28% King City 2,005 3,222 1,217 1.92% 709 1,143 434 1.93% Tigard 19,585 28,291 8,706 1.48% 46,041 63,919 17,878 1.32% Total 59,398 78,613 19,215 1.13% 103,803 143,533 39,730 1.30% Wash. Co. 202,819 276,213 73,394 1.24% 266,600 398,484 131,884 1.62% Unincorp. 9,574 23,844 14,270 3.72% 6,772 11,936 5,164 2.29% Wash Co. Source:Metro The following chart shows employment growth by industry sector for the next 10 years at the metro region level. Employment growth of 1.01 percent is expected, meaning Tigard and Washington County are expected to add jobs at a faster growth rate than the region generally. In order for River Terrace to be an employment hub, the City will need to capture some portion of this anticipated employment growth at the regional level. Fast-growing industries like healthcare and social assistance, professional and technical services, and management of companies and enterprises provide opportunities for new office and healthcare development. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 31 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 18. Metro Region Job Growth Projection,Total Jobs and Annual Growth, 2019-2029 Accommodation ■ ■2019 - Natural resources&mining IN Arts, entertainment, &recreation Mr I ■2029 Information Private educational services Real estate&rental &leasing Finance&insurance Mgmt.of companies ■ Transp.,warehousing, &utilities ■ Other services 1 Wholesale trade I - Construction ■ Administrative&waste services Self-employment Professional &technical services Food services&drinking places Retail trade Manufacturing M Government Health care&social assistance Iffi 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 -0.1% 0.4% 0.9% 1.4% 1.9% Source:Oregon Employment Department, Workforce&Economic Research Division Market Trends The following section describes the market conditions and demand for commercial development, including retail, office, and industrial uses. Nationally, one of the longest periods of economic growth following the Great Recession of 2007-2009 has come to an end, exacerbated by the global pandemic in 2020. Regionally, economic growth has materialized in significant construction across all real estate sectors. Housing construction boomed all across the region and commercial development followed thereafter—albeit at a lesser rate due largely to retail sector constriction and other forces such as ecommerce—but the construction of office and industrial space has been more concentrated. Market Cycles Market cycles play a major role in attracting development and investment interest to certain areas.The length of a full market cycle is inconsistent, with the most recent lasting approximately 12 years following the Great Recession. While market cycles play a less significant role in development prospects over 20+ years, on average, the City needs to understand these cycles to capitalize on opportunities for certain land uses. For example, as the following conceptual chart from RCLCo shows, most real estate sectors (nationally)were already entering the "bottom" of the market cycle before the impacts of the COVID pandemic were fully felt (the x-axis represents time). There are now opportunities for investment in land and industrial, however. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 32 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 19. Real Estate Market Cycle Status, Current (2020) and Future (2022) 0 Current CwIe Stage 0 Future Cycle Stage Late Stable '•,rly Downturn Full Downturn Bottum Early Recovery RESORT/SECONI HOME • 4, FOR-SALE RESIDENTIAL 4,0 LAND • • MULTIFAMILY • 4, RETAIL • • HOSPITALITY 0 ]� OFFICE 00 AGE-RESTRICTED/AAC 0 ]' INDUSTRIAL •• SENIORS/CCRC4. 0 + + Source:RCLCo Hospitality and regional malls have been hit the hardest by both the current economic downturn and economic impacts of the pandemic on consumer behavior, which has only exacerbated the looming challenges that were already facing many industries. Industrial prospects have been growing rapidly due to the rise in ecommerce and the need for"last mile" logistics and distribution. All other commercial sectors appear to be nearing the "bottom" of their respective market cycles and may start to exhibit signs of recovery in the coming years, depending on the length of the downtown and the extent of the impact of the pandemic. This is a sentiment backed up by the Urban Land Institute in its annual Emerging Trends in Real Estate publication. Emerging Trends similarly summarizes the prospects of various real estate sectors. According to ULI, • Industrial and housing top the list for national investment and development prospects. • There are significantly weaker development prospects for offices, hotels, and retail. • Industrial and distribution uses have become increasingly popular investments in recent years, largely due to the rapid rise of e-commerce (which has been accelerated by the 2020-2021 pandemic). The 2020-2021 pandemic has accelerated demand for"last mile" facilities that essentially allow for the final leg of delivery, and many industrial brokers and developers are now exploring ways to capitalize on this trend in areas that have perhaps been previously overlooked for light industrial uses. However,while these last-mile industrial facilities are smaller than the average distribution facility, they are typically still in River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 33 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis excess of 50,000 square feet at 0.20-0.25 FAR, generate significant truck traffic, and prefer locations on high-capacity transportation networks. Further, the rapid emergence of drones as delivery vehicles may cause another disruption in the industry.At a more appropriate scale for neighborhood commercial, pickup locations, such as Amazon's Hub Locker, will continue to grow in popularity as micro-distribution facilities increase to match growing ecommerce use. Trends like these have only emerged relatively recently and demonstrate the unpredictability of the market and the challenges of forecasting development opportunities, especially over a period of 20 years or more. However, previous market cycles have shown an ebb and flow and a continued need for commercial uses in fast-growing residential areas, regardless of national prospects. Changing Consumer Behavior Several trends in consumer behavior provide additional cause for optimism for commercial and employment uses in River Terrace. In fact, while national research and publications provide helpful context for development prospects, there are significant opportunities for differentiation and "hyper-local" retail orientation that capitalizes on consumer preferences and rapidly changing behaviors. One notable shift in consumer behavior is the growing demand for the 15-minute neighborhood—the concept where one can take care of everything within a 15-minute walk. These areas have walkable access to employment and commercial services including amenities, multimodal access, adequate sidewalks, and good street connectivity. While it is challenging for most areas in suburban or edge locations to attract a critical mass of commercial amenities and services and employment opportunities to achieve the 15-minute neighborhood, there has long been a growing demand for suburban neighborhoods that include these elements, as shown below. River Terrace is poised to capitalize on these shifting preferences. Figure 20. "Where Would You Most Like to Live" Survey Results 30% ° 15/0 13% 110/ 14% 16% City City Suburban Suburban Small town Rural area Near a mix of Mostly neighborhood neighborhood offices, residential with a mix of with houses apartments, neighborhood houses, shops, only and shops and businesses River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 34 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Source:National Association of Realtors,2013.4 Trade Areas Prospects for new commercial uses in any given area heavily depend on the potential "trade area" or "market area."A trade area or market area is the geographic region from which a development generates the majority of its customers, employees, or other users. Trade areas often extend beyond city or neighborhood boundaries and come in a variety of shapes and sizes, depending on the land use or development type and the general scale of the development. For example, a trade area for a large commercial or employment center will be much larger than a neighborhood corner store, coffee shop, live/workspace, or doctor's office. It is important to note that trade areas are fluid and will grow, shrink, and change shape as residential, commercial, and employment development occurs throughout the region. The following drive time analysis map shows the approximate distance that someone can currently travel by car from either River Terrace West or South. Note that the analysis uses existing roads and may not reflect future road construction—such as the area to the immediate west of River Terrace. Multiple localized micro-trade areas do/will exist within this drive-time-oriented trade area, which is defined by both walking and bike access and the type of commercial on offer. 4 More recent Realtors surveys that reflect similar consumer preferences are available here: httas://www.nar.realtor/reports/nar- community-and-transportation-preferences-surveys River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 35 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 21. Drive Time Analysis 26 i AA Cornelius Hills ;, ' 110.....44.1 I 1. , I ,- �_ i i . Portland . ... iis.7......j .I • - /.. - 4 r , .ii ... ,. , ''''''''..:, _.. __.\ ,..le, ir- ... • . , , , . . .. . .__•. _ .%-.) k qi I e Osuvega z .'I. i 44111r� — , A3 •'- Du a ,1-‘,410- , c:!,, : -_-_,..r--., Sherwoc . '± , ---1 m I9qW 1.` I � _ Drive Time lj r Tr 11 15 minutes Washington County Wjlsonvi! 10 minutes Newberg`--- t, 0 1 2 mi =t 5 minutes Source:ESRI, Metro RLIS, LCG Commercial Primary Trade Area For commercial development, we define a primary trade area (PMA) as the geographic region from which a retail development generates the majority of its customers. Generally, this involves the area from which 50 to 80 percent of market support can expect to originate. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 36 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Various factors determine trade area(s) including the community's population and its proximity to other competing areas. Specifically, these factors include: • Proximity and access to household concentrations. Generally, the larger the community's population, the larger the trade area. The River Terrace study area is a new urban area on the periphery of the existing metropolitan region. Limited household concentrations will exist to the west and south of both areas in the foreseeable future. In the near-term, therefore, market support will rely on existing households to the north and east. As development rapidly continues in South Cooper Mountain and other River Terrace areas—as well as development both in and to the west of the study areas over a longer time frame—market support will increase for new commercial development. • Development form. The type and scale of retail development have an impact on the size of the trade area. In small communities on the edge of the metropolitan region, such as River Terrace, commercial uses are most likely to be main street retail or town center formats, which are typically smaller-scale neighborhood-serving convenience types. Neighborhood-serving commercial generally draws from a five- to 10-minute drive-time. • Proximity and size of other competing areas. Typically, there is a cutoff point where customers are drawn to one competing area versus another. Time and distance are primary determinants of consumer's willingness to patronize a particular center, but consumers will make exceptions for superior centers that contain certain retailers and tenants, a greater land use mix, or a range of other determinants (location on commuting routes, for example).As competing centers may exist to the north, east, and south of the River Terrace study area, it will be critical to provide hyper-local convenience retail to nearby residents and differentiate the tenant mix from competing and established centers. We expect these established centers—as described in the following pages—to continue to draw their fair share of market support and will serve as primary competition for any commercial that is developed in the study area. • Presence of Pass-through or Daytime Employment. While the surrounding one and three-mile areas from River Terrace are not currently major employment centers (see Figure 16)the influence of daytime employment on commercial demand is currently limited, as housing concentrations increase, there will be a greater flow of commuters north and east and employment opportunities will increase in the immediate vicinity. River Terrace may also benefit from east-west pass-through traffic as Portland-area residents visit destinations to the west, such as wineries. That being said, these pass- through impacts are less significant than the presence of households and employees. • Presence of barriers. Physically and manmade barriers have a considerable impact on the primary trade area by influencing accessibility, visibility, and the road network. The Tualatin River and congested roadways are significant barriers. Defining the River Terrace Primary Trade Area Given the information provided above, the River Terrace PTA is impacted by the following factors and influences. • The Tualatin River to the south serves as a major barrier, limited north-south traffic to SW Roy Rogers Road. New households south of the river will more likely be consumers of commercial in Sherwood and Tualatin. • Significant commercial concentrations exist along Highway 99 and Scholls Ferry Road.While the character of new retail in River Terrace is unlikely to be in keeping with most highway-adjacent retail, River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 37 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis particularly along Highway 99, retail concentrations closest to River Terrace are more comparable with typically town center or main street commercial formats. The Progress Ridge Town Square is most notable in its likelihood to draw customers from the River Terrace area. • Major arterials to the north, east, and south offer quick access to well-established commercial concentrations.As such, future commercial in the River Terrace study area is unlikely to draw many customers from beyond a five-minute drive time, as shown in the drive-time analysis map below. The PTA is shown in Figure 22. The map also includes the "Secondary Trade Area"—the geographic area that contains an additional 15 to 25 percent of a store's customers. Beyond the secondary trade area is the fringe trading area (not shown on the map), which includes the most widely dispersed customers. Visitors or tourists might be considered part of the fridge trade area consumer base. Figure 22.Trade Areas Cornelius I L. -----� I Hillsboro ,` Beaverton 1, 1 1 1 217 i Portland ■�' I 'r ■ I i zr •, I i ...II?) .�'r-; . Tigar vvW ake Oswego Ir NI ,, /-- .), -i I I i.r' S �19 City ? ..Durham: tr.i,j/ 1 Rivergroye I -..---- _..� ---- ' f Tualatin '- .l ,r..... ` i ,___.__: Sherwood . i 1 o 1 2 miWilsonville? Newberg i Washington County ' e • Source:Costar, Metro RLIS, LCG River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 38 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Employment Market Area The market area is the area from which a business can expect to draw most of its future employees and other users, including customers and partners, and where most of the competitive development is located. For River Terrace, this is expected to be primarily within a 15-20 minute commute time, reflecting the fact that some employees desire shorter commutes. According to Metro, the average commute time for the region was 26 minutes in 2014 (the most recent year reported), which was about a minute longer than in 2010. For this analysis, the secondary trade area outlined above serves as the employment market area on which we base our analysis. Typically, the market area for large employers (e.g., major manufacturers, hospitals, universities, office parks, etc.) is regional.The greater the need for skilled labor, the greater the need to cast a wider net to capture that talent. Commute time is also a major factor. Commute times are shortened in central locations with access to major transportation networks, thereby increasing an employer's access to potential employees.This is reflected by the location of new office and industrial development along the Highway 99W, Highway 26, and I-5 corridors, as shown in the following section. The employment market area for River Terrace is likely to reflect a less significant employment center than those along these transportation corridors due to its current edge location, lack of access to major transportation and freight routes, and limited suburban office interest from the development community. Development typologies are likely to include in-line tenants as part of neighborhood- or community- serving commercial centers or standalone office buildings. Commercial Market Analysis This section describes the local commercial market conditions in the southwest Portland metropolitan region and the implications for the prospects of new development in River Terrace. Commercial Centers The commercial landscape of the southwest Portland metropolitan region is dominated by commercial centers of various sizes. In comparison to east Portland, for example, lower density development and more auto-oriented development patterns gave rise to centers that offer consumers a broad array of amenities and services. These centers are not just retail-focused, they also include an array of medical, financial, and professional office space, banks, libraries, educational facilities, and other uses. While the commercial development envisioned for River Terrace is more pedestrian-scale, it is necessary to assess the entire commercial environment in order to determine the competitive advantages, disadvantages, and opportunities for River Terrace 2.0. The following map, therefore, shows neighborhood and community centers within five miles of the River Terrace study areas. These centers are where commercial uses largely exist today; outside of these centers, standalone commercial development is limited. "Micro" commercial is explored later in this report. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 39 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 23. Competitive Commercial Centers Within 5 Miles of River Terrace Hillsboro 1 Farmington Wil] 0 1 z 2 n 11 C Farmington C Village AL LT Ii BLVD Z DAWS RD g ROSEDALE R9' -•}'y = DFNNNEY RD ""RD J y HART RD RAGERT RD > \ v '��_�.— I Beaverton' yo .� • +�+_ •--• I BROCKMAN ST I Murrayhill a `\, ^WeTervb •.•�O�[O Marketplace . 0.OA*"--- ___ W WEIR R \`j n a a I N Greenway Town ti Center + g` Murray Scholls \ TEFF �', Town Center N 4Tren Village on '. y Tigard P + I Scholls -,• Barrows ' \ fi 1 Rill South Cooper �� Crossing WALNUT ST p e MountainCID Progress Ridge Tigard I.--.. TownSquare "ard "'...'L9 (j.• , la` f1 tplace SCHOLLS E EFr GAARDE ST MEGO NAI❑Si IT &ETEC MO[1N'44•,..c. I I River Terrace •� •�' . Town Center = King City Plaza + Tigard +1/ ` e, m Promenade 2:4.. Rfl DURHAM RD Commercial Centers Cool?' King City 1 ''--^'�. Tigard Towne I ' Square • Grocery Anchored ! ,. . f- ioLES-SHERWOOD RD + � ' King City 60 �,..r-•� TLSBLATIN RD • Not Grocery Anchored ��- '� i o Planned Center AU RD Sherwood Sherwood Market Langer Farms Tualatin pts Center Size (sq ft) Crossroads , Center Shopping Center �RsySHERW� 0 ----•. �, a 200,000 ---i-l'46 AVERY ST _ EDT Br • ParkwayVillage 30,000 Sherwood Plaza a9 at Sherwood ti� ➢ C7� .� Source:Costar, LCG The centers in the above map are generally defined as follows. • Community centers. Often referred to as a strip mall, community centers range from 125,000 square feet to 400,000 square feet. These properties usually have a grocery store and can also have a discounter and large specialty shops mixed with convenience retailers, such as drugstores. • Neighborhood Centers. A smaller version of community centers. These are typically referred to as grocery-anchored properties, along with other convenience retailers.They run up to 125,000 square feet. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 40 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis • Convenience Centers. These are very small properties that are less than 30,000 square feet and filled with, well, convenience-based retailers, such as dry cleaners, nail salons, drug stores, and other types of shops where customers are looking for a quick purchase or service. For this analysis, we have generally excluded malls, lifestyle centers, factory outlets, and power centers. These centers have significantly larger trade areas, require very central locations in the region (or on major transportation routes), and substantial household concentrations, among other factors. Further, these centers are inconsistent with the typologies and neighborhood character described in the preferred alternative for River Terrace. The characteristics of the centers showed above are summarized in the following table. The characteristics for grocery-anchored versus non-grocery-anchored centers are similar, with a few notable differences. • Vacancy rates for grocery-anchored centers are slightly lower than non-grocery-anchored centers. • The greatest differences in typical center sizes and site area are between commercial centers that only have a grocery anchor versus those that only have a non-grocery anchor(s). However,just two of the commercial centers analyzed have a grocery store as the only anchor—Sherwood Crossroads and Barrows Crossing, which both have grocery stores nearby in competing centers— so the data is somewhat skewed. • There is just one commercial center—Village on Scholls Ferry—with no anchor tenant. Table 5. Property Characteristics of Commercial Centers Within 5 Miles of River Terrace Average/Total All Other Grocery No Anchor Centers Anchors Anchors Tenant "Neighborhood "Neighborhood Center" Node" Typical Anchor Target, Safeway, Village on Tenants Wal-Mart, Albertsons, Scholls Rite Aid New Seasons Bldg. SF 144,323 137,513 82,080 32,000 Site Area 14.7 13.3 8.6 2.9 FAR 0.23 0.25 0.22 0.25 Total Vacant SF 83,162 66,416 9,845 0 Avg.Vacancy 6.2% 6.9% 6.2% 0.0% Avg. Traffic Counts 28,271 34,154 27,200 18,900 Source:ESRI, LCG *Competing areas include South Cooper Mountain, River Terrace Town Center, and King City 6D A range of possible uses in suburban commercial centers is summarized below. Most of these uses can be accommodated either as in-line tenants within larger commercial buildings/centers or on a standalone one- or two-story building (also usually within a larger commercial center). River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 41 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Table 6. Best Opportunities to Generate Employment within Commercial Development Sector Potential Uses Medical/Health Dental Office, Neighborhood Clinic, Services Optometrist, Veterinary Clinic Financial Services Neighborhood Bank/Credit Union, Financial Advisory Services, Real Estate Brokerage, Insurance Personal Care Salons, Fitness Centers Household Childcare Facilities, Education, Co- Services/Other working Spaces Source:LCG Commercial Site Selection When selecting sites for future commercial development, there are a few core characteristics that commercial developers and brokers typically look for, including: • Appropriately zoned land, • High rooftop density, • High median income, • Presence of a major destination, • High traffic counts, • Central location, • A significant concentration of jobs, and/or • Balance of daytime (workers) population to nighttime (resident) population. It is important to explore how River Terrace meets or does not meet these site selection criteria—both under existing conditions and anticipated future conditions—to determine the extent of the opportunities for various commercial uses. The current characteristics of various centers are displayed below. • Among competing areas (South Cooper Mountain, River Terrace Town Center, and King City 6D), traffic counts, population, and daytime population are, on average, slightly higher than River Terrace South and West, indicative of recent development. • Traffic counts in River Terrace are much lower than those near existing centers in the region. • While population (resident and daytime) counts near River Terrace trail existing centers, median household incomes are significantly higher.A greater degree of office and services in River Terrace would increase the daytime population, but significant new development will be necessary to achieve a balance between the daytime and nighttime population. For example, for every 10 acres of land developed for office at an average floor area ratio of 0.25, approximately River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 42 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis 550 jobs would be added (at 200 square feet per employee). An employment landscape that is more industrial-oriented would likely add between 100 to 200 jobs for every 10 acres of land developed. Table 7. Socioeconomic Characteristics of Commercial Centers Within 5 Miles of River Terrace (2020) Grocery + Other River Terrace Difference: Competing Other Anchors W+S Avg. A - C Areas* Anchors A B C D E Traffic Counts 28,271 34,154 17,530 (10,741) 21,500 Population 21,138 13,859 4,020 (17,118) 4,794 Household Income $81,562 $83,672 $117,444 $35,882 $114,965 Daytime Population 17,823 13,973 3,185 (14,638) 3,958 Three-mile Radius Population 129,495 77,259 63,917 (65,578) 70,412 Household Income $83,744 $93,532 $97,641 $13,897 $101,091 Daytime Population 127,150 82,965 55,143 (72,008) 59,776 Five-mile Radius Population 288,071 195,612 197,778 (90,293) 202,267 Household Income $85,609 $92,728 $89,117 $3,507 $86,024 Daytime Population 298,666 205,752 193,976 (104,691) 196,938 Source:ESRI, LCG *Competing areas include South Cooper Mountain, River Terrace Town Center, and King City 6D Household density is an important metric to consider when evaluating commercial prospects. The following chart demonstrates the current lack of household concentrations near River Terrace West and South relative to other commercial centers within five miles. Most existing commercial centers have household or daytime population counts in excess of 15,000-20,000, yet River Terrace currently has less than 5,000. With these being said, residential development typically precedes commercial development, as shown in the case studies. Several years of aggressive housing construction are expected to greatly increase the nearby population. Based on the estimates received by LCG, there will be approximately 3,135 new dwelling units at project build-out. Using the existing City average of 2.5 people per household, this equates to 7,837 residents and provide a significant boost to commercial prospects. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 43 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 24. Population and Daytime Population Within a One-Mile Radius of Commercial Centers, 2020 River Terrace West ■Daytime Pop River Terrace South 1mi South Cooper Mountain = ■Pop 1 mi River Terrace Town Center King City 6D Village on Scholls Tigard Towne Square Tigard Promenade Tigard Plaza Tigard Marketplace Sherwood Plaza Sherwood Market Center Sherwood Crossroads Progress Ridge TownSquare Parkway Village at Sherwood Murrayhill Marketplace Murray Scholls Town Center Langer Farms Shopping Center King City Plaza Greenway Town Center • Farmington Village � Farmington Mall Barrows Crossing 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Source:ESRI The following map shows showing for the southwest metro region.While having appropriate zoning in place is important to developers, a developer may be willing to pursue a zone change if a site is especially attractive for their desired development. Zoning classifications are generally consistent with the commercial development trends. However, there are pockets of mixed-use zoning that have largely seen retail remain as a dominant commercial use. For example, the zoning for Progress Ridge allows for a broad array of uses, yet just 45,000 square feet of office has been developed. Multifamily residential has continued to build out in these parts. Industrial zoning is even more limited in geography, with major clusters in certain locations near major transportation routes. However, this is consistent with site selection criteria for industrial development (described in the following section). River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 44 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 25.Aggregated Zoning r : , 4.-4.0." , f ~'a� 5� r 1 1�1�._ ili o+ i ,1 q •�--1, - '-- h • lg. i it %API 141'11111170-'rood'-...:. 615........ 0 apt 14. I., .. ../.4. "Illifit ill •-,- w ..,t . P`o'rtl a .75iii 1.-'t ......." . . . ,, ,,,... --.."7,Tinplo..._111..-dli L -it ltdiyfir 914 jir . ,a-�[—�;- ) 'N �; _ Bea%%et Fp; Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 26.Trade Area Commercial Rents and Vacancy Rates $25.00 10.0% $20.00 �� `\ 8.0% • $15.000.__.• - 6.0% -. •L ' - 5.0% $10.00 4.0% Rent I - 3.0% $5.00 2.0% -----Vacancy $0.00 0.0% 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 Source:Costar Construction in the secondary trade area has been limited, although it does not appear to face a burgeoning wave of supply pressure and the pipeline is largely empty. However, the pandemic has led to heightened uncertainty in commercial real estate, and retailers, in particular, may be the most susceptible to continued turbulence in the coming months. Its effects are likely to linger for the foreseeable future, impacting demand, rent growth, and the capital markets in the process. Figure 27. Trade Area Construction and Absorption Trends 300,000 250,000 0 Absorption •Deliveries' it 200,000 • • 150,000 I I 100,000 • • alli iirl ::: -100,000 -150,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Source:Costar River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 46 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 28.All Commercial Development a3 Ill i'V Hillsboro • _ - I -. p4J i Lr. r• � , 6ea'tir0 n ®■ --••L- ■ wj y ,� ■ ,. �L�f �I - 11111.11- I . . Portland I II ' •■ . I ll 14 ..� i ■ •. 11116 • •�. Ti•.® I ,-- — L-- Lake o • -:"- � `, Building Status ■ ��' i W - King �'Y ,1 Du :a Built Pre-2010 ' . „,L�, I %: if` - • Built 2010-2020 ' Turlat-_. . Under Construction rf;- 111 - & Proposed Building Size She ''- 200,000+ _ it ondary Market ■ I rr--- --- 1. 20,000 , --f-- A„Y..-�•-: I I I r r � 0 2 4 mi = 94w I 1.__. +--- Isonviile Newbery L—_•-_----------_j • r ea Source:Costar, LCG New Commercial Development As shown in Figure 29, excluding what is proposed in the UGB expansion areas, there are no major commercial development projects proposed or under construction in the Primary Trade Area, and proposed development is highly limited in the Secondary Trade Area. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 47 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 29. Commercial and Employment Development Built Since 2000* a Mt 1 j 21mi �i�ro�� I r ' ■ V; 1410 o • ■ M • I = ... III? i Beaverton 1 Portland' Er 1• lb e ■ ■ Legend:Land Use _ ■ ■ a l * ■ Flex ■ ■ ir d® ~ li • Health Care a II HospitalityIII 21 CP ■ Industrial M.. ■ Office s, ■ ■ k Osweglp ■ Commercial aEZ:i. a • Specialty King City •ii -'', Du ,._ Sports& Entertainment . --. _, 1 i - grove l r; 1111 Tu atin I ..J_* •ti z ......s mii -- erw�n_od ..s I . ■ 79+7 Newberg i a Vllilsanviile Source:Costar, *Note:Bold outline indicates construction since 2015 or under construction and proposed developments. However, there is a substantial new development under construction in Sherwood called Parkway South on the area bounded by SW Langer Farms Parkway and SW Century Drive. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 48 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 30. Parkway South Site Plan I . , I �� /fL .aePsnceL saor ` t -' Ptii�GC.114' PROJECT . '� 'y ;. N 1 —` Itlllir7anrl,lilid��I° rrr i III r E .1, , e r . Enka [ i 41. ... ....,•� `1 El w _ i y �n.. ., I a � ayu ��.� � u �e�a�i ililii6soo� — I II "VIII{11111 "[ I : ii x.wk 11 +0,2,6VI its �_. f.. MASS 7 if .. .i.e1 I• +r�r$F � _ 5u L4Y�R'A1$45 Pgq',yWr Source:Costar At 132,000 gross leasable feet (GLA), Parkway South is anchored by a 53,000 square foot family entertainment center—the only building currently built. Among the other proposed buildings are a 12,275 square foot daycare facility and a 40,000 square foot indoor racing facility.Approximately 27,000 square feet of in-line tenants on "pad" sites make up the remaining buildings. While sizeable, Parkway South is relatively unique and is not likely to compete with new commercial development in River Terrace That being said, the fact that the only new major commercial center planned for this part of the metropolitan region is primarily non-retail is telling and reflects the changing composition of commercial development and a desire for differentiation in an often saturated retail market. Competitiveness with Alternative UGB Expansion Areas How and when these areas develop will directly impact the market and compete with the study area. Along with an assessment of relative competitiveness, the following table summarizes the scale of planned development in each of these expansion areas. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 49 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Table 8. Competing UGB Planned Centers Summary UGB Planned Expansion Commercial Advantages Disadvantages Area Area River 25,000 to Residential Development currently Other than River Terrace 2.0, it Terrace 40,000 Sq. Ft. underway, ability to draw from Bull may take several decades Town (building area) Mountain Neighborhood and planned before new development to the Center, development to the north and south. west is complete. Tigard Commercial area is located at the intersection of two collector streets. Development in River Terrace 2.0 (to the west) will support this center. South 10-acre main Residential Development currently Proximity to Murray Scholls Cooper street underway, existing high school, future competition; may take several Mountain, commercial development at North Cooper decades before new Beaverton Est. 80,000 to Mountain. Good visibility and frontage development to the west is 120,000 Sq. Ft. along Scholls Ferry Road. complete. (building area) Limited competition. URA 6D Est. 54,000 to Presumed potential for tourism, limited Limited existing household King City 85,000 Sq. Ft. immediate competition, ability to draw support and physical barriers (building area) from River Terrace household growth. limit market area, this area is the most removed from centers of population and employment. Source:LCG South Cooper Mountain. The SCM concept plan shows that the area could support up to 3,430 housing units and between 47,000 and 142,000 square feet of new commercial space, which would primarily be driven by demand from new residents.A guiding principle of the planning effort is that any commercial would complement existing commercial along Scholls Ferry Road, rather than compete with it. The report recommends planning for a 100,000 square foot commercial center, based upon estimated household expenditures of the projected new households in SCM, for convenience-based shopping such as food, drug stores, flower shops, and personal services. North Cooper Mountain is slated to support another 300 housing units, with another 3,760 units slated for the 1,232-acre Urban Reserve Area that connects the two. The Urban Reserve Area is unlikely to develop within the next 20 years. King City 6D. While the proposed King City commercial location appears the most "central" in terms of proximity to other centers, this is likely because of the lack of existing household concentrations. River Terrace Town Center. Future commercial development in both URA 6D and South Cooper Mountain will compete for market support with the River Terrace Study Area. However, both competitive areas will provide new household growth that will support the collective sub-regional commercial market. Both areas are planned for neighborhood-scale commercial development. From a market perspective, River Terrace is best positioned for development in the near-term, with the ability to draw from existing household concentrations while facing limited competition. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 50 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis As shown in the following map, Beaverton's South Cooper Mountain, King City's URA 6D, and Tigard's River Terrace Town Center planned commercial centers are all near River Terrace West and South. All three are no more than 2.3 miles apart, with River Terrace West and South in between, which is likely too close to support the traditional auto-oriented commercial centers that are shown on the map. However, there will likely be opportunities for neighborhood-scale commercial, albeit in select locations with the highest density of rooftops and at a much smaller scale. Regardless of the type, scale, and mix of commercial uses, the proximity and the potential for market cannibalization means that these commercial spaces must complement each other by finding opportunities for differentiation. Figure 31. Distance Between Grocery Anchored Centers CJ' 0 1 2 m •I Hillsboroa a i. Q z • UAv,s kp ROSEDALE RD •••y ..__•, r:•.E.I.:: en dr 217 R1aRT RD ��.___.__�_ 3.2 1 ,.A ` RWEIR RP 1 & : 1.2 • ! = '• �eFF�r� u .. ``, NT:: f1 5 ' y�._R R • ��Ro � 49J ,• 4.8 E SCROLLS REppN� «'•r» •L JWRDE ST oiIALU sr BULL MOS 1.2.�]L 1........1 - Area G.3 11 h� r s ' rte—..,-1 --°\ .! SCHOLLS.SHERWOOD W 1 - , 3.5 :` :....0.41 iUALATIN RD 1.9 C. : :al Centers Center Size(sq ft) o • Tualatin • Grocery Anchored 200,000 -� r• �� RD • �P AVERY Si 47, • Not Grocery Anchored NAU 9-' a 30,000 , a z Planned Center 5i� od M Source:Costar, LCG River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 51 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Key takeaways from the current traffic counts and socioeconomic conditions displayed in Table 9 include: • The River Terrace 1.0 Town Center looks best positioned for commercial development in the near- term.While the population within one mile of the Town Center is just 4,000 less than the average grocery-anchored center (but 10,000 less than the average non-grocery-anchored center), it is significantly higher than any of the other planned centers. It also currently benefits from a higher daytime population count. • King City looks least competitive relative to the other areas due to its isolation from household concentrations and fewer average vehicle counts. • Of the two River Terrace study areas, River Terrace South has fewer average daily vehicles on its major arterial (Roy Rogers) but benefits from the significant daily activity on its secondary access (Beef Bend). • The proximity of River Terrace West to South Cooper Mountain and other, already established commercial centers (e.g., Progress Ridge), is likely to make River Terrace South the most competitive of the two areas. Table 9. Traffic Counts, Population, and Income for Planned Centers, 2020 River Terrace River Terrace South Cooper River Terrace West South Mountain Town Center Kin• Cit 6D Traffic Counts Major 19,800 12,700 23,200 16,690 Traffic Counts Minor N/A 5,303 10,200 753 252 One-mile Radius Population 4,291 3,748 2,922 ,3 1,133 Household Income $122,576 $112,312 $117,552 $115,999 $111,343 Daytime Population 3,369 3,000 2,388 ,569 918 Three-mile Radius Population 59,633 68,200 71,793 78,418 61,026 Household Income r $103,866 $91,416 $108,077 $99,273 $95,922 Daytime Population iimmii47,928 62,357 57,507 65,154 56,667 Five-mile Radius Population 205,598 189,958 211,441 222,261 173,099 Household Income $85,842 $92,391 $81,258 $83,795 $93,018 Daytime Population 191,454 196,497 196,158 218,610 176,045 Source:ESRI, LCG The short distance between the centers is not likely to be overly determinant in final development prospects, as planned high-density residential development will generate micro-trade areas to help support commercial development. A substantial amount of housing construction in the immediate vicinity, however, will be required to generate strong enough support to mitigate the challenges facing River Terrace 2.0 from a commercial development perspective. Based on estimates provided to LCG, River Terrace is expected to add over 3,100 units at full project built-out. The cumulative impact of residential construction at all new growth areas is likely to support a variety of commercial tenants. The realistic scale, type, and quantity are explored in the River Terrace Market Potential section. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 52 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Factors Influencing Demand and Development Prospects The demand for commercial space, and ultimately land that needs to be planned for future development is a function of many interrelated factors. Each commercial real estate sector—including office, retail, industrial, hospitality, and healthcare—consider certain factors more important than others, as summarized below. Factor& Description Real Estate Sector Spending Leakage. Leakage occurs when locals spend a larger amount of money Retail, medical and on goods than the number of sales reported by local businesses. Retail leakage professional office, implies that locals are traveling outside of the local market area to buy retail lodging goods and can indicate unsatisfied demand within the PTA. Existing and Future Consumer Base. Consumers include shoppers, workers, Retail, office, tenants, and other users.A fast-growing area will create demand for services and industrial, lodging development quicker than slow-growing areas because of the needs of new households. High-growth areas will attract development interest. Purchasing Power of Base. Households with higher incomes generally have Retail more disposable incomes and, therefore, consume more goods and services and generate demand for more commercial development. Households with certain demographic profiles tend to spend more in certain categories than others. Retailers are interested in targeting clusters of households that fit the goods and services on offer. Local Demographics. Characteristics of residents and workers, such as education, Retail, office, household composition, age, and income, play a factor in consumer behavior, industrial, lodging employment demands and trends, and hotel use. Unique Differentiators. Placemaking and walkability can create unique Retail, office, destinations that people want to live, work, and play in. These places pull people lodging from outside the typical trade area and generate more development interest than traditional locations. Access and Visibility. While neither of these characteristics generates demand in Retail, office, itself, highly accessible and visibility areas will be more likely to attract industrial, lodging development interest because of the ability to draw from a wider market area and capture passing traffic (auto, pedestrian, tourism, etc.). Source:LCG Here we summarize these factors as they relate to the study area. Spending Leakage As the following chart shows, there is leakage in all retail categories. In theory, the total sum of the leakage across all categories could be met with more than one million square feet of new retail development. In reality, only a small fraction of existing leakage might be recaptured within the PTA in the form of new development.This is because most of the retail "gravity" is to the east, with several power centers and malls that draw customers from a much larger trade area because of the substantial range of River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 53 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis goods and services on offer. New centers in the River Terrace area can expect to see low recapture rates in the categories of general merchandisers (such as Target, Walmart), clothing, sporting goods, furniture, and electronics. Figure 32. Spending "Leakage" by Retail Category, Primary Trade Area General Merchandise Food and Beverage(grocery) Foodservice and Drinking Places Building Material,Garden Equip Clothing and Accessories Sporting Gds, Hobby,Book,Music Misc.Store Retailers Health and Personal Care Other(incl.cinema, - prof./med.office, banks) Furniture and Home Furnishings Electronics and Appliance Millions$ $0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 Source:ESRI, LCG The retail categories with the highest recapture potential are those that customers typically travel the shortest distance.These categories include convenience-based retail, such as grocery and health and personal care, as well as neighborhood-serving retail, such as foodservice and drinking places. Existing and future consumer base There are currently 9,967 households residing within the PTA, 69 percent of which are family households. These households will provide early market support for commercial development in the study area. Existing housing concentrations are located north and east of where commercial development is planned. With the exception of ongoing residential construction in River Terrace and South Cooper Mountain, most of these housing concentrations are located too far away from the study area to provide sufficient market support for early-phase commercial development. Commercial development in the study area is only likely to see demand sufficient for its creation once a foundation of new households has formed in the study area. Building upon the existing household base, new household growth in the PTA will further influence commercial demand. Cooper Mountain (South and North) and King City have planned residential capacities for up to 3,730 units 3,576 units, respectively. Continued build-out of Tigard River Terrace 1.0 (excluding the River Terrace 2.0 West and South study areas) will result in around 1,000 new households. River Terrace 2.0 West and South are expected to add approximately 3,100 units at full project built out. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 54 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Collectively, these three areas include more than 11,000 new units. Approximately 60 to 75 percent of these units—or 6,600 to 8,250 units—will likely be for-sale homes (versus rental). These units will take many years to absorb into the market.Within one-mile of Tigard River Terrace, for- sale ownership homes (single-unit detached, townhomes, and stacked flats) have been constructed and sold at an average of 215 per year for the past four years. At this rate, absorption of these 4,800 to 6,000 units would take 30 to 38 years. That being said, the initial phases of any proposed new development are likely to concentrate around River Terrace and build demand for new commercial development. Comparatively, the 2017 King City Market Study estimated 500 to 950 housing units could be absorbed within the first 10 years (a lower absorption rate but a smaller area). Purchasing Power Households with higher incomes generally have more disposable incomes and, therefore, consume more goods and services.The median household income in the Primary Trade Area is $101,865 and $120,102 within one mile of River Terrace West and South, well above the local and regional rates. Consumer preferences and generational and household behaviors also impact the potential spending capacity. ESRI balances these preferences with disposable income levels for its "Spending Potential Index" (SPI). The SPI for the PTA shows the highest spending potential index in the categories of personal care products, health care, and household furnishings. Food away from and at home are among the highest categories for average spent per household ($7,265 and $5,266, respectively). Consumer Behavior and Preferences Ecommerce is expected to capture an increasingly greater share of the retail market, with online sales projected to account for 22 percent of retail sales in 2023, up from 16 percent in 2020. While retailers struggle to adapt and compete with the rapidly growing ecommerce sector, River Terrace stands to avoid many of the negative impacts that ecommerce has had on traditional brick-and-mortar retail. The lack of existing retail development in these corridors means that new development is not constrained by the increasingly unpopular land use patterns that auto-oriented retailers and big-box centers have created across the United States. Instead, River Terrace has the opportunity to shape its commercial centers in a way that remains popular: as accessible, interesting, unique places that cater to a diverse array of needs. Additionally, ecommerce's share of total retail sales is uneven, with greater impacts on certain retail categories than others. Among the categories with the greatest threat of ecommerce competition are electronics, clothing, sporting goods, and, to a lesser extent, general merchandisers. Many of the retailers in these categories have already adapted to this shifting dynamic, with smaller building footprints and greater online presence. With the growing popularity of online shopping also comes the need for"last-mile distribution." As consumer preferences have evolved and the need for faster service has grown, demand for last-mile real River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 55 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis estate has spiked.These mainly smaller properties Class B infill facilities have experienced rapid rent growth driven by the combination of massive user demand and a lack of new development.This supply/demand imbalance is especially acute in the western U.S. region, where light-industrial rents (a good proxy for last-mile) have grown by more than 10 percent annually in the past two years (according to CBRE). Placemaking and Walkability Several historical factors, including past consumer preferences and regulatory conditions, contributed to single-use, low-density commercial land use patterns nationally. More recently, shifting consumer preferences have shifted to suburban neighborhoods with a mix of houses, shops, and businesses. These neighborhoods generally have a strong sense of place and attract both shoppers from outside the area and the type of households that prospective retailers seek. Placemaking has therefore become an important strategy for attracting commercial tenants. Figure 33. Neighborhood Preferences 30% 15% 13% 14% 16% 11% City City Suburban Suburban Small town Rural area Near a mix of Mostly neighborhood neighborhood offices, residential with a mix of with houses only apartments,and neighborhood houses,shops,and shops businesses Source:National Association of Realtors,2013 Access and Visibility Proximity to a highway or arterial roadway is critical for businesses that generate a large volume of truck/auto trips, such as industrial warehousing, manufacturing, and traditional larger format retailers. It is also critical for businesses that rely on visibility from passing traffic to help generate business. Locations visible from the highway or major streets, or that receive a lot of foot traffic due to the presence of frequent-service transit, high-density residential development, or popular trails, are highly sought after; many retailers will pay a premium for these locations. In some instances, rent premiums are also associated with right-in, right-out access during the evening commute. With this being said, the need for high visibility locations is declining for some businesses due to increasing dependence on technology, meaning some internal areas in River Terrace could attract development interest despite the lack of main arterials. This is particularly true for the hotel industry, which has seen national chains largely staying true to the course but smaller, independent, or boutique hotels seeking niches in the market and opportunities to leverage unique market draws. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 56 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Access and visibility can generally be analyzed through traffic count numbers. As the following map shows—and as described in previous sections—traffic counts are highest on Roy Rogers Road south of Scholls Ferry and on Scholls Ferry Road east of Roy Rogers. Elsewhere in the area, traffic counts are significantly lower. Figure 34.Traffic Counts �- , L1 ik 10.200 -_ 3,900 =sr Bea4 101111 n 18,900 A x 11010111111' s f f 12,700 5,x25 L .FEnRyfRo�y - •-.. y .I ti5yr . . .._ 24,935 _ ' 9,136r.! 3,- _ �� - w N -- Rims mitipm MO J 2,900 1Q,000 • 1,313 , , a r � y 1y3 sii----------- , 3 ,i Y 19,800 �'....*' 4,200 5 3n 03 y ~� ,./ / , _ BE4f 8i`�•Rp / 4,800'iver,Terrace5o0"n {, !I r 280 . f ?Iltik ll I 0 0.5 1mi _ _ ___________-, _ 1fi,fi90 Source:ESRI River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 57 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Equitable Commercial Development Commercial development—particularly newly constructed commercial development—is typically dominated by national, international, and large regional "credit" commercial tenants rather than the local "mom and pop" stores with the potential to reflect the full diversity of surrounding communities. Further, even the smaller, local businesses that do operate in commercial centers are more likely to be owned and managed by wealthier households, and less likely to be owned by lower-income households and people of color; disparities in access to jobs, capital, and opportunities have increased during the Covid pandemic. Tigard is a diverse community. Approximately 27 percent of the population are people of color, including Black, Latinx, American Indian/Native,Asian, and those of two or more races. Latinx and Asian Americans comprise the largest non-white populations. Further, 28 percent of Tigard residents are considered rent-burdened (households are considered rent- burdened if they spend more than 50 percent of the household's income on rent), and Tigard is considered to be a "severely rent-burdened" city. Most of the housing built in River Terrace 1.0 is more expensive than the average Tigard home, meaning that the average Tigard resident currently has fewer opportunities to rent or own a home in the River Terrace area compared to the rest of the City. The City's aspiration is that principles of equitable development be taken into account in the planning of commercial space at River Terrace 2.0 and that there be opportunities for lower-income and communities of color to own, manage, and work at businesses in the area. A cultural and business opportunity. In addition to helping disadvantaged communities to gain employment, business expertise, and wealth, commercial projects that reflect different, unique, and authentic parts of a community are by definition "differentiated."They are experiences that people cannot get at another location just down the road, and this can be a business advantage. Examples in the Portland region include the Beaverton's Uwajimaya, a "huge Asian grocery outpost" that also hosts a Japanese bookstore;the Portland Mercado, a colorful venue offering Latin American food from multiple vendors; and the Jade District, a diverse neighborhood in East Portland that celebrates Asian-owned and other businesses, among other community development goals.Although more dispersed in nature, the Raices Unidas/Celebrating Hispanic Roots campaign heightens awareness of Oregon winemakers who share a Hispanic background, many of whom are located to the west and south of Tigard. Because food can be such a sensory and exciting cross-cultural experience, prepared foods are one part of commercial development (though certainly not the only) where there are particular opportunities to enable employees and entrepreneurs of color to achieve greater success. Challenges However, equitable commercial development is not without its challenges, and it is important to be aware of these to prepare strategies to overcome them.The most fundamental challenge is financial. Developers of new commercial centers in Washington County are often seeking rents in the high $20 to $40+ per square foot of leased space, and multi-year lease commitments from tenants, because of the cost to acquire land, permit, build, and operate the projects. Even for a modestly sized space (2,500 square feet), River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 58 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis this is a significant commitment ($75,000 per year at $30 per square foot) that the lessee commits to for several years at a minimum. In addition, there are often up-front tenant improvement costs borne by the vendor, systems development charges, and ongoing wages and operating expenses (raw materials, utilities, taxes, etc.). While many commercial center owners do value different and unique tenants, they are reluctant to sign leases with unproven businesses, as there are costs to them for businesses that are not successful (tenant improvements, lost rent, negative perception due to vacant spaces). By contrast, businesses such as Starbucks and Subway are considered "credit"tenants because landlords believe they can rely on their rent payments and because lenders will give them credit for this income stream when making loans. Strategies Given this context, LCG recommends that the City consider the following equitable commercial development strategies for River Terrace 2.0 and the City as a whole. Because of the complexity of the need, opportunity, and financial challenges, LCG believes that additional, follow-on work will be needed after this concept plan to refine a strategy. • Consider collaboratively defining the purpose and goals of equitable commercial development citywide. Will the City's efforts be targeted towards businesses and households at certain income levels, a certain number of years of residency in the community, who employ certain types of individuals, or other factors?Who are the businesses and individuals most in need of public investment?The answers to these questions should help the City to refine its investment criteria since the City will not be able to support every business enterprise. Ensure that the City's goals are legally permissible and non-discriminatory. • Continue partnering with local non-profits with expertise in business education, assistance, finance, and other areas. For example, Mercy Corps Northwest offers low- and no-cost training in business and financial planning, advertising, and other business essentials. Craft 3 is a Pacific Northwest-based Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) that makes "loans that strengthen our economy, our families and our environment." Such organizations could play an important role in Tigard, especially if the purpose and need of Tigard's equitable commercial development program are well defined and targeted. • Stay up to date on best practices in the region and nationwide. For example, Prosper Portland's Affordable Commercial Tenanting Program is one potential model to watch; this program provides benefits to disadvantaged commercial businesses including reduced rent, tenant improvement contributions, and technical assistance, as well as developer incentives such as increased density. (Note, however, that a significant focus of the program has been on buildings owned by the City of Portland, rather than private owners.) PolicyLink is one national leader in equitable development policy (residential, commercial, and other). • Evaluate and/or adopt equitable commercial development incentives, either Citywide or in targeted areas. This may include systems development charge (SDC) waivers for below-market, equitable commercial space; City financial assistance for qualifying businesses, for example, via investment in interior or exterior tenant improvements; technical assistance that is directly provided by the City or a partner non-profit. Another approach is to adopt the City's Vertical Housing Development Zone River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 59 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis (partial tax abatement) in River Terrace and enable projects that provide affordable commercial spaces, small spaces, or both to qualify for tax abatement. • Evaluate whether the City should take a targeted and proactive approach to equitable commercial development at River Terrace 2.0. This could be based on the "Mercado model" (a property controlled by the City or non-profit where equitable commercial development takes place. This model can have both great rewards and significant costs/risks and has similarities to a Commercial Community Land Trust model.);the Jade District model (partnership with a place-based community development non- profit); or another model to be determined. These models generally require the City to take a more active role and go beyond providing a mix of regulation and incentives. • Investigate ways to enable commercial development to be built at a lower cost. The Portland Mercado, and numerous food cart pods around the region, show the potential for this approach. Allowing lower cost, owner-occupied space (food carts) seems to have enabled more entrepreneurs of color to start their businesses. Costs can potentially be decreased via changes to fees, taxes, zoning code, building code, and other regulations, and technical assistance.5 Micro Commercial The City asked LCG to evaluate the potential for"micro commercial" spaces, an issue that is separate but related to equitable commercial development. Since LCG is not aware of any industry-standard definition of micro commercial, we generally define it as being one or more leasable spaces within a building or cluster of buildings whose total size is 5,000 square feet or less.Any individual micro commercial business could be much smaller than this, for example, 1,000, 500, or even 100 square feet (e.g., a rolling cart within a commercial building). Table 10 shows that, based on this definition, "micro commercial" has made up between 1 and 4 percent of all commercial space built in the secondary market area over the last two decades. By a narrow definition—small commercial spaces that are not located within an existing center (e.g., neighborhood center) and not located along a highway (i.e., are more pedestrian-oriented)—micro commercial comprises one percent of the market. We can see from this data that micro commercial is a very small component of the overall commercial market; developers are providing very little of it. Table 10. Micro Commercial Summary, Secondary Market Area Existing Since 2000 All Commercial 5,370,098 Micro Commercial (<5,000 sf) 235,302 4% Not in center, not on highway 61,311 1% Source:Costar 5 Selected Equitable Commercial Development sources:httos://www.asoeninstitute.ora/bloc-posts/racial-aao-business-ownershio- exolained-four-charts/;httos://www.americanoroaress.ora/issues/race/news/2020/04/14/483125/economic-fallout-coronavirus-oeoole- color/;httos://orosoeroortland.us/oortfolio-items/affordable-commercial-tenantina/;httos://www.00licvlink.ora/our-work/economv/all- in-cities;httos://ilsr.ora/tacklina-oroblem-commercial-aentrification/;https://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/smart-growth-and-equitable- development River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 60 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis The table provides additional an additional breakdown of micro commercial. The table indicates that: • Since 2000, 74 "micro" commercial buildings (<5,000 sf) have been built, totaling 240,000 sf, and averaging 3,240 sf each. • Of these 74 buildings, 58 percent were built in larger commercial centers. • A further 17 percent were built along major highways but not in centers. • About one-quarter(26%) were not built in centers or along highways. • Of the 74 new micro commercial buildings, 20 are neither in larger commercial centers nor located along a major highway. Of these 20, most are auto-oriented commercial tenants (e.g., auto repair, car dealerships, gas stations, drive-through coffee, fast food). One is a cafe, and one is a restaurant. Table 11. Micro Commercial Overview, Secondary Trade Area ocated in Located Along Total Bldg. Avg. Center Total enter? Highway? Square Feet Size (sf) Buildings N N 61,311 20 N Y 40,450 15 Y N 49,964 227,805 15 Y Y 87,994 139,917 24 239,719 173,720 74 Source:Costar, LCG The overall conclusion of this analysis is that micro commercial spaces of the type envisioned by the City have not been a common type of development built by developers over the past 20 years. (Going further back, say, to the early 20th century, it may be that more micro commercial spaces were built, but this was during a time with different structures pertaining to development, leasing, lending, construction cost, surrounding transportation and development patterns, and consumer preferences. Therefore, while these early examples may serve as inspirations, they do not reflect today's real estate development environment.) In particular, it is likely that the fixed construction costs, diminished economies of scale, preferences of anchor tenants, parking expectations, and lower rents are factors in leading developers to build very little micro commercial. Assuming that the City and project stakeholders view micro commercial—particularly within the interior of River Terrace 2.0 neighborhoods (not along arterial roads)—as a desirable type of development, LCG recommends a suite of approaches and incentives similar to those recommended for equitable commercial development above. Again, there may be considerable overlap between these two goals. River Terrace Commercial Development Program This section presents the conclusions of market demand for various types of commercial land uses, as well as compatible businesses within the study area given current and projected future growth. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 61 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis The following chart shows estimated 20-year net new demand by commercial category for the Primary Trade Area. Demand is calculated by approximate household demand using a 1.90 percent annual growth rate, consistent with a range of growth projections for the area. This "base" demand is supplemented by a "leakage recapture" rate, which differs by category based on a consumer's propensity to "shop locally"for certain products.A small percentage of the existing commercial inventory is also expected to become obsolete through general age, deterioration, and shifting consumer preferences, therefore necessitating a "replacement" rate, as shown in blue below. LCG's 20-year projection shows demand for a total of 524,000 square feet of new commercial development, more than half of which is in foodservice and drinking places (bars and restaurants), grocery, and general merchandise. Figure 35. 20-year Primary Trade Area Commercial Demand Foodservice and Drinking Places Food and Beverage(grocery) I General Merchandise Other(incl.cinema, prof./med.office, banks) Clothing and Accessories Misc.Store Retailers Building Material,Garden Equip • Household Growth • Leakage Recapture Health and Personal Care ■ Replacement Furniture and Home Furnishings 524,000 Square Sporting Gds, Hobby, Book, Music Feet Total Electronics and Appliance est. square feet 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 Source:US Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics,ESRI Business Analyst, LCG. The River Terrace study areas are expected to "capture" only some portion of the total amount. This capture rate will depend on the River Terrace development's potential to outcompete nearby centers (planned and existing), which depends on the tenant mix, the size, the timing of new development, and a range of other factors. We anticipate a high capture rate for foodservice and drinking places, grocery, and "other" commercial uses, which include banks, professional and medical offices, etc. Not all demand will be captured within the primary trade area. Realistically, the area will likely continue to "leak" spending outside for certain commercial categories that typically have a much larger trade area (general merchandise, for example). New development within the PTA will also capture a certain proportion of demand, which will vary depending on the tenant mix. Proposed new commercial projects River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 62 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis in the PTA, as of February 2021, are limited to planned developments in nearby UGB expansion areas and River Terrace 1.0, as summarized below. Table 12. Summary of Proposed Development in Competing UGB Expansion Areas UGB Expansions Bldg. SF Percent of Bldg. SF Percent of Low Demand High Demand South Cooper Mountain 80,000 22% 120,000 33% King City 54,000 15% 84,000 23% RT 1.0 Town Center 25,000 7% 40,000 11% Total 159,000 44% 244,000 68% Source:UGB area planning documents, LCG Within the broader secondary trade area, there is currently 160,000 square feet of leasable space attributing to a 6.2 percent vacancy rate in neighborhood and community commercial centers (excluding regional malls, such as Bridgeport Village and Washington Square, that are regional destinations). Non- center commercial development is minimal and limited to pad sites and highway-adjacent, auto-oriented users. Current leasable space includes: • 66,414 square feet in grocery-anchored centers (40,000 square feet of which is the former Thriftway supermarket in Farmington), and • 93,007 square feet in non-grocery-anchored centers. It serves to reason that a certain proportion of prospective tenants will gravitate to retail space in existing commercial space because of proven existing demand, as well as lower risk and cost. Others might find new centers elsewhere in the region more appealing. Currently, the only other planned center(found during this analysis) is Parkway South in Sherwood, which includes 27,000 square feet of in-line tenant space. Taken together, Parkway South and existing vacant space total 187,000 square feet of leasable space that will compete with River Terrace West and South. This market analysis has explored the market trends of a variety of commercial uses in order to determine the prospects for new development in River Terrace. This analysis has demonstrated that a commercial center approach will likely result in the highest"capture rate" of regional demand, meaning the construction of the highest amount of commercial square feet over a 20-year timeframe.This should be considered the "market-based" approach that speaks to the highest and best use for the area from a market perspective. However, alternate scenarios exist that may be more consistent with the preferred alternative for River Terrace. One of these scenarios includes a Main Street approach that prioritizes smaller-scale, decentralized commercial space. These scenarios are detailed below. Commercial Center Scenario. We recommend that, over the next 20 years/full project build-out, the project team prepare for two areas of commercial development totaling between 110,000 and 140,000 square feet. This reflects a capture rate of 27 to 36 percent of Primary Trade Area demand. Given the existing household concentrations, future growth trajectories,visibility, and access, we see River Terrace West along Scholls Ferry Road as a prominent location for a potential neighborhood center or commercial center between 80,000 and 90,000 square feet in building area with a mix of uses including River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 63 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis retail/commercial, restaurants, office/employment, and multifamily housing.At 0.25 FAR, this requires 7.3 to 8.3 net developable acres total. Rather than limiting commercial zoning to 8.3 acres, we recommend allowing commercial development in 10.0 net acres in order to allow for some flexibility and "room to grow." This scenario would be consistent with the Bethany Village case study. Main Street Scenario. The Main Street approach prioritizes smaller-scale commercial development that typically does not include an anchor tenant. Absorption trends for main street commercial tend to be lower and fluctuate more than commercial centers due to lesser attention by brokers and the lack of larger tenants. We recommend two potential locations for Main Street commercial: in River Terrace West near Bull Mountain Road and Roy Rodgers Road and in River Terrace South near Roy Rodgers Road and Beef Bend Road. Both locations are selected based on accessibility and visibility from main arterials. The feasibility and suitability of Main Street commercial in River Terrace West depend on the scale and land use mix of development near Scholls Ferry.A larger commercial-based center may capture a higher proportion of commercial demand and, thus, thin the market for a second location. Conversely, a higher proportion of employment-based uses near Scholls Ferry, for example, may help drive demand for additional commercial uses (albeit over a longer timeframe). We recommend planning for between 30,000 and 50,000 square feet in building area or 2.8 to 4.6 net developable acres total at 0.25 FAR for each location. The Main Street Scenario, if built as part of mixed- use developments, could conceivably be a denser development type and require no more than four acres. This scenario would be consistent with the Northwest Crossing and Orenco Station case studies. Table 13. Primary Trade Area Demand Calculations UGB Expansions SF Low SF High 10 Year Demand 241,000 20 Year Demand 524,000 SCM, KC, RT TC 159,000 244,000 River Terrace West & South River Terrace West—at Scholls Ferry 80,000 90,000 River Terrace West—at Roy Rogers 30,000 50,000 River Terrace South—at Beef Bend 30,000 50,000 Centers Subtotal 140,000 190,000 Total 299,000 434,000 Excess Demand or Leakage 225,000 90,000 Percent of Total Demand 43% 17% Source:LCG River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 64 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Commercial Typologies Neighborhood Centers (Grocery Anchored) In the language of commercial development, "Neighborhood Centers" are commercial developments that are anchored by a grocery store, often include a pharmacy, restaurants, and a range of smaller"inline" tenants," and offer an array of goods and services regularly needed by households—unlike smaller strip retail developments and large commercial centers like malls.6 Grocery store sizes typically range from smaller stores Trader Joe's, New Seasons Market, and Aldi (Green Zebra is an even smaller local example) that have standard footprints of 20,000 to 30,000 square feet. New midsize grocery stores, like most Safeway, Albertsons, and Thriftway, range from about 40,000 to 60,000 square feet, stores. Large-format supermarkets, like Fred Meyer, typically start around 60,000 square feet. Other tenants often include other food and beverage, healthcare or fitness providers, banks, professional and medical offices, salons, packaging and shipping, and other shops.The Neighborhood Center is a stable retail format since nearby residents shop for groceries and other daily goods, and then cross-shop for other goods and services since they are already on site. Nationwide, neighborhood centers generally include about 60,000 to 100,000 square feet of rentable building area (RBA).The average site area for such a center is about 8.6 acres. About 6,000 to 8,000 households are needed to support a neighborhood node, though this figure can be lower if the center is located along a high traffic arterial. Neighborhood Nodes or Convenience Centers A neighborhood node or convenience center includes many of the in-line tenants described above, but without the grocery store, and is therefore typically 30,000 square feet or less. The focus is on businesses that offer food, personal, and professional services. Examples mentioned above include the Village at Scholls Ferry and the Northwest Crossing Main Street. Without a grocery or large pharmacy anchor or other"credit tenant," such neighborhood nodes can be more difficult for commercial developers to finance.About 2,000 households are needed to support a neighborhood node. Corner Stores or"Micro Commercial" The River Terrace planning team asked LCG about the potential to include small corner stores or micro- retail within the study areas.The Congress of New Urbanism defines these stores as "corner stores,"which range from 1,500 to 3,000 square feet. These small stores typically offer beverages, food, and sundries that are needed regularly by most households, workers, and travelers. Beer, bread, cigarettes, prepared sandwiches, sundries, and snacks represent the bulk of their sales. These stores primarily offer convenience over selection and value. Such small-scale vendors can provide great charm to neighborhoods, and a special human scale and connection, as the owners are on-site regularly. However, based on LCG's review of commercial development in Washington County(see Market Analysis section above), they are not common. 6 Attributes of retail typologies are based on:Principles of Urban Retail Planning and Development, Robert J.Gibbs,Wiley,2012. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 65 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Moreover, the ideal location for a corner store fluctuates. From a sales and feasibility point of view, the best location for a corner store is along one or more busy roads, at the entrance to a neighborhood. By contrast, there has been interest in locating such corner stores in the interior of neighborhoods, where visibility and feasibility are lower. The Villebois Village Center is one cautionary tale of an interior location, despite a relatively high target density of 13 dwelling units per net acre (see case studies). The ideal location may balance the benefits of auto drive-by traffic and visibility with high-quality pedestrian connectivity. Stores also benefit if when located adjacent to higher density development, community buildings, parks, and schools. Approximately 1,000 households are necessary to support the average corner store. This number can be reduced significantly if the store is located along a major road with 15,000 or more cars per day. Corner stores that also sell gasoline are supportable with virtually no adjacent homes. Error! Reference source not found. shows a range of policy approaches. When certain land uses and development patterns are existing or mainstream, with an established track record of development, policies may guide or optimize the development in some way. For "niche" development types that are rarely built or uncommon—such as corner stores—policymakers may want to encourage, incentivize, or invest in order to increase the likelihood that they will happen. Table 14. Potential Policy Approaches Market Trend Potential Policy Approaches Existing, Mainstream Guide or optimize development Discourage Permit with conditions Permit by right Niche, Built Examples are Rare Encourage, Incentivize Invest Source:LCG Vertical Versus Horizontal Mixed-Use Tigard should pursue horizontal, rather than vertical mixed-use construction. The major differences include parking (surface versus structured), construction type (wood versus concrete podium), the use of elevators, additional circulation and interior spaces, fire and safety elements, and the level of fees associated with the development. Vertical mixed-use requires much higher rents, primarily because of the more expensive construction costs. These rents do not exist in the area today.As such, pursuing the latter without allowing for the former may delay new development in River Terrace. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 66 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis / Horizontal Mixed-Use Vertical Mixed-Use Residcnnal and commeraal uses Residem,al and commercial uses are mixed across the site,but not within buildings are mixed within buildings Employment Market Analysis Possible employment-based uses for consideration in this analysis include office, industrial (including light industrial, flex, or"maker space,"), medical office, hotels, or other miscellaneous uses (such as self- storage). Some of these uses—particularly professional office and healthcare—are often tenants in commercial centers. However, these uses can also be built as single-use, large-scale,purpose-built projects, such as the office space at Kruse Way, or the extensive industrial development in Tualatin, west of I-5 (see map on following page).Within the primary trade area, there has been very little of this large-scale office, industrial, and "other" commercial development activity over the past 20 years. Costar data, shown in Table 15 below, shows significantly more development in the larger secondary market area. Of the uses that might be expected in a town center or neighborhood-scale commercial development—office (including medical), flex, and hospitality/hotel—the secondary market area has experienced 50,000 square feet annually. More notably, the primary trade area has captured less than 1.0% of the industrial, office, flex, and medical office development that has taken place in the secondary market area. This is most likely due to the area's location near the urban growth boundary, distance from major highways, and distance from population centers. Large-scale office development must be highly accessible to a large workforce, and large industrial development must be exceptionally well connected to major arterials and highways.These trends suggest that while some industrial, office, flex, and medical office uses could be in-line tenants within larger projects led by retail and general commercial uses, they are unlikely to drive demand for single-use, large-scale, purpose-built projects in the River Terrace area. Table 15. 20-Year Employment Development Trends, Total Square Feet Development Industrial Office Flex Medical Hospitality Specialty Office Primary TA 3,982 8,434 87,001 Secondary MA 1,907,813 533,277 220,833 161,941 70,993 501,923 Total 1,907,813 537,259 220,833 161,941 79,427 588,924 PTA as a % of SMA 0% 1% 0% 0% 12% 17% Source:Costar River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 67 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis The City of Tigard's 2011 Employment Opportunities Analysis (EOA) indicated a need for 19 to 45 additional acres of commercial and mixed-use (including employment) land and 14 to 30 additional acres of industrial land between 2011 and 2031.While the addition of River Terrace 1.0 and other annexed areas has changed both the commercial and employment land supply and demand in the City, the City and LCG's assessment is that additional employment land, in particular, is needed.A new EOA will be completed by the City in the near future. To the extent possible, the City would like to see River Terrace 2.0 play a role in meeting employment land needs. As mentioned above, purpose-built employment development—particularly office and industrial development—is more likely to be occupied by target industry or"traded sector" businesses—those who sell goods and services outside of the Portland regional market, to clients at the national or global level. These businesses also usually draw their workforces from throughout the metropolitan region, though the quality of the immediately surrounding workforce, along with transportation infrastructure, and other factors are important in their location decisions. According to Greater Portland Inc. (a regional economic development partnership between the public and private sectors), the Portland regional economy is driven by the following six target industries, which are the most likely to drive any major employment development at River Terrace (versus employment-based development as a secondary use): • Metal and Machinery, anchored by companies such as Vigor, Schnitzer Steel, Columbia Steel, and Daimler; the region has a more significant manufacturing base stands than most other metros. • Computer and Electronics, anchored by Intel. • Clean Tech, "propelled by Greater Portland's sustainable mindset and its capacity for innovation, • Athletic &Outdoor, anchored by Nike, Columbia Sportswear, Keen, and others. • Software + Media, This sector builds on Greater Portland's reputation as a tech and innovation hub. • Health Sciences + Technology, primarily an emerging area.? Office Market Office development, as discussed in the market area discussion, is more impacted by economic trends at the regional level than commercial (which is more localized). Major employment growth at the metro level, while concentrated in certain locations, impacts office development prospects more so than any other characteristic. If the market is limited at the regional level for certain industries, then a secondary location like River Terrace is unlikely to attract these jobs. Conversely, substantial growth in certain industries may spill over to peripheral locations, providing development opportunities that capture a portion of this growth. As noted above and in the employment projections, the Portland region's office- based employment strengths are primarily in healthcare, business services, and technology.These industries have, historically, driven demand for new office development. 7 GREATER PORTLAND 2020 https://staticl.squarespace.com/static/5331fb02e4b07029e4ac8b11/t/581cc30e03596e1 b70126e34/1478279950956/GP2020+CEDS.pdf River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 68 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Based on LCG's experience and other sources, large employers base their decisions on where to locate office space based on the following primary criteria: • Attracting and retaining talent. This is the most often cited requirement for location decisions. Businesses want to be in locations where they can draw on a large pool of highly educated, innovative, creative, and motivated individuals.While the population size and educational attainment near River Terrace are reasonably strong, other competitive areas still have a talent advantage, as shown in Table 3 on page 25. • Clusters. Being located in proximity to customers, collaborators, suppliers, and even competitors is critical. Hence the clustering of Athletic and Outdoor businesses in the Portland metro region, and proximity to Nike. • Accessibility and visibility. Employers' workforce, customers, suppliers, and others must be able to easily get to and from the office space.Visibility is important since an attractive office space can as a marketing tool for the company's brand. • Quality of place. Since talent is the most important consideration, and highly skilled people are attracted to places with a high quality of life, quality of place is important to employers. • Real estate costs. • Regulation and tax structure.8 The following text provides a regional and suburban/local outlook for office development. Regional Overview. The national and regional office markets faced significant challenges through 2020 and the impacts are set to continue for many years. The vast majority of the Portland metro's office inventory is located in the downtown Central Business District (CBD), which has borne the brunt of falling demand caused by the pandemic and civil unrest. • The urban core accounted for more than half of Q3 2020's negative absorption. • As demand continues to fall in the urban core, Q3 2020 rent growth has stalled. Rent growth in the CBD slowed to 0.5 percent year-over-year. • Average vacancy rates rose to 13.7 percent market-wide, up 170 basis points over the past 12 months. While economic conditions appear to be improving, the road to recovery remains long and unsteady with Portland's downtown core particularly burdened.Vacancy is rising and will continue to do so over the next year.Almost one million square feet of new, mostly unleased, office product delivered to the market in 2020, and another 500,000 square feet is still in the pipeline. Sublease space has doubled to over one million square feet and will continue to rise as a number of larger subleases are announced. All of the above factors are putting pressure on rents, which decreased 0.7 percent in the CBD from the second quarter. This trend is expected to continue for the remainder of 2020, likely resulting in negative rent growth for 2020 and 2021.9 Moving forward, conditions in the near-term are likely to remain volatile due to the rapidly changing trajectory of broader economic indicators and public health conditions. Over a longer timeframe, these 8 Based on LCG experience and Seven reasons why location is important https://www.usjll.com/en/views/seven-reasons-location- important 9 Data from JLL Q3 2020 Portland Office Market Report River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 69 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis conditions will stabilize as workers return to the office. After many years of office space consolidation, office users may start to value more space (spurred on my health concerns during the current pandemic), although any impacts from space expansions are likely to be dampened by the increasing normalization of the work-from-home environment. Suburban Office. The suburban office market has generally maintained a steadier course, albeit with a substantially smaller inventory. The hub of the suburban office market in the region is Kruse Way, which is located outside of the market area and not reflected in the charts that follow. Kruse Way and other relevant office developments are described in the bullets below. • Kruse Way (also known as Kruse Woods Corporate Park) has remained the premier suburban office location since the first buildings were constructed in 1981. Occupancy peaked around 2000, although rents have continued to climb, with average asking rents now in the mid-$30s (gross). The most recent office building was constructed in 2009 and there are still several large developable parcels. In total, Kruse Way includes 1.8 million square feet of office space, but vacancies have been steadily increasing as office trends and consumer preferences have shifted away from the conventional business park. Seemingly as a direct result of an increasing desire for more walkable, amenity-rich locations among employees, there were five new cafes, restaurants, and other local-serving retail buildings constructed in 2015. Kruse Way is home to many major tenants in finance, professional services, and information and continues to benefit from a major clustering of industries and tenants. • Other peripheral locations include the Wilsonville Town Center, which, after many years of stagnating rent growth and limited occupancy, is seeing a resurgence based on the City's desire to increase placemaking, walkability, and household density in the area. Elsewhere in Wilsonville there is recently built speculative office space, with more in the pipeline.These and other locations in the southwest metro region that have established employment markets serve as an important example of the long-term nature of suburban office development. These areas are expected to continue building out and absorb a significant market share. • Most office developments are part of larger planned centers as single, isolated buildings typically struggle to penetrate the market. An example of this is the Pacific Financial Center in Tualatin. Despite a location on Highway 99W, the building has struggled to attract tenants and is only recently achieving a vacancy of 75 percent since its construction in 2008, with asking rents of $28 full-service advertised for currently available space. Pacific Financial Center is an ode to an outdated development model and demonstrates the need to cohesively plan for a critical mass of employment and commercial activity. • Beaverton's The Round, a master-planned development with a mix of office, retail, and residential units along MAX light rail, is one of the few new employment centers in the subregion in the past decade. Constructed began pre-recession, but performance has been mixed in the years since, with significant vacancies and frequent tenant turnover.The City of Beaverton recently purchased space and located a city library there. The Round serves as an important reminder that location is not everything.The City of Tigard must have a deliberate strategy, coherent vision, and market- realistic plan for employment-based development in River Terrace. Rent and vacancy trends for the past decade in the secondary trade area—an area with a standing inventory of 2.0 million square feet—indicate reasons for both optimism and caution when considering River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 70 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis the demand for new development. Rents have grown by about 30 percent in five years to a 10-year high, and the average vacancy rate has dropped below 10 percent for the first time since before the Great Recession. Both of these factors increase the likelihood that new office development will be feasible. However, rents in the market area are almost certainly well below where they would need to be to justify new ground-up office development in the near-term. Developers evaluating projects in the Portland Central City state that, in order to justify new speculative office development, rents must be $35 per square feet triple-net (NNN, meaning the tenant pays operating expenses) or about $45 per square feet for full-service rents (meaning the landlord pays operating expenses). Due to lower land costs and other costs, rents can be somewhat lower in Tigard while still justifying new, ground-up construction; however, these rents are still well above those shown in the figure below. Figure 36. Office Rent and Vacancy Trends, Market Area 22.0% $23.00 20.0% .° �`• - $22.00 • 18.0% — i `• � $21.00 ` 16.0% ,' `� i - $20.00 .. � • 14.0% \\... .° /1/ $19.00 12.0% — `�%_--' — • • �•_• - $18.00 • 10.0% _____Vacancy `�"� `''- $17.00 • 8.0% Rent % $16.00 6.0% I $15.00 2008 2010 2017 2014 2016 2018 2020 Source:Costar Despite positive trends in rents and vacancies, the following chart shows zero new construction in the STA since 2012 and only positive absorption trends for three years since, averaging 40,000 net square feet per year for the past five years (but just 18,000 for the past decade). This indicates a slow-growing and constricted submarket in which the lack of quality space is likely pushing up rents and driving down vacancies, rather than an influx of high-quality, new office space. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 71 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 37. Office Absorption and Deliveries Trends, Market Area 200,000 150,000 100,000 • 50,000 0 • —0- -50,000-50,000 -100,000 •Absorption I •Deliveries -150,000 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Source:Costar It remains to be seen whether the downtown Portland office market will return to pre-pandemic levels as work-from-home is normalized, or what impact the glut of new CBD office space has on suburban office prospects.An oversupply of new, high-quality, downtown office space is likely to soften Class A rent growth, making it more affordable to prospective traded-industry tenants. In fact, there is little data at this time reflecting a consistent migration to the suburbs or the creation of a "hub-and-spoke" (satellite office) model in which an occupier leases a central, urban office as well as multiple, smaller suburban offices. Several factors likely have slowed any significant wave in favor of the hub-and-spoke or suburban models: • Location choices often are made after a multi-year evaluation process, so not enough time has elapsed since the start of the pandemic for a full re-evaluation of space needs. • Occupying multiple locations within a metro area has cost implications that are challenging to accept when revenues are down for so many firms. • Some executives prefer a wait-and-see approach before committing to an occupancy plan, given that a vaccine for COVID-19 could shift their plans once again. • Decision-makers are assessing how much space they may need if a portion of their workforce continues to operate remotely on at least a part-time basis. • Corporate leaders are concerned about their workforce being spread out, away from a single urban node, because of the potential long-term damage to talent recruiting/retention and corporate culture.10 Given the information presented in this section, planning for office development in any location will remain tough for the next five years until conditions stabilize. However, the case studies show, amenity- rich locations will continue to attract investment interest. The extent of that interest, however, remains a question mark. 10 Newmark,An Office Market in Transition?The Urban vs.Suburban Debate,September 2020, URL River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 72 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Industrial Market Potential locations for industrial development, which typically includes warehousing, logistics, distribution, and manufacturing, generally need to fit within a narrow framework of criteria.These include: • Major transportation routes. Industrial users typically need access to major transportation routes so that products can be quickly and easily delivered and shipped, and to maximize the employment catchment area. The closest industrial development in the past 20 years has been in Tualatin and Sherwood along I-5 and Highway 99W—both major freight and transportation routes. • Separation from residential uses. Due to the propensity of industrial users to generate noise, pollution, and vehicular traffic, development is not typically located next to residential uses. This sometimes applies to other uses that attract pedestrian activity, such as main street retail and hospitality. • Low-cost land. Of all land use types, industrial fetches the lowest rents and sale prices. Comparatively, high-density residential and commercial uses fetch the highest rents and sale prices.Typically, the cost of land reflects these trends. • Large, uniform sites. Industrial development is low-density (typically one- or two-stories) and requires plentiful space for circulation, storage, parking, particularly freight operators. • Flat sites. Due to the cost of grading, combined with the low value of industrial development, industrial users require sites with less than 3.0 percent slopes. Despite stronger national and regional prospects for industrial development—summarized below—the River Terrace area is unlikely to attract, or be suitable for industrial users, due to: • A limited supply of large, flat sites. • Current and likely future proximity to residential areas. • In the near term, an edge location with a one-sided market area, limiting the employment catchment area. • Lack of highway access. Regional Overview. As with most markets, food and beverage distributors in Portland have seen an increase in consumer demand following the onset of COVID-19, while manufacturers and wholesale suppliers remain strained. Development activity remains buoyant with over 4.2 million square feet still in the pipeline, over half of which is planned to be owner-user or build-to-suit properties. Still under development are Intel's multi-billion dollar, 1.5 million square foot expansion of its D1X fab, JSR Micro's nearby $100 million facility, and Columbia Distributing's 530,000-square-foot planned consolidation in Canby. As discussed in prior pages, industrial appears to be weathering the storm better than most property types and deal activity remains steady. Of the almost 10 million square feet of speculative construction that have been delivered over the past 5 years, less than 10 percent is available and the market should be able to absorb most of the 2.1 million speculative square feet delivering in 2020-2021. Suburban Industrial. Without a major industrial hub, rents and vacancy trends in the market area are steady yet unspectacular.A standing inventory of 6.8 million square feet is primarily located in Tualatin to the south of River Terrace. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 73 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 38. Industrial Rent and Vacancy Trends, Market Area $10.00 9.0% Rent $9.00 I-----Vacancy I z.---N – 8.0% $8.00 , 7.0% •$7.00 �' ��-,,� 6.0% $6.00 I�+-�� ..'.� �� ` 5.0% $5.00 ' �! , 4.0% $4.00 I, u ` _ .----''', `� : . 3.0% ` $3.00 �' \ • '• 2.0% $2.00 .. . ��–'� 1.0% $1.00 0.0% 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 Source:Costar The market area has experienced moderate levels of construction activity in the past five years, especially as compared to the office market, averaging 93,000 square feet per year. Absorption has largely been positive, averaging 74,000 square feet per year. Figure 39. Industrial Absorption and Deliveries Trends, Market Area 400,000 300,000 • 200,000 100,000 Li • — 0 17 • -I I • I • I • Ir-•-i 1 ` I• � I I �JI � I IA -100,000 -200,000IIII I ■Absorption h •Deliveries -300,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Source:Costar Healthcare and Hospitality Healthcare and hospitality, like commercial space, tend to locate new development in underserved markets where demand exceeds supply. Development trends for facilities 5,000 square feet or more since 1980 are shown in the map below.There has been relatively limited hotel and healthcare development in the southwest metro. Hotel. Some of the key inputs to hotel developers' site selection decisions are the amount of nearby employment (which drives business travel), convention center space, major tourist destinations/quality of place, and visibility from major highways/transportation corridors.There is also "background demand" River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 74 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis that is linked to the size of the surrounding population. Hotel development, to an even greater degree than commercial development, tends to be a "following use" except in the case of natural tourist destinations: it follows other types of development.Therefore, in terms of phasing, the City should not expect lodging development to be completed early in the lifespan of River Terrace, if at all. As shown below, new hotel development has clustered in downtown Portland and Hillsboro, with a few isolated projects elsewhere along major arterials. To the southwest, Sherwood saw a 73-room Hampton built in 2020 and a 122-room WoodSprings Suites proposed for 2023. This reflects the site selection criteria described above. Since it is not clear that River Terrace is likely to have competitive advantages in terms of major employment clusters, tourism draws, or transportation corridors compared to other locations, LCG views the probability of attracting a hotel as low, at least in the next 20 years.Again, following significant development, this calculus could change.The most likely location for a hotel would be near a mix of uses or town center feature or near open spaces. It is possible that lodging could be located along one of the arterials and look to build on travel to and from the wine country to the southwest, but most likely there are superior wine country lodging locations. Healthcare. Healthcare facilities are more dispersed and have spread out through the region to serve the growing population. Key healthcare demand drivers are the size of the population in the market area and the size of key populations such as seniors. Small and medium size healthcare facilities (particularly clinics, primary care offices, and dental) can easily fit into commercial centers. Major healthcare facilities (e.g., hospitals and large medical office buildings) tend to locate along highways and major transportation corridors. Healthcare is an industry that has the potential to drive demand for other commercial uses and amenities, including retail, office, lodging, and, to a lesser extent, light industrial and manufacturing. River Terrace may benefit in the future from several emerging trends, including a growing acceptance and use of telehealth (driven on by the COVID pandemic), technological advances, and a growing desire for more convenient and accessible outpatient services.These trends are more likely to lend themselves to smaller healthcare facilities. LCG's assessment is that it is likely that some small or medium size healthcare facilities will locate within one of the River Terrace commercial areas. Assisted living facilities can be located within residential parts of River Terrace. Because major healthcare facilities depend on large nearby population bases and visibility and access along highways and major transportation corridors, such a facility is unlikely, at least in the next 20 years. Attracting such a user would require time, effort, and deliberate planning and policy on the part of the City. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 75 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 40. Healthcare & Hospitality Development Trends ! i �•' a 1M'll , I--_I � ,. Vanco v North Plains --I -- .. ! ,,', ••ti --- OL-1 .1.-. \ 0 . Maywood'Park -- ,a� cs Viand G�eshara Hill�orogib.C.) ow ( 1_1):-. .:::• 4' ja IF . 41110 • .- r; 6' 0 II 205 ,b,_ :•tone I ° 0 IP Healthcare& j,.; • Hospitality A i •l. Milwaukie Hp Valley • Health Care r9-9i3' qTi: � S Hospitality f�! Lake Oswego Johnson City Built 1980-2015 r f•, •-,- I{ing City Durham V (Faded) Ri�ergrar�e Q Built Since 2015 S ._'� Gladstone (Bold) f- Tualaftn' • --�-_ ice- „Ali " W 5t Lin 205 c' -� 131 woadl a r-•- v ... .... ..4.0regon ki •• ._ I----.�......-f �` `•`; r is' `•• , yilsonlille•' f.--""-.._,- Nelyb._s;r ' ' 0 -. 4 mi {i•-- .© Canby Source:Costar River Terrace Employment Development Program While this analysis has shown that a market-based development program in the River Terrace area primarily involves commercial land uses, the City's stated need for employment lands (per the 2011 Employment Opportunity Analysis) stipulates a necessity to explore an employment-focused scenario. Employment, as discussed previously, primarily involves office, industrial, and healthcare. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 76 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Table 16. Case Study Summary Northwest Villebois Bethany Orenco Case Study Crossing Village Station Average Total Acres 201 133 207 110 163 Commercial 3/9% 0 13 /65% 6/ 50% 5.5/33% Office 16/47% 0 7/35% 2/ 17% 6.3 /38% Industrial 15/47% 0 0/0% 0/0% 3.8/23% Hotel 0/0% 0 0/0% 4/33% 1.0/6% Comm. & Emp.Acres 34 0 20 12 16.5 Percent of Total Acres 17% 0% 10% 11% 10% Source:Leland Consulting Group Of the three case studies with commercial or employment acres developed, commercial and employment land typically comprises between 10 to 17 percent of total acres. In these examples, the non-residential mix of uses varies significantly, with commercial uses featuring more in Bethany Village and Orenco Station, and employment uses featuring more in Northwest Crossing. For River Terrace, a viable employment center will likely require the City to set aside land in excess of 10 acres of employment land in order to accommodate at least 100,000 square feet of new development. This is necessary to create a critical mass of employment activity to generate economies of scale, which will help to mitigate the geographical, financial, and market challenges in the area. Employment Typologies Each employment-based building type has different site characteristics and land needs. Many of these characteristics have already been described in detail. Land needs, however, is even more significant as it is a major determinant of the acreage required to be set aside for employment in the River Terrace area.The increasing land needs for a variety of building types are shown below. There is much crossover between employment and commercial uses, as many of these typologies—such as medical and professional suites—can be office space leased within commercial centers or larger buildings. 'C. � I LeJ� e �� a�5� ��p`� �Jtec •�� •s' \ c:1 Q,4) \far G� �Q d` �' �' �` 0Qt y �'`, 4` C? 6-„ `.o \6. .j• & L ` ` 6 I ; ■ Source:LCG Users on the left side of the graphic above are well-suited to a variety of development landscapes and are typically feasible in both commercial centers and main street environments. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 77 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Users on the right are less likely to co-locate with other development types, especially industrial and larger healthcare users. Office buildings are more compatible with residential and commercial uses, particularly if creative solutions to parking can be found (such as shared parking). However, the suburban office market is thin and incentives and other actions will be necessary to entice developers to build speculative office space in River Terrace 2.0. These are described in the following section. Employment Development Strategy Real estate developers have built commercial space within the secondary market area with a reasonable level of predictability and consistency over the past 20 years. That is not the case, however, with employment space. There is little precedent for major employment space in the secondary market area. Other locations appear to have a near-term advantage because of larger workforce bases, existing clusters, higher levels of transportation accessibility, and major (e.g. interstate) transportation facilities, flat sites, and other attributes. And industry interviewees expressed wariness about the area in the near term.These factors mean that the City of Tigard will benefit from both patience and a proactive strategy if it wishes to see dedicated employment space delivered at River Terrace. Strategies and Incentives. LCG recommends the following approaches and strategies for employment attraction: • Be both proactive and patient. The City will need to be both proactive—in maintaining relationships with major employers, brokers, economic development professionals at different levels of government, and others in the employment development community and understanding their needs—and also patient. NorthWest Crossing, where developers waited for more than a decade before major employment sites broke ground, provides an example. This means a recognition that the City will probably forgo the opportunity to see the land developed sooner with residential, or a mix of residential and commercial, uses. • Ensure that buildable shovel-ready land is available for employment. The land must be zoned for employment development. The zoning and building codes should require an appropriate level of development quality, but not make unrealistic requirements, for example, around low parking ratios, mixed-use, etc. For certain sites, the City may want to use the State's "Certified Shovel Ready" process to document that environmental, archeological, title, wetland, and topographical issues do not preclude development. • Invest in talent and quality of place. The underpinnings of traded sector office site selection are simple: Locate where the talent is. Therefore, cities must attract talented people, by providing high-quality cities and neighborhoods where people want to live. The River Terrace Concept Plan, which integrates residential and commercial development with parks and open spaces, is an important step; building out the plan is another. More broadly, the City should work to ensure that its workforce is well educated and trained to fill jobs within the City and regional industry clusters (software, electronics, and others mentioned above) and that its primary and secondary schools are of high quality. • Increase accessibility and visibility via the regional transportation network. Large employers have historically needed to bring large numbers of employees to their campuses, and this requires robust auto, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian transportation infrastructure. In the near-term, most employees are most likely to commute to work in cars they own; over the long term, automated vehicles, ride- River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 78 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis sharing, and non-auto modes may increase. In any case, this will require the City to work closely with other cities, Washington County, and Metro. • Consider land acquisitions. Site ownership can put the City in a strong position to recruit employers; it can also be expensive, risky, and politically contentious. If the City is considering land acquisitions, LCG recommends that the City work with a broker with experience executing deals that have resulted in employment land and building development in Washington County, in order to clearly understand costs and benefits. Incentives. The City already employs a number of incentives that provide financial benefits to employers to locate in the City or certain subareas. Some of these are listed below and can continue to be offered, or can be expanded to apply to River Terrace: • Tigard/Lake Oswego Enterprise Zone. This is a local economic development program that reduces the tax burden on companies investing in equipment, facilities, and people. This program offers a 100% tax abatement for three to five years on new capital investments when a firm also increases employment by 10%.A new zone could be created to cover River Terrace. • Matching Grant Program. This fund provides matching grants for new catalyst businesses in Tigard's Urban Renewal District to make improvements to the exterior of their business and is funded through tax increment financing. This incentive could be extended to River Terrace, with or without a new urban renewal area. The State of Oregon also provides some employment attraction incentives: • Business Expansion Program. This incentive program is available to existing companies expanding operations in Oregon or new companies coming into the state.The Oregon Business Expansion Program is a cash-based incentive (forgivable loan) equivalent to the estimated increase in income tax revenue from the new hiring. • Strategic Investment Program (SIP). This program exempts a portion of very large capital investments from property taxes for 15 years. The program is available statewide. • Strategic Reserve Fund. This is a discretionary tool used for a variety of projects impacting economic development requiring an extensive vetting process, with the Governor making the final approval. 11 Phasing/Timing It is important to remember that timing is critical. The UGB expansion areas, including River Terrace West and South, are expected to get built out in the following order. • River Terrace Town Center • South Cooper Mountain Main Street • King City Town Center(URA 6D) • River Terrace South "City incentives:httos://www.tiaard-or.aov/business/economic develooment.oho.State incentives: https://www.oregon4biz.com/Oregon-Business/Tax-Incentives/.Some incentives available in other parts of the City probably will not be applicable at River Terrace because of area household's relatively high income levels.This includes Opportunity Zones and New Market Tax Credits(NMTC).The creation of an Opportunity Zone is also unlikely,at least in the near term,as the location of those zones has already been set by federal and state rules. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 79 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis • River Terrace West It is therefore necessary to plan for a range of scenarios depending on the tenant mix and size of other centers.The potential for market saturation if each UGB expansion area develops in a similar mix of tenants is high.A flexible program is, therefore, necessary to mitigate some of these challenges and respond to market opportunities. If the River Terrace Town Center capitalizes on a greater share of the market than anticipated, or if King City builds a grocery-anchored center first, then it may be necessary to pursue a non-anchored center or employment hub.Without the grocer or other anchor, a center is likely to be no more than 30,000 square feet. In this situation, being flexible with the commercial versus employment programming of River Terrace is highly valuable. Commercial and Employment: Combined Market Potential River Terrace is well-located along established arterials (Scholls Ferry Road, Roy Rogers Road, and Beef Bend Road)just 15 miles from downtown Portland, 12 miles from Intel, and 7.5 miles from Nike—two of the region's biggest employers. Its location on the edge of the metro region gives residents access to cultural activities, employment centers, and outdoor recreational activities—attractive elements for prospective residents and businesses who prioritize a high quality of life.The presence of wine country to the west provides potential opportunities to capitalize on tourism activity. Commercial.While the area has a limited number of existing households to support commercial growth in the near-term, market conditions have been improving at both the local and regional level, and planned development and demographic trends are supportive of commercial development during the next 20 years in River Terrace West and South. However, there will likely be competition for commercial development in River Terrace West and South, which could result in market saturation. This will be a more acute issue if all the nearby developing areas pursue similar types of commercial development. LCG's analysis indicates that there is likely potential for two or possibly three grocery-anchored Neighborhood Centers in River Terrace West and South, River Terrace East, South Cooper Mountain, and King City URA 6D. The other two (or more) commercial and employment nodes would be either employment hubs, neighborhood nodes, main streets, or corner stores. Given the expected timing of development, other centers may be developed before River Terrace West and South. Employment.The City's 2011 EOA indicated a 20-year need for additional acres of commercial and employment land. The suburban office market is thin and there are few recent examples of successful office development. Healthcare has driven most of the demand for new office development throughout the suburbs. Speculative office—particularly singular office buildings—however, has struggled in most suburban locations outside of Kruse Way. In order for River Terrace 2.0 to meet the employment land needs of the City, the City should consider setting aside land for employment development. The amount of land depends on the City's priorities and policy approach.A modest amount of dedicated employment land (e.g., 5 acres) will do less to satisfy the need identified in the EOA.A larger amount of land (e.g., 10 to 15 acres) has the potential to accommodate more of this land need and to potentially encourage a critical mass and industry clustering; however, absorption is likely to be slower for this larger area. River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 80 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Given the needs of industrial users and the development financial structure of the land and development—unless segregated from residential uses, major transportation investments are made, and the City provides direct subsidies—employment-based development is unlikely to include much industrial space. Table 17. River Terrace Development Program Summary RT West at Scholls Ferry RT West at Roy Rogers, and RT South at Beef Bend Commercial Anchored center Main Street or recommended "Unanchored Center" Commercial space likely to recommended. include retail, restaurant, Models: Northwest Crossing employment, healthcare, and TC, Village on Scholls other uses. Models: Orenco Station, 3 to 6 acres Bethany Village Up to 10 acres Employment Employment center, including No purpose-built office space and potentially employment land is healthcare and other uses is recommended. optional. Models: Bethany Village, NorthWest Crossing 5 to 20 acres Combined Scenario Commercial and employment Main Street or center with a mix of uses. "Unanchored Center" 10 to 30+ acres 3 to 6 acres Source:LCG River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 81 Commercial and Employment Market Analysis Figure 41. Potential Center Locations i l t y`.Beaverton + . ,! • Potential River Terrace <'' Center Locations `� N South Cooper Mountain S�µOCLS�ERRY RD a..,�"` Potential Competing 0 .. nV Pp" . t'w-`12 ti r' Centers , !tc,,-, t li t, -;,,r '4 1, - -:, — siv!,;444-1, lk-,‘),,t..,*44,, , : , , . y 1 {E 2 a -1 may{ r�� E�L 1 . > ttin;w, IL!, 70:' -' r -: .e ' j Tigard et ' • `i` • T ; e ` • s~ s- 44 �„4 BULL MOUNTAIN R6 '„^ , p o x • r ► ..'taF�.Se+=eilll*,'" Al. 4 p {? '� �-BURGUNDYSiF 1•��•la g��'v 4 f.. Jr .0:— '-a4--- •+sir :' �► • �.• y . ,i r 0 • z' • vt i I-t z 4 r w • a r LASICH LN f z =t ,' o Rover Terrace South.,,,, .., , t N �r s l B ire - LowBEEFrBEND'RD ^? 111 . .4 _ n w f C +, G'~. -- ao me _ y il Source:LCG River Terrace West and South Concept Plan 82 lika.% .10,,,t,,..fr',,,..„'--7V14;-f > ikr • ;:,..: . .. !• . - ir - TA f „,'Xi.- "tri.C.. ' 4 1,' . . ,, q., '. ' .. ' - . 7 ek,ii•in, J,,,r 1 !..,k. ,,. -1/4. ,,,,..r, .!,,,•JL.•' I. - ',.• •• • n• .,.._„,:,..'s.,?, • -• ... -. 4 ..._ k1 : - ... . C• 'S 4 • 1 .., . - -4115: 1, ''.--4 4.-• ',•••• . .), • ', 6 , ,....,. -• ,'. 2,3 o:',Y('S K• • 'fi, , • i' o' ••••..• .- • . ,.... :r.''' ' ' '' "441- w.'' f*!f.1',t '''' 5:;Se7./. :"';-_,; - ' .... A ir. : i vi • : . 4 4-.‘. ' - ..A' .... . 1_ L ...i.. ..... •'. ., '''.1;1 --'r '. 'LI ••'•. . ' ' 17').- !Pi . $.- ...Ii- • 1 . Prnil---4 ;11,.. '''r.- .. r 1 . 1 - . .• . .• It .- . ,„ . ..,. _ ' ' • i r#t - ' cii` ti11 ' -.Is • •• .1501.r- 0.1 Lr. ...0.. ,.,... ... • • • , Ll . . : •l. i 40 ..-..-,:. •,'....,.•. . ; • i .4:4'. . :6,44 44 . 1 • ' ".- • '' ../.. __ 4 ,.L, .,. ..11. - o il'..0 ' '- °' • • ii • ii..• , ••-.4 . • ' '. -1.• ff, "'''.-•'f II . - - •..,411 I •' ',.' -"7 oil r I _i , i 'A-,. '-.• ',;- . , II; i • - IL : Y1'611' " • P. - IP .V •- • • ..--fir. .• 4. r ) . ...r..11 .I141 k ' , :4... .. ip _iti• • .. I c . .4,'- •l - ' ''.c.,,'...1.'" - •-• . :1,74.. ',.. ._ , -1111'; -. , , . ...h,. 7•,...,''',, .. 4 i. •.. .i. ..• •• - ..,.pti.,,,• - _ - 1 ...•• rikiNsikal _- , • . ,. 4«, • '.44 ) .' ' .,....•r ' AO- • mil .44 • 4 . I ... .".1>. .411?!'.', •, . I .44. ' .... • . dp 1 -- or •:;.':: A-6•11. '. , N. .: J - . • . . ' ri.'7'• ,031*16.. ir • a-• ",;_ 41 i k;-1,1 • '. ." ir • 1. 1 5 :".71"...,..914/ELLoAkk,• ." ..4 r,••••:•7 6....ntir. • , • - 1.-', .4 i , ......d. • ...,,,N. • : • • .,. , , • , kilo . • g• • • •Li - rip-!--4.--1 . `01F ‘• ' :"...., . 4.4(4'.•. . ... e. . 17, . • ''''. • .... • .. . . . •;.I 4 • )1 i 1'r . . rti 'I P4: • -.- ,i,pi.' !.- '' ''r " • ' !. 4. .7. -. ..-- • - . 7 . , u,,-.... . !.. : - : , •4.• ,Asies it, . - Pr . ,III '. __: - 9 . *, . . _. 4"••.. . ...4.1., 414: • il 1 k •'-' " ' '''• • .... - r •-- - 4 i'' , .f•" -. 17:2-:'5Ef 1 4. I. t - •'.' .., -I., .4''. I% ' '''c..-• .• 1.'4'' - ' . .. ..r!..e ! 5 rc.1;"4:14. r AitilP 1, ,-1,--. ; . . . - .. ....:....... ,, •. - - , -44,...„,. - k- 4,.... 1 4 0 I''' . ' • -..A. .--:01 -5, . 1.. . ..- . • • ` 4:'11.-11a, 11411t ' 4 , ,.. a. , • . , - : • . . I, •a is - '44. _k. ,,.•. '.4 i ,r• . . • f . ';Ji .'W r. plii .,.. . T...... ,e E.it.,., • 1 '4.1.7 ' 1. , r I. 114.:'''' , 'f.'.f ti T '41 . .IP• .411 . '...r •.' 1. -4,.•.' . 4 'i.r..• .... • ,• ,,, •. - ..-.-7'r..,•-• -c., N. ... 01• "- - 4' . dr:t1". • ' i '' js. Lip' 'ip. • -I, ' • • . %.,,.• Ir... ..VF •s, ,N. .. • .- ./ 't ....'1.' - i••.si il111.• •71' 1 - • . • 1-.7:7-.-.-.... .4? 1. ..'.7.:' •;', ... ' •r . ••2.1.4. . ..4,- , '. 4.-." .. r.. .„ 4 lt, :. •. ., ..1..-s. il I. • . % .1 1 iT '..- N '... It - -.4 ' 1 • ••• \'' - I • . . ;."''''' . •T' - -fr ..... ,.... 4,1.. .. . . _ • . , . • , . iv 1 4.,5t1/41 , .t,' •iliii .1." ..•ili . r - 1,... . 4 ..-",-"1 -... 1, -r,, ... . .; . ..- .,;,.. ! t , t .."0.,. ........016.. ..4. 4 • if 4 ' . 'I 1111116)4 A•'' ' Z.' .a ,... " • ' •VAN. " •4.1'...., -- --..,-r..L• • ..OF '.gi') i. ; 'al '''Ti . t • ..7 „._ - ' v• ':•-%..„t•. 1:,..OR . • v._ •. ,...t.:.'4 4 . /it c 4.;.--r,•asy„f. ' . • ' . -" 4 . .... ..: .4 Jo. ,, ,:a ,. ',I, Pk,,.... ,t- • '.111 i•TI41. ' - 4 . • -I * 44• .11.4 ''; • NI ik • - .4, •,e - . M. rot 0 s•AA • • r.1-) ri if )k 1 .1.•,Fordro,„,, . kii •.', I • • ,• - .. .; 4 i1/44 !.k. V ...." /.17A. . . • ,.L. 4if • ; . .. l , . • • ..4 lifig 4, • -l'. 3 'e . 1 • ' 1 it ' if . 1.- r. , . • .• . - • 4.. 1 , i . 1 ' .4 11. „ id.. .4 ''.•-IF:•-iritJe i-t. ' .; it : .yr, P. k e: 5'1. ler tpt • 14 i , • 1 !... rf A....lt,,, ' . • .511- .1 41 i • 1 it ill' I- 1.-44 1;• :4. . .... ,,...... i* , Al; • j -if21* . .- .f.., _ . .... .. •.......*:..a. .. • .. 'A 44. ... .:- i .4 : •Pt.• - , li 4.10.774• 1 " .-'6". 0.Lt. ' 1.- .r, _4 j'..t....: - 'ti'li, . „i_.1 .._ .4.-,,,s.,c ...,..1,,A.4,-.... . :...% ... viik ::-/r .gip.. • . , aii .... iwititt-'• ' . 54, . i . • . .... .1 '''4" ,' . 1r 4 . . •' • ' 4L-, -. '.. r' ,'.;•ft. , •'N.,- , ,,. ..,, • ,..4 , 414F, ' ' 'I'1 .-,-' •. l)I Ili. j! 7 I. -,1 t ...V. ',... .;,.. . , -isLiM SI • • I ' 1 • , tft • al,' • •73,, ?Jilif-- ... , ..'''''''.:f.. * 0 (, .- . , ..,:-.,4.,,,, • , 3 i V. I I . . .........„ i. ' ID ' . 1. • - . 'ff. .F147/41 k ..',..,• -a . f • •11:" , :f. - 1 s 111;11•4 71111• 71 yffe!. .•;.. ..,. A. • ..... : ,. , ,4...• -,,, ' _ ••1 •,, . .v -11.„. • I•. , , .p-, . •.••••,; •.. . , 7.• ••-•„ : 1p lie,";..N. • • Ill..,- #' : - 0' ,. •ii ' T • ... _ -4." „ . "ilt - .." V . ; Tk•- ''.11. ` 0 '41-11,111111. / . . 1-,. ',..4'..I . -.4...1. ; . 't. '..- .11.:..'Illir : '.. F., ::10%. .," '. , ".' . • air -919...... . .. : idle'. -Ir. • ,-• _ i .. • . ,..... .4-p...:, ,ii. s• . ,1 --.-, ,. . ...01. .11, ..6. : .,...-../t.., _ r 1 • . •• .... •x, 0, - t , .„. .L .. •7.1.4.! : . 24' )14 .. is- . • .. -.7 -4 .F, N.,. ..",,..,.. 1• °till! I, -, • i'll-•i"••'4 • - I .• ''. i . '4111. . •"* .• or _•.;J . . . _ , r7 . :-r'.:,4' 121' .i 4._rile. v 4 • • ....... . 4,- • 4...., . . a .. . . •_._,., ,.. " • a, . . - t4 .-_ .1-, !NI -.,... A . . ,i • •• ... .. ,-', ... t. w. 14 - • qv' th - or' I ' ,I. • 1.41,, i 1.. '!'1111/IVA) Atilt:i. i .. •.‘ „„ '!•,! .e.•.,..,4 - • .. •i• AI . i iik" , :4..:1 .. - - ....: • 4,....if.,:,„ * . -• .• . . . cit., .4idi - • 4- - 'Ihd.0 ' .1 .• • : II .41 . • ! 1,4, . r • .1- . 41-14,1* .0 I• ,0,-* .1 Vile , isim, 61,4-14.111. r..... , -....'k . - •,- .. . - .4; lim,4 io, . , 1 lIE • ;, I .1.4 • i r ' . :L-. . ki Nif .". :A! •4" It P .1;IP"-• Irtlillfy• k.4 . Pfti•ell .. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS DATE: March 22, 2021 TO: Serah Breakstone, OTAK FROM: Carl Springer, Kevin Chewuk and Kamilah Buker I DKS Associates SUBJECT: Tigard River Terrace West and South Concept Plan Transportation Analysis (Task 5.1) #20020-002 This memorandum summarizes the future transportation conditions under one land use scenario and two transportation frameworks associated with the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area. Included is documentation of the assumptions and methodologies, an analysis of future motor vehicle conditions and an identification of multimodal improvements needed to support future growth within the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area. FUTURE GROWTH MIIM Land use is a key factor in developing a functional transportation system. The amount of land that is planned to be developed, the type of land uses, and how the land uses are mixed together have a direct relationship to the expected demands on the transportation system. Understanding the amount and type of land use is critical to maintaining or enhancing the transportation system for all users. The nearly 500 acres in the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area are being studied together to create a cohesive vision for the area and identify appropriate areas for urbanization, natural resource protection, and infrastructure. Prior to establishing and as a part of adopting the needed zoning to allow for development in suitable areas, the City is required to update all public facilities plans, including the Transportation System Plan (TSP). The land within the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area will be addressed in community plans that will describe their intended zoning and development implementation. In addressing changing transportation needs in the area with the Concept Plan growth, the impact of the increased demand for vehicle, pedestrian and bicyclists on the surrounding transportation system, as a result of full build-out over the long term, will be evaluated through the year 2040. The new information obtained from this system analysis will be used to develop a set of transportation improvements and standards that will serve to inform the creation of the preferred Concept Plan Scenario, on-going infrastructure funding analysis, and updates to the Transportation System Plans for the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area. ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 1 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 BASELINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The starting point for the 2040 performance analysis relied on the list of improvement projects in the Metro Regional Transportation Plan, and Tigard (including the River Terrace Addendum) and Washington County Transportation System Plans. These projects represent only those that are expected to be funded, and therefore can be used in the baseline traffic analysis for 2040. Additional transportation projects will be needed to support growth in the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area; however, they cannot be assumed for the baseline traffic analysis. The improvements that were assumed include: • SW Scholls Ferry Road widening to five lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks from SW Roy Rogers Road to SW Tile Flat Road (RTP ID: 11915) • SW Roy Rogers Road widening to five lanes south of SW Scholls Ferry Road with bike lanes and sidewalks (RTP ID: 11486, 11903, 11914) • SW Beef Bend Road widening to three lanes with bike lanes and sidewalks from SW Roy Rogers Road to OR 99W (RTP ID:11577) • SW Jean Louise Road/ SW Lorenzo Lane extension; SW River Terrace Boulevard extension; SW Woodhue Street extension; 161St Avenue extension; SW Potomac Road extension and traffic signal installation at SW Roy Rogers Road (Tigard TSP/ River Terrace Community Plan) ESTIMATING TRIPS A determination of future street network needs requires the ability to accurately forecast travel demand resulting from estimates of future population and employment for the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area, and the rest of the City and Metro region. The objective of the transportation planning process is to provide the information necessary for making decisions about how and where improvements should be made to create a connected, safe and efficient transportation system that provides travel options. The travel demand forecasting process generally involves estimating travel patterns for new development based on the decisions and preferences demonstrated by existing residents, employers and institutions around the region. Travel demand models are mathematical tools that help us understand future commuter, school and recreational travel patterns including information about the length, mode and time of day a trip will be made. The latest travel models are suitable for motor vehicle and transit planning purposes, and can produce total volumes for autos, trucks and buses on each street and highway in the system. Model forecasts are refined by comparing outputs with observed counts and behaviors on the local system. This refinement step is completed before any evaluation of system performance is made. Once the traffic forecasting process is complete, the 2040 volumes are used to determine the areas of the street network that are expected to be congested and that may need future investments to accommodate growth. Washington County has a travel demand model that is based on Metro's Regional travel demand model. For the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area, the Washington County ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 travel demand model was refined to reflect the planned land use and roadway network envisioned as part of the Concept Plan. LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS As shown in Table 1, the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan includes about 4,500 housing units and about 460 employees in the preferred scenario. Vehicle trips that would be generated by the Concept Plan area were estimated by applying travel demand model trip generation rates by land use type, which were developed by Washington County staff based on westside trip patterns in the Metro model. Overall, the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan area is expected to generate about 3,900 motor vehicle trips during the p.m. peak hour, or about 1,500 more than what was assumed in the Baseline scenario. TABLE 1: LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN SCENARIO HOUSING EMPLOYEES PM PEAK HOUR UNITS VEHICLE TRIPS ENDS 2040 TSP Baseline (Tigard TSP) * 2,587 200 2,485 2040 with River Terrace 4,541 460 3,971 West and South Change +1,954 +260 +1,486 *Based on the disaggregated Washington County Model 2040 MOTOR VEHICLE OPERATION ' Future traffic forecasts were prepared for 2040 for the following scenarios: • 2040 TSP Baseline - this assumes the land use and transportation network currently within Washington County's version of Metro's 2040 Financially Constrained Regional Travel Demand Model, and the baseline transportation improvements. This scenario includes 2,587 households and 200 employees in the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan area and is assumed to match the forecast of the current Tigard Transportation System Plan. • 2040 with River Terrace West and South updates - this scenario assumes the preferred levels of potential development within the River Terrace West and South areas, with 4,541 households and 460 employees. It includes the baseline transportation improvements, in addition to the street extensions envisioned in the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area since they would be needed before development could occur. Two transportation frameworks were evaluated with the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan updates scenario. These transportation frameworks include various street extensions with associated pedestrian and bicycle facilities, in addition to a trail network that is included under both frameworks. ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 3 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 • Transportation Framework A: This transportation framework assumes projects 2 to 11 and 23 shown in Table 2 and Figure 1. The SW Mountainside Way extension and an improved SW Bull Mountain Road (projects 2, 3, 4 and 7) is assumed as the primary collector route between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road in this framework. • Transportation Framework B: This transportation framework assumes all of Framework A, but with an extension of SW Tile Flat Road between SW Scholls Ferry Road to the SW Mountainside Way extension (project 1 shown in Table 1 and Figure 1). The SW Tile Flat extension, SW Mountainside Way extension and an improved SW Bull Mountain Road (projects 1, 3, 4 and 7) is assumed as the primary collector route between SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road in this framework. TABLE 2: TRANSPORTATION FRAMEWORK STREET EXTENSION ASSUMPTIONS # PROJECT SUBAREA Transportation Framework A 2 Extend SW Mountainside Way from SW Scholls Ferry Road River Terrace to west of SW Clementine Street West 3 Extend SW Mountainside Way from west of SW River Terrace Clementine Street to the SW Jean Louise Road extension West 4 Extend SW Mountainside Way from the SW Jean Louise River Terrace Road extension to the SW Bull Mountain Road extension West Extend SW Sabrina Avenue from SW Bull Mountain Road River Terrace 5 to the UGB West 6 Improve SW Vandermost Road from SW Scholls Ferry River Terrace Road south to the UGB West Improve SW Bull Mountain Road from SW Roy Rogers River Terrace • Road to the SW Mountainside Way extension West Extend SW River Terrace Boulevard from SW Potomac River Terrace 8 Road to SW Beef Bend Road South 9 Extend SW Woodhue Street west from the UGB to SW Roy River Terrace Rogers Road South 10 Extend SW Lasich Lane from SW Roy Rogers Road to SW River Terrace Beef Bend Road South Extend SW Elsner Road from SW Beef Bend Road to the River Terrace 11 SW Woodhue Street Extension South Extend SW Jean Louise Road west to the SW Tile Flat River Terrace 23 Road/ SW Mountainside Way extension as a 2-lane City collector West Transportation Framework B (includes all of Transportation Framework A) 1 Extend SW Tile Flat Road from SW Scholls Ferry Road to River Terrace the SW Mountainside Way extension West ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 FIGURE 1: TRANSPORTATION FRAMEWORK STREET EXTENSIONS Ak 4111111M SW Scholls Ferry Rd `� 1 -I ]River terrace 20 ProetAreai OO Collector Rood 1 I f -"• ----Street I Pedestrian Connection SW Tile Flat Rd I SW , - Minor Street Connection [me Flat J. Clementine St ; [WEST] `0'Potential Future Extension(Mountainside Way) 1 Future Study Area- f ; Framewprk g, CO ! .0.Potential Beef Reno coririec:uL,d See Transportation i .I .1 ., Section! f---•�` © •� ' Scream w 71 .. _ ,_._ W Jean' Louise Rd E I \ rt)C i O i N I CO 0 11 i SW Bull Mountain Rd i ' r i a 1 0 r . I I I ! i:i._ o°'T a 1 0 c m7o ra • uIJIi '�` E 0 in [SOUTH] I y 1 SW Woodhue St..... •. 0 I . 4301,,H---,_________ , SW Lasich Ln • 10 L. . TT'--—.4_,—..._._._t_._-------SW Beef Bend Rd ce L c w inin 0 o sou r.000 n _. . ._,.. - . _, O`fes ii•mmis kl ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 6 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 TRANSPORTATION FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS RESULTS Motor vehicle conditions were evaluated during the 2040 p.m. peak hour at the 18 study intersections (shown in Table 3) under both transportation frameworks. The evaluation utilized the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition methodology. As shown in Table 3, several intersections are expected to exceed mobility targets under each scenario. Many of these are unsignalized intersections along SW Beef Bend Road where side street traffic growth from the River Terrace South subarea (and King City growth to the south of SW Beef Bend Road) is causing these intersections to exceed their mobility targets. Many of the study intersections along SW Roy Rogers Road and SW Scholls Ferry Road are forecasted to operate just under their mobility target by 2040, with these intersections operating satisfactorily due to the assumed widening of both corridors to five lanes. It should be noted that the River Terrace Community Plan recommended that a traffic signal be installed at the SW Roy Rogers Road/ SW Potomac Road intersection. This updated system analysis re-affirms the need for this improvement by 2040 once a signal warrant is met. TABLE 3: STUDY INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (2040 PM PEAK) WITH RIVER TERRACE WEST MOBILITY BASELINE AND SOUTH # STUDY INTERSECTION TARGET FRAMEWORK A FRAMEWORK B V/C V/C V/C SW Roy Rogers Road/SW 175th 1 0.99 1.50 1.26 1.21 Avenue/SW Scholls Ferry Road SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Jean Louise 2 0.99 1.02 0.93 0.92 Road 3 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Bull 0.99 1.17 0.96 0.97 ** Mountain Road 4 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Potomac 0.99 0.86 0.86 0.88 Road 5 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Lasich Lane 0.99 0.73 0.66 0.67 6 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Beef Bend 0.99 0.88 0.97 0.97 Road SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Scholls- 70.99 0.88 0.82 0.84 Sherwood Road SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW Tile Flat 8 Road 0.99 0.99 0.97 0.85 SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW 9 Mountainside Way 0.99 0.47 0.57 0.53 SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW Barrows 10 Road 0.99 0.86 0.82 0.81 SW Mountainside Way Extension-SW 0.95; No 11 Tile Flat Road Extension/SW Jean movement * 0.09 0.18 Louise Road Extension over capacity ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 WITH RIVER TERRACE WEST MOBILITY BASELINE AND SOUTH # STUDY INTERSECTION TARGET FRAMEWORK A FRAMEWORK B V/C V/C V/C SW Mountainside Way Extension-SW 0.95; No 12 Tile Flat Road Extension/SW Bull movement * 0.13 0.41 Mountain Road Extension over capacity 13 SW Roshak Road/SW Bull Mountain 0.99 0.65 0.82 0.82 Road 14 SW 150th Avenue/SW Bull Mountain 0.99 0.89 1.01 1.01 Road 15 SW River Terrace Boulevard 0.99 * >2.00 >2.00 Extension/SW Beef Bend Road 16 SW Elsner Road/SW Beef Bend Road 0.99 >2.00 >2.00 >2.00 17 SW 150th Avenue/SW Beef Bend Road 0.99 1.89 1.96 1.96 18 OR 99W/SW Bull Mountain Road 0.99 1.22 1.24 1.24 Notes: Red shading indicates an intersection that exceeds the mobility target * Intersection does not exist in the baseline scenario. ** Intersection assumed with an eastbound right turn lane with the SW Tile Flat Road extension. RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS As shown in Table 3, six of the study intersections are expected to exceed mobility targets under each scenario. Recommended improvements for these locations are shown in Table 4, with the resulting intersection operations. The intersections along SW Beef Bend Road will all be expected to improve with a traffic signal or roundabout installed. No feasible improvements were identified for the SW Roy Rogers Road/SW 175th Avenue/SW Scholls Ferry Road and OR 99W/SW Bull Mountain Road intersections. Both intersections are expected to carry a significant amount of traffic and would require large-scale widening or alternative routes to meet mobility targets. Any improvements would need more extensive study to consider all possible options and weigh benefits and shortfalls. The SW Roy Rogers Road/SW 175th Avenue/SW Scholls Ferry Road includes two through lanes and two left turn lanes on all approaches except for the eastbound left movement (adding a second eastbound left turn lane does not improve operations). This intersection is a regional bottleneck since multiple travel routes to the north merge into a single route via SW Roy Rogers Road. Improving street connectivity surrounding the intersection and providing alternative routes for drivers to SW Roy Rogers Road will help pull some traffic away from the intersection, but it will continue to operate substandard without a more substantial parallel facility. The OR 99W/SW Bull Mountain Road intersection is also expected to serve a significant amount of traffic, with over 2,000 vehicles in each direction of OR 99W during the p.m. peak hour by 2040. The intersection was tested with an additional northbound left turn lane from OR 99W to SW Bull Mountain Road, but the improvement only has a minimal benefit to operations and was not recommended. Intersection operations can be improved by widening OR 99W, but that requires a ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 significant investment and should be more extensively studied to ensure the needs of all users of the corridor are addressed, and all possible options are considered. TABLE 4: STUDY INTERSECTION OPERATIONS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS (2040 PM PEAK) MOBILITY RECOMMENDED V/C WITH # STUDY INTERSECTION RECOMMENDED TARGET IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT SW Roy Rogers Road/SW 175th 1 0.99 None* N/A Avenue/SW Scholls Ferry Road 14 SW 150th Avenue/SW Bull Mountain 0 99 Eastbound right 0.93 Road turn lane 15 SW River Terrace Boulevard 0.99 Traffic signal 0.64 Extension/SW Beef Bend Road Roundabout 0.67 Traffic signal 0.66 16 SW Elsner Road/SW Beef Bend Road 0.99 Roundabout 0.70 17 SW 150th Avenue/SW Beef Bend 0.99 Traffic signal 0.87 Road Roundabout 0.89 18 OR 99W/SW Bull Mountain Road 0.99 None* N/A Notes: * See discussion preceding Table 4 SW TILE FLAT ROAD EXTENSION As shown in Table 3, the SW Tile Flat Road extension included in Framework B slightly improves operations along the SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road segments adjacent to the River Terrace West subarea. This alignment was analyzed as a collector type facility, with a design speed between 25 and 30 miles per hour. These assumptions were also applied to the SW Mountainside Way extension and to SW Bull Mountain Road between SW Clementine Street and SW Roy Rogers Road (projects 3, 4 and 7) in this scenario. With this design, it is forecasted to attract around 200 to 250 vehicle trips in each direction during the p.m. peak hour from the SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road corridors. However, it was found that after assuming the SW Tile Flat Road extension, the associated vehicle trips that would take up the available capacity along this segment is often back-filled with other regional traffic. In other words, future congestion on parallel arterials routes (such as OR 99W) could potentially cause drivers to re-route to SW Roy Rogers Road through the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan area, therefore, the traffic operational results shown in Table 3 are often similar between the Transportation Framework A or B. Although it should be noted that the model is assigning the shortest travel time routes for these trips, and drivers may not be that efficient in determining this, at least initially. Summary of Prior Studies The SW Tile Flat Road extension has been analyzed in several previous studies, including the Washington County Urban Reserves Transportation Study, Beaverton South Cooper Mountain Community Plan, and the Tigard River Terrace Community Plan 1.0. Overall, these studies have shown that this street connection provides network benefits, beyond traffic operations. The connection provides for redundancy of routes, providing an adjacent alignment to nearby arterials, including SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road. This enables multimodal circulation to ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 8 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 occur areawide and reduces the reliance of local trips to occur along SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road. This route also provides connectivity between neighborhoods within River Terrace and provides a direct and continuous route for cyclists (off the arterial street network). It also allows for connections beyond the River Terrace study area that could occur in the future and aligns with shared values to enhance livability and safety for all travel modes. It should be noted that these prior studies reviewed the importance of the SW Tile Flat Road extension from a more regional focus. They were outside of the current planning effort for the Tigard urban reserve areas, and thus did not have detailed information on land use and local destinations, environmental and topographic constraints and local circulation patterns for pedestrians and bicyclists. As this information has become available, the potential alignment and design of the SW Tile Flat Road extension has and will continue to evolve. SW Tile Flat Road Extension Sensitivity As mentioned above, the SW Tile Flat Road extension has been analyzed in several previous studies. This prior analysis of the SW Tile Flat Road extension assumed an arterial level facility for the SW Tile Flat Road extension, with a higher vehicle capacity and design speed, and resulted in a higher level of traffic along the SW Tile Flat Road extension. To test the current demand of this potential corridor, two sensitivity scenarios were analyzed. The first assumed the arterial level of facility (i.e., higher capacity and speed) that would connect to SW Roy Rogers Road at the SW Potomac Road extension intersection. A second sensitivity scenario kept the collector level facility but connected it back to SW Roy Rogers Road further to the south at the SW Potomac Road extension intersection, instead of the SW Bull Mountain Road intersection. As shown in Table 5, the SW Tile Flat Road extension arterial sensitivity scenario improves intersection operations at intersections along SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road adjacent to the River Terrace West subarea. Again, some of the capacity that is freed up along SW Roy Rogers Road is being back-filled with other regional traffic, so operations are not improving as much as would be expected with the volume of traffic shifting to the SW Tile Flat Road extension. Overall, it was found that the arterial level facility more than doubles the trips along the corridor, with an estimated 500 to 600 trips in each direction during the p.m. peak hour. This indicates that the regional demand is there for a connection, largely due to congestion on surrounding arterial streets. This route becomes a shorter trip once assumed travel speeds are increased with an arterial level of facility, with that travel time benefit slightly reduced once it is assumed as a collector level of facility. It should be noted that the design of this facility through the River Terrace West subarea will be largely hindered by topography and environmental constraints, and by the character of the surrounding neighborhoods. The current understanding between Washington County and Tigard staff includes a collector-level design. An arterial level design may not be possible or appropriate through this area due to the surrounding neighborhood environment, or even further to the west of the River Terrace West subarea since it would be entirely outside of the Urban Growth Boundary, but this sensitivity test shows the regional demand supports such a connection, and it would provide value by freeing up capacity along congested corridors elsewhere on the transportation system. DKS TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 9 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 The second sensitivity test maintained the SW Tile Flat Road extension as a collector level facility (i.e., same speed and capacity as assumed in Framework B) but connected it back to SW Roy Rogers Road further to the south at the SW Potomac Road extension intersection, instead of the SW Bull Mountain Road intersection. This scenario was found to attract slightly more trips from the SW Scholls Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road segments adjacent to the River Terrace West subarea when compared to the same connection at the SW Bull Mountain Road intersection, roughly 30 to 40 in each direction during the p.m. peak hour. As shown in Table 5, it would also be expected to improve operations at the SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Bull Mountain Road intersection since vehicles turning to/from the SW Tile Flat extension to/from SW Roy Rogers Road would largely occur at the SW Potomac Road extension intersection. This intersection is forecasted to have less vehicle volume at competing approaches to the intersection (i.e., the southbound left from SW Roy Rogers Road to eastbound SW Potomac Road, and the westbound approach from SW Potomac Road) when compared to the SW Bull Mountain Road intersection. This alignment also allows for future connectivity to potential development in the area to the south of River Terrace West. TABLE 5: SW TILE FLAT ROAD EXTENSION SENSITIVITY SCENARIO INTERSECTION OPERATIONS (2040 PM PEAK) FRAMEWORK B WITH RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH # STUDY INTERSECTION MOBILITY FRAMEWORK ARTERIAL COLLECTOR TO TARGET POTOMAC ROAD B SENSITIVITY SENSITIVITY V/C V/C V/C 1 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW 175th 0.99 1.21 1.14 1.21 Avenue/SW Scholls Ferry Road 2 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Jean 0.99 0.92 0.87 0.91 Louise Road SW Roy Rogers Road/SW Bull 3 0.99 1.01 0.92 0.98 Mountain Road 4 SW Roy Rogers Road/SW 0.99 0.88 1.21 0.99 Potomac Road SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW Tile 8 Flat Road 0.99 0.85 0.67 0.85 SW Scholls Ferry Road/SW 9 Mountainside Way 0.99 0.53 0.47 0.53 Notes: Red shading indicates an intersection that exceeds the mobility target SW MOUNTAINSIDE WAY EXTENSION The SW Mountainside Way extension is shown on Figure 1 to connect SW Scholls Ferry Road with SW Bull Mountain Road, west of SW Roy Rogers Road (projects 2, 3 and 4 on Figure 1). This corridor would provide the primary collector route through the River Terrace West subarea (without the SW Tile Flat Road extension) and would provide the only direct and continuous route for pedestrians and bicyclists through the area with Framework A. However, as noted earlier regarding the SW Tile Flat Road extension, the River Terrace West subarea includes topography and ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 10 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 environmental constraints that make street connections difficult and costly. In particular, the area along the SW Mountainside Way extension between SW Clementine Street and SW Bull Mountain Road (projects 3 and 4 on Figure 1) will require two bridge crossings that would result in an expensive street connection. This sensitivity test analyzes Framework A without the SW Mountainside Way extension between SW Clementine Street and SW Bull Mountain Road. Overall, not constructing this segment has a negligible impact on nearby intersection operations (i.e., no change in intersection v/c ratios). Much of the traffic utilizing the SW Mountainside Way extension instead utilizes SW Sabrina Avenue between the northern portion of the SW Mountainside Way extension north of SW Clementine Street and SW Bull Mountain Road. This segment of SW Sabrina Avenue would experience volume increases of up to 100 trips in each direction during the p.m. peak hour. Although this level of traffic is typical for a neighborhood route, this segment was built slightly narrower with 32 feet of pavement width, and parking on both sides, while the typical neighborhood route section requires 36 feet of pavement with parking on both sides. This scenario would likely require removal of parking along one side of SW Sabrina Avenue. SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS Transportation improvements needed to support future growth and new development within the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area are summarized in Table 6. Overall, an estimated $75 to $85 million in transportation system improvements are expected to be needed to support the growth conceptually planned for the full planning area (see Table 6). Regional traffic is responsible for $10 million more investments with Framework B than Framework A, with about 55 percent of the total costs of these improvements (approximately $41 million) with Transportation Framework A, and about 61 percent of the total costs of these improvements (approximately $51 million) with Transportation Framework B are expected to be caused by regional traffic growth. Meanwhile, the River Terrace West and River Terrace South subareas each have very similar cost shares, regardless of the Transportation Framework. Forecasted traffic growth associated with development in the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area is expected to drive the need for about $34 million worth of the total project costs in Transportation Framework A and $33 million worth of the total project costs in Transportation Framework B. Of these total project costs, both the River Terrace West and South subareas are expected to cause the need for about $16 to $17 million of the total project costs in Transportation Frameworks A and B. In addition, several projects were identified in previous studies or plans surrounding the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area. This updated system analysis re-affirmed the need for improvements at many of these locations. Since the need for these improvements are generally driven by regional traffic issues and are not entirely caused by growth within the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area, they are shown separately in Table 6. Overall, an estimated $33 million worth of improvements were previously identified in the Metro Regional Transportation Plan, Washington County Transportation System Plan, and Tigard Transportation System Plan. Of these previously planned projects, about $2.5 million worth of the total improvement costs would be driven by growth within the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area. ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 11 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 The recommended improvements can be seen in Figure 2, with the project numbers corresponding with those in Table 6. Not all recommended improvements are required to be in place prior to developing land within the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area. The need to extend or upgrade streets will be driven by the multimodal access needs of the adjacent properties. Table 6 illustrates the relative proportion of future traffic growth for the River Terrace West subarea, River Terrace South subarea and other Regional Traffic growth, in relation to overall transportation improvement costs. Using the Regional Travel Demand Model, percentages of total traffic volume and/or growth using specific streets or intersections were derived for each of the recommended transportation system improvements. These percentages were used to estimate the share of the improvement costs for the separate areas of the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan study area, since they will likely develop to and through the planning horizon of 2040. TABLE 6: RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) TERRACE TERRACE SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Transportation Framework A Projects Extend SW Mountainside Way A2 from SW Scholls Ferry Road to $2,480,000 $1,990,000 $0 $490,000 west of SW Clementine Street as a 3-lane City collector Extend SW Mountainside Way from west of SW Clementine A3 Street to the SW Jean Louise $3,000,000 $2,860,000 $0 $140,000 Road extension as a 2-lane City collector Extend SW Mountainside Way from the SW Jean Louise Road A4 extension to the SW Bull $3,000,000 $2,780,000 $0 $220,000 Mountain Road extension as a 2-lane City collector Subtotals $8,480,000 $7,630,000 $0 $850,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 90% 0% 10% Transportation Framework B Projects Extend SW Tile Flat Road from SW Scholls Ferry Road to the B1 SW Mountainside Way $7,880,000 $1,480,000 $130,000 $6,270,000 extension as a 3-lane County collector. Extend SW Mountainside Way from SW Scholls Ferry Road to B2 west of SW Clementine Street $1,970,000 $1,590,000 $0 $380,000 as a 2-lane City neighborhood route ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 12 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) TERRACE TERRACE SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Extend SW Tile Flat Road/ SW Mountainside Way from the SW Mountainside Way extension to B3 the SW Jean Louise Road $4,220,000 $2,250,000 $30,000 $1,940,000 extension as a 3-lane County collector. Extend SW Tile Flat Road/ SW Mountainside Way from the SW B4 Jean Louise Road extension to $4,180,000 $1,820,000 $20,000 $2,340,000 the SW Bull Mountain Road extension as a 3-lane County collector. Subtotals $18,250,000 $7,140,000 $180,000 $10,930,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 39% 1% 60% Projects Constructing or Reconstructing Streets On-site (Transportation Framework A and B) Extend SW Sabrina Avenue from SW Bull Mountain Road to 5 $4,200,000 $4,200,000 $0 $0 the West UGB as a 2-lane City neighborhood route Improve SW Vandermost Road 6 from SW Scholls Ferry Road $1,220,000 $1,220,000 $0 $0 south to the UGB as a 2-lane City neighborhood route Improve SW Bull Mountain Road from SW Roy Rogers 7 Road to the SW Mountainside $2,360,000 $2,150,000 $10,000 $200,000 Way extension as a 3-lane City collector Extend SW River Terrace Boulevard from SW Potomac 8 $5,580,000 $0 $2,720,000 $2,860,000 Road to SW Beef Bend Road as a 3-lane City collector Extend SW Woodhue Street 9 west from the UGB to SW Roy $4,130,000 $0 $4,020,000 $110,000 Rogers Road as a 2-lane City neighborhood route Extend SW Lasich Lane from 10 SW Roy Rogers Road to SW $6,820,000 $0 $6,640,000 $180,000 Beef Bend Road as a 2-lane City neighborhood route ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 13 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) TERRACE TERRACE SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Extend SW Elsner Road from 11 SW Beef Bend Road to the SW $3,130,000 $0 $1,780,000 $1,350,000 Woodhue Street Extension as a 2-lane City neighborhood route Extend SW Jean Louise Road west to the SW Tile Flat Road/ 23 SW Mountainside Way $460,000 $120,000 $0 $340,000 extension as a 2-lane City collector Subtotals $27,900,000 $7,690,000 $15,170,000 $5,040,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 28% 54% 18% Projects Upgrading Existing Streets to Urban Standards (Transportation Framework A and B) Improve SW Scholls Ferry Road from SW Roy Rogers 12 $8,300,000 $1,040,000 $40,000 $7,220,000 Road to SW Tile Flat Road as a 5-lane County arterial Improve SW Roy Rogers Road 13 from SW Bull Mountain Road to $13,150,000 $400,000 $70,000 $12,680,000 SW Beef Bend Road as a S- lane County arterial Improve SW Beef Bend Road 14 from SW Roy Rogers Road to $10,470,000 $50,000 $850,000 $9,570,000 150th Avenue as a 3-lane County arterial Improve SW 150th Avenue 15 from SW Beef Bend Road to $1,290,000 $20,000 $90,000 $1,180,000 SW Rosario Lane as a 3-lane City collector Subtotals $33,210,000 $1,510,000 $1,050,000 $30,650,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 5% 3% 92% Projects Improving Intersections (Transportation Framework A and B) Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road intersection with SW 16 Potomac Road by installing a $500,000 $20,000 $20,000 $460,000 traffic signal (when warrants are met) Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road intersection with the SW 17 Woodhue Street extension by $500,000 $10,000 $30,000 $460,000 installing a traffic signal (when warrants are met) ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 SHARE OF TOTAL PROJECT COST BY AREA TOTAL ID PROJECT DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED RIVER RIVER REGIONAL TRAFFIC COST (2021) TERRACE TERRACE SHARE WEST SHARE SOUTH SHARE Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road intersection with SW 18 Lasich Lane by installing a $500,000 $10,000 $30,000 $460,000 traffic signal (when warrants are met) Improve the SW Bull Mountain 19 Road intersection with SW $470,000 $40,000 $10,000 $420,000 150th Avenue by adding an eastbound right-turn lane Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection with SW River Terrace Boulevard by 20 $1,280,000 $40,000 $100,000 $1,140,000 adding a traffic signal or roundabout (cost assumes roundabout) Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection with SW 21 Elsner Road by adding a traffic $1,280,000 $30,000 $260,000 $990,000 signal or roundabout (cost assumes roundabout) Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection with SW 22 150th Avenue by adding a $1,280,000 $10,000 $140,000 $1,130,000 traffic signal or roundabout (cost assumes roundabout) Subtotals $5,810,000 $160,000 $590,000 $5,060,000 Percent share of subtotal cost 3% 10% 87% Total Cost of Recommended Improvements with $75,400,000 $16,990,000 $16,810,000 $41,600,000 Transportation Framework A Percent share of total cost 23% 22% 55% Total Cost of Recommended Improvements with $85,170,000 $16,500,000 $16,990,000 $51,680,000 Transportation Framework B Percent share of total cost 19% 20% 61% ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 FIGURE 2: RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS SW Scholls Ferry Rd � �.��.�.�^.r y, I ® =River Terrace�.0 Project Areo 0 A2 Collector Road ------f---'• ----Street I Pedestrian Connection SW Tile Flat Rd SW Clembntine St ---MinorStreetConnection �'e Fes`J I [WEST] F�Io ri'e Area- -0o Potential Future Extension(Mountainside Way) F.,me.�,.,k s. A3 -O-Potential Beef Bend Connection See ranspo rtaclon Section' --•—, ..• Stream L----. i to 1.... W Jean: Louise Rd E I > A4 B4' 9 I O N m ISW Bull Mountain Rd 1 © 19 ce j r o tit1 CU CD >, >o . . c U7 m 0 1 o aVru Ln A ° 16 SW Potomac Rd I— v` I 0 v) [SOUTH] „.,_ .._ SW Woodhue St 0 Qm ! 18 ;---.o0 1 SW Lasich Ln [ 10 _.,.. .._._,.L.. l 20 [,_._.L.--_. .----1-------- 14 0 SW Beef Bend Rd® a ce a) v) w v) 0 a �o rt Otak �.d1 k ® TIGARD RIVER TERRACE WEST AND SOUTH CONCEPT PLAN • 16 TASK 5.1: TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS • MARCH 2021 , ..., 7.7,.._., 41 I • _.. s• . ...-::.,:4'......',...-:.,%6 44:171:I ',-•'' -. ..„ - • -40,.. IcpiTilic,,Fn.., I ., . . 414, _II ' 11.- .( I'•'4 4I : is:•.,i.:s' ,''r ..111:1. im -. , • •11 * • ' ' • 4"' 1......' .6. -14.,. •i 1 ,, , , 6 , ..,.., . J .• Z ., ..-, • ;14 ..• _ ' ,.1/ _ !•-''.= ' ).,' 7' - II'se-. ", .011,114 ' f ' ' .•••• ;I..'- ' Liir w.' :1 !f.'3or ' t-r. 1.:..,:•:-,- - . .3 i.Vb 4 - 4.Ni"..' • . .1,11,.- 1 . '• . . • li` • 4 • , ' Arr."--4 . ,,Ii... It".L ' 4'4 j. ., -. 4.r.1 464,,vti , . ..., ... .. . .. . : . .., , . . ...,„, ,, . • .•P,.0,y '. r .1 0 •! .}. '4 di •• „e .111Afbr ' ' . -4-• ' Op .1 .--. 1' ,.-• • .' ' .•• lie-16 ti• 414., Li ,_.. . 4 ,I . .- ,. i • • f,to . !' ' . -''I' ', 1,1 • .. r .. -... i. _ •,.. '. • . I I 4". 1.- .,... . . • .... 47,.7- 1 • .. : .4', ,..1.... 'f. '' . . V . to '4 ...r 4•1.1 14 ...? 4•4, . ... -.. - . ipli I : , . ,,_ -.=- 1.Fur,. . . . •,, , Alk- 7'..• 4......"15 ttliedfill ko61;•:1, --- : .--; -VA, ' 1 .Tha..•* "! 7. .....e W ... „ 0.--ii :IP ir lira, , . 1 i 1 .'...9 AO' ...•1 44 .„.... 'WO'4', ',.5 I ' r li• 1. V -- 11r. . .. i J i 40 ., ... ..,44 ri,.„ .-,.. ,0111*,1411 T • a.. 'i_ I , Jr fl'114". • ... 1 NIFIr- -2 p rimil • ,....., 4 ' I aill ,, L t kilo ' ' i'', 4 I , . '44./ . • I . • ,1 . . in • ' ' ai,... ,...--Jr.',.. ' -,11 4••••• , ' . .. . i • - -r at '. 'I, . ' - - . '' 4 ' .. i--- . .• 1 1r . . ... , . . •4 dt. ..24111t i t . - 111*•, 9, •••_ _ I4.• • ..„.1: 414 r.. k...... ' . '-' ..• 4 1 - I7.,417:5f11.5 I. 1 . 'E .t VI 47 " ..., ' ''''- r.4" ,b1 Aitilv1--. ; ' . AN. ' • - . . . • ....., ,,,, . ..57',..1,-....w. J..... . 4 .... .1 lik•-, . ' • - --.. A-Cr_era, - ?ill , ... 1 •,,, itilk 4 , :. ii,„ • - •7 iit : . ' ..'- et )1 • - . it- „ .. . .-4 1 rh . 4. . •1 ..!`t° r pit ,-. .-4...., _4 .1 '...1.' 4 .14'•.' ,' f..11T 'W i •, i' , $. r-'4 ''-0.16.o.' ''' 4.• ',...le . AA, i' .......• I. . .0' ',I • . - . -''..,• 4.t 'A '0.....'" • .4,- ' - 4' . '111 . • j 5' . 1. ' I'•..4 ..,..rr - 1- . . .,..,... , Nn . . _ .1 t 11‘ 11' , - • r-- i --.....- .,... .. ,r , ,.. IA, .. .,, • . 0-'.• ,'.. ''i, a .911P .r Ili L IT 1- ..1.. %-..--Pilit‘H` , •- • I t• r.;JAI: 1.' I- . 11. .. \\'s .,• .--•'IL- L... - -... • A n. i I / r I I ti: il.4 Ir •I i -1,14 4 'r . f'..,..., _ • • i '. . . . - • - • . ". , ' r 1 ... / • ,1301,1 ....It,, . Silk .4 1 111111i 11 I• .a ... • ' VAN ; 41..I' 4- - •.. ..i- , ..._ . - '''.......17-0,')i le: • ▪ '.'_EiaLft , :it, vir :V.,..• 1.AP .0,41,Er 4' - -ir v, -0 e •;,. .11 TirCrxik '4 , il•1 • 1.0. , I,...r 14.'s'Sle4 --r, .• , 1.1 1 ,. . a gr I i "'' Igif r I, . _, "_ a ' vii. 14:4114' ' lki % • . ....F - r7".f tr Arlf, ,ItT . . . - ..... • ,7„.. , . .., 1 , - st. . .,..._ ...ay., • t . . / .1.4 . A '!-IF:vitioe 1 '1 ' ., , c'_ ' ...a;t 1 4Ail_ pi r 7 , • ori,- tn. ..r, - 4- t ;:;b111' iiiiffria, . 2•;,,I; s II%mik ....f.., 1.**lif:-AtT;Nx nt ...- , ..., ,d_.I , . 44. -1,. .1 ..11 - jj. :Itiat , . - - , 4. ..•,.. .. , •311-Jim*:..44. .. . ..,.44. _- . , .1... ...41.4•14"-lit 41.4 114101412,11 . i '. ' 11 lui " a1113,4 ' • ,4 :04, .i,1 4- 41„clic „;,firii,:,-,,- " `..%. io, IL vliri , r. i',i .t.., . .: 'I,.: 1 ' . ' • . , „._ . . . ..,i , Al, • ' 1. ,. • jilli ..k. .r. , 4. '' • 41161"r''4 - IN, , 1?.Pf• 41. _ ic-1114, 41 ..'". - . '14' _'''. oif- '4.• .= It: ,.... . •'.....1-•A.: , ,.:.-3-1A4,•,.. ., .7m 45..11,. a . , I . °,... •,11 404 -..., II ..II. '--- r-re.Le _.,,,i 1 ' I ' . ' . 411'4 I. ii - 4 41"11114r• ` .. die, .16,:.'1'1'. .P`, . -'''.; '„ ' . I '• .'.1 ' IN Wit,jii 111,-.7.-. .i' .- •' . • - .„ I ,‘,. , 11.1* _ 1..4, . '. "it' 1 . . .1. •:i L 1410 .1...„I. ilgir4 i L It . ,,.....1j.i.,..I ,,s........j; ' F., '171. .I' • I. A • .... . : ifirt. -ir, • ,- _ , . •,. to 'r - -' ick* L. 1 . , x, bit„4 aqpi. - r • .4' Ile 4 "4... . , ca_iiii" • .. -.7 ..4 .F r if,. ,:. .1• kilt. i i r--, • • • , i . wt•ii, , ,,,v,,, - 1 ,• ir - , r7 . . ., .. •,„/„v4t .,1 . . ' -:.: , • ,.... ,,e- •, .• . _,,.•-...I. (. Ir it: ' lip 1 tb , 1 ir; .1 ,, 11. , /i . . • , 44 ., ,. /I. -I - Of th.,- , ,,,,•,. i,e4 - • .04 .1 • : „ii r.:4••. • ' -. r . • •.)..: I .•, 4: _ ' ,..64 . -_ „126c ' i , .1.1. - .-.0,,Idi ..4110 •;'.▪.-i 4.4:1t,.-'•-i *"1. g L' io,, . .` - (44164114 I 4. i r ... ,,.. 1.,,,, 7-"r_• rig, „ . A ,!IMAM , . • . Otak Memorandum To: Serah Breakstone From: Danah Palik & Curtis LaPierre, Otak Copies: Schuyler Warren, City of Tigard Date: February 26, 2021 Subject: River Terrace West and South: Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Project No.: 019599 T5.3 Parks and Open Space Needs Existing Conditions The River Terrace 2.0 project area is on the west boundary of the City of Tigard.This area is currently urban reserve land and comprised of agricultural uses and single-family homes.The trail and parks facilities are just beginning to be developed around this area. Figure 1 shows existing and planned parks and trails around the project area.All the trails shown in Figure 1 are planned trails, meaning they have been through a planning process and have more precise alignments, or conceptual trials, meaning they have general alignments that have not yet considered detailed site conditions such as slope or property ownership.The existing parks are relatively new, developed along with neighborhoods of the River Terrace area. Nearby Planned Trails • South Cooper Mountain Trail • River Terrace Trail • Southern Access Trail Nearby Conceptual Trails • SW 150th Avenue Trail • Tualatin River Greenway Trail Nearby Existing Parks • Emilia Park- neighborhood • Sabrina Park—neighborhood • Roshak Ridge Park—neighborhood • Orchard Park- neighborhood Nearby Proposed Parks • River Terrace Future Neighborhood Parks (3 total) • River Terrace Community Parks (2 total) • Future Regional Park(Lasich Property) 11241 Willows Road NE,Suite 200 Redmond, WA 98052 • Phone (425)822-4446 Fax(425)827-9577 otak.com River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Figure 1. Existing and Planned Parks and Trails s� v� F South Cooper Mountain gy'RA r•"' Trail-Planned sw 5C5i�L'�s•FER t •▪ EMILIAPARK• r`ProectArea ...... i— — r—•~ 'I : Neighborhood Park ' Stream I Existing Park 1 [J%JEST] SA9RINAPARK- Planned Park neighborhood • Park :A •• •e" ••Trolls I •' Existing School 1 al I •8 Vegetated Corridor ....:14.;,. µ Wetlands L,^, I River Terrace Master+ �y. Plan Community Park ce L- SW]EAN LOLIISE RD •▪ s 1_ ▪a .ter �.._._ it I 1 • 0 I ROSHgK RIDGE PARK- Neighborhood Park 3 I I • II SW BULL MOUNTAIN RA I I I I •• J *;Future L._ _._.^__._. •Neighborhood Park •• L' '.'-r PARK- Future Neighborhood Park • Neighborhood ; ., -C'. Park • • • , ' �•.• '. •••• :Southern s;Yra�l..11rannod + • K i..—.--1: g 1 • API f:l:lK: 1. F�.r:,irN r....r River Terrace Master m I Plan Community Park 1 t .J.LL L LJ.Lri"-..t m IF. Z A I Future I' '.� Neighborhood Park �1JF4lLLL0JJL.tLaa, c • • t• ra • r s • . SW LASICH LN E m : '' 1 [S 15 OUTH] #@ ••••• • C, Future Regional a rT •• a' Park{Laskhii .�'�-�- .•.... jai/ •••• '•• ce I .o • PYua�... ��Nv • RV .o •t • a o .o a z .in C • v ��,y.GreefWayi:a.i Co ,�'ei:::dl 0o aso yaa • i,aoo x,7oo rob : ....+ •``` • i tib•. 3/18/2021 2 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Level of Service Planning for parks and open space in River Terrace West and South begins with determining the minimum amount of parks and open space acreage that will be required of the expected development.The minimum requirement for the amount of parks and open space is based on level of service standards that provide a measurement of need per population.The City of Tigard's Level of Service (LOS) Standards were used to determine the parks,trails, and open space needs for River Terrace 2.0.The LOS standards give a needed park acreage or trail mileage per 1,000 residents.The following calculations use the estimated number of residents for the project area based on an estimated 4,500 new dwelling units. Estimated Number of Residents: • River Terrace West=6,774 • River Terrace South =4,489 Level of Service Standards PARK TYPE STANDARD (PER 1,000 RESIDENTS) RIVER TERRACE WEST RIVER TERRACE SOUTH COMMUNITY PARK 3.0 acres/ 1,000 20.32 acres 13.47 acres NEIGHBORHOOD PARK 1.5 acres/ 1,000 10.16 acres 6.73 acres LINEAR PARK 1.25 acres/ 1,000 8.47 acres 5.61 acers OPEN SPACE 4.25 acres/ 1,000 28.79 acres 19.08 acres TOTAL ACREAGE 67.74 acres 44.89 acres TRAIL 0.26 miles/1,000 1.76 miles 1.17 miles Park space goals can change over time based on the particular needs of an ever-changing community. How these acreages or specific facilities are allocated across the landscape can vary and may be influenced by cultural and natural resources, development patterns, or requests from neighborhood groups.Typically, LOS standards are meant to be used as a starting point or planning guide for ensuring there is adequate facility capacity and opportunity for everyone.Another measure for providing this opportunity is access. Service areas based on park types are a way of assessing the geographic distribution and reasonable distance or travel time to parks. Service areas can apply to all park or trail types. For the purposes of this report, community, neighborhood, and linear parks and trail access points will be analyzed for potential service areas because they provide basic local park amenities and usually have a higher level of development or programming that provides a quality experience. Service Areas Community Parks Size: 10+Acres Service Area: 1-to 2-mile Community parks serve a larger area than neighborhood parks. It is expected that most visitors would drive to a community park because they have a diverse range of activities including programmed sports activities.These parks are intended for longer visits up to all day. In addition to the diverse amenities, support facilities typically include restrooms, parking, rentable shelters, and trail connections. Prime locations for community parks would be near commercial centers with walk-to retail and restaurants and on collector streets.Another important consideration in the River Terrace 2.0 area is the scenic view potential from park spaces.The conceptual 3/18/2021 3 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs community parks for River Terrace 2.0 are evaluated with a 1-mile service area because the acreage is within the lower range for community parks.A 1A-mile was also used to evaluate the potential 10-minute walk service area of community parks model* it --&kk _+.4, ---10.- I - ' f r 4 ----...4r .-+. t r ~ •.� ��.�� - �sig . ��- -T da •d y� -Pr • 1 `• 4 J. Community parks combine a diverse range of activities from Intense uses such as league sports to passive use such as walks through natural areas(Photo credit:1-3 Design Concepts LA) Neighborhood Parks Size: 1-10 Acres Service Area: 'A-mile to%2-mile Neighborhood parks are smaller parks intended to serve residents within walking distance. Many neighborhood parks do not include parking or have only minimal on-street spaces.The emphasis of use is on informal activity but may include programmed recreation.Typical facilities can include a playground, small multi-sport hard court, open grass area, and small loop walk. Planning neighborhood parks with al/2-mile service area can help toward the goal of all residents being within a 10-minute walk from a quality park. Sometimes in areas with constraints such as limited access or space,the coverage of neighborhood parks can be supplemented with small or special-use parks such as pocket parks or dog parks.The development areas of River Terrace 2.0 are generally split up by greenway corridors.Though it is expected that future trails or other pedestrian connections would be provided,the neighborhood and linear park acreage requirement was split into multiple, smaller parks across the different sections. Because smaller parks may not have the same level of development or programming, a IA-mile service area was used to evaluate the potential coverage of these parks. . r r 4i1C; -. ,'v7+r".-' yu r • - � ..,...t.".... d 'pti�r7.4:1$ N. J�4.��. 'Y'� 1 w is f Zf 1■ .2 .:` Thy :y-1 "" - _i Z I- f ,- - , r +M { .. ':_ Small2 to 4-acre parks typically serve residents within walking Medium(10-acre)parks may have more variety and serve neighborhoods distance(Photo credit:MCSAGrouol further removed from community parks(Photo credit:Miller-Dalrvmaer) 3/18/2021 4 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Linear Parks Size:Varies Service Area: 1/4-mile to%2-mile Linear parks can provide the same amenities as neighborhood and sometimes even community parks.They are typically used as a tool for providing parks in dense areas that are already built-out, where some of the only land available for park space is reclaimed or multi-functional infrastructure such as vacated transportation corridors or utility easements. In the case of River Terrace 2.0,the opportunity would likely be for linear parks to serve as small neighborhood parks along stream corridors in combination with trail recreation or in urban centers as part of a boulevard or main street public space. 01001 i '- x4k, b>x59F • ter. • .v. fill y:!qy 4 4 ,tE4 F f. R I .617n } Y:L Ilit , •i --. fir# ' r .) ,is - }=_..._ 1 y • - Y •` �"�• i �� 7� • om _ Linear parks are usually in close connection with transportation(roads or trails)or natural resources(greenway corridors) (Photo credit:1-lonnu Singleton,2-CVG Committee,3-Tom Fox) Trails Size:Varies Service Area: %2-mile Trail systems mainly consist of long-distance regional trails, community connectors (urban/town center scale), and local, neighborhood connectors.They include paved, separated multi-use trails and unpaved trails through open spaces. Considering trail access with a %2-mile service area can help support the trail system as a recreation amenity and transportation facility. Potential trails for River Terrace 2.0 are intended to establish connections between neighborhoods, parks and open space, community/transportation destinations, and other planned or existing trails. Planning trails should also consider the opportunity to use trail connections to provide residents with a shorter travel distance to green space, potentially expanding the 10-minute walk service area of a park. , - ii . ,- .4!d-4-= ' �' iti ad:1111 1'41 a a. _TriMIIRS Trail systems can be made up of urban/town center trails,neighborhood and community connectors,and long-distance regional trails (Photo credit:1-Max Grinnell,2-Chicago Traveler,3-Three Rivers Park District) 3/18/2021 5 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Open Space Size:Varies Service Area: Regional Public or privately owned areas, either undeveloped or minimally developed, intended for either active or passive outdoor recreation. Open spaces may include developed facilities that support outdoor recreation and trail-oriented recreation, or areas solely set aside for nature-oriented recreation and areas under natural resources protection including wetlands, streams, buffers, and preserved woodlands. Open space for River Terrace 2.0 is anticipated to mostly overlap with identified natural resource areas. Nature preserves provide open space that can range in level of development,typically featuring soft surface trails and outdoor education (Photo credit:1-Kacey97078,2-MO Stevens) Potential River Terrace Parks and Open Space A preliminary look at service areas for community, neighborhood, and linear parks of River Terrace 2.0 is shown in Figure 2. Figure 3 shows service areas for potential trail access points.These locations are conceptual to assess potential coverage of park service.Actual locations of parks and open space facilities will be determined on an ongoing basis as infrastructure networks are further defined and as development occurs. Service areas and access would usually be based on street, sidewalk, and trail networks without barriers. For planning purposes and in absence of a full street network, the service areas are shown as a radius. Community Parks are shown with a 1-mile service area and neighborhood and linear parks are shown with a 'A-mile service area.A 1/2- mile radius was also added to community parks to understand the 10-minute walk service areas. 3/18/2021 6 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Figure 2. Potential Service Areas of Community, Neighborhood, and Linear Parks EXISTING I Stream fiy 4ij —Existing Pork sT Proposed Trail p4 Existing School �I Vegetated Corridor y.F s an Wetlands '114 nr11/e �•,P Surd SLty01.L ERO 1--- '� — — CONCEPT —Collector Road [INE ••rStree0_iice�. g,.. .._.i.1 .. I . .t Lr■LS� I •-•Minor StreetConrieCtran . _ I ••Potential Beef Bend Connection I —C.' L.7� . I = . Trail Network Beef Bend F. ... 1'4S =Alb i Commercial l Neighborhood Ctr t .—�L -I ,sW iE LouiSf RD • =MVO Street Emphasis 7 '.. -1 s Even Mix 1 -� - II Feathered Edge Park Service Area n Cvmrnun7ty Park ....-- 1 }mile ":41"? ) SW BULL MOUNTAIN RD 7.9 mile Noghboncood 8 - - - Lir tear Pork r1amik I 1 mile. . For.... ,.. :.. r,service areas ore sown ase radius ift5tPad of along a sireetltraJ7 network W 4 ..- 1/2 Mile • :e . [SOUTH] . I;t— ,___I L _1_ --�-.1— 411115..-i- Nn Rb A s rea rr C (E) D, e50 9a0 1.800. 2.701:1FeM N 1 1 3/18/2021 7 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs River Terrace West Community-Two community parks could be split up r42 between the north and south sections.The north park would },r N a•• be a minimum of 7.6 acres and the south park would be a pF minimum of 12.8 acres as there would be a higher amount 1,,2�;r P 050°1'S F4RRY RCI of expected residential development in the south section. -.----` - However,for the residential area in the middle, access would be provided to both community parks with the L -I___ [WEST] proposed multi-use path or road connection. Depending on • -• .- _ I plii., future opportunities for parkland,the two community parks • I' could be split more evenly. L- � '- ti., 3 5W JEAP:LOUISE R❑ Neighborhood- Four neighborhood parks could include two J N.____ _-} parks in the north section and two parks in the south section.The parks in the north would each be a minimum of I two acres, and the parks in the south section would each be }.. i a minimum of 3.2 acres.The neighborhood parks are shown 1 ) sWBULL in the proposed even mix and feathered edge residential areas. In both sections,these locations would provide a neighborhood park within walking distance of the main L —_J street emphasis areas as well. West Community Park Areas Linear-Acting much like neighborhood parks,four linear parks could include two parks in the north section and two Ai 4 M+l@ 5wsaotis w1.0 ati parks in the south section. In each section, one linear park I would be in the commercial/neighborhood center and [WEST] main street emphasis areas and one would be in the feathered edge. The town center parks would be providing - I I greenspace along the urban corridors with a higher density of residential development.The outer edge parks would be '� '" - A SW JEAN LOUISE RD providing typical neighborhood park amenities along a n •� -I %. green corridor and likely in connection with a local, multi- o — ---t use trail. Each linear park in the north section would be a o , minimum of 1.6 acres. In the south section, each would be * i a minimum of 2.7 acres. ... River Terrace South Community-One centrally located community park, a ' minimum of 13.5 acres, could be in a more heavily developed area, served by a main road connection, and provide a 10-mintue walk service area to the majority of West-Neighborhood&Linear Park Areas the higher-density residential area. With trail connections, 3/18/2021 8 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs this location could be a short A w walk to natural areas or other - _ 112 Mils, open space, providing both passive and active recreation in proximity. ; 1 [SOUTH] �r----L___ �______ Neighborhood—Two I1 • neighborhood parks on the west SW LAS1Ck LN q___ ' ls_ 1 side of River Terrace South could i�-• � `--�-- 0 provide park space for the L —i^ '��-E F kN°� western neighborhoods, where Sig No linear parks are not as suitable. 0 These locations also have J opportunities to connect to South—Community Park Areas natural areas and potentially extend recreational use and access with low-impact nature - trails. Each park would be a ------- N minimum of 3.4 acres. I� r ' Linear–Two linear parks on the r 1« 44. east side of River Terrace South [SOUTH] 1 � r-- - , �' could provide service along • SW LASICH LN x_-_r ,.... ' greenway corridors to the even -- --i_jYvyKxuu -�-Y��i.�-y-y-�, mix and feathered edge areas. ' _�u)_I—i_____ These locations would have �_ i _ i_�, s-�EF� opportunities to connect across ° the corridors and for close trail - South-Neighborhood&Linear Park Areas connections with major routes and future regional trails such as the Tualatin River Greenway Trail. Trails The conceptual trails shown in Figure 3 would provide a network with both recreational and commuting opportunities. Smaller, neighborhood trails could connect residents in the feathered edges and even mix developments to the main routes and commercial corridors, with connections to parks for both passive and active recreation along the way. Multi-use community trails along the main roadways would provide connections between the neighborhood centers, community parks, and neighboring communities.These trails would also provide connections to the greater, regional trail system with future connections to the River Terrace Trail, and SW 150th Avenue Trail. 3/18/2021 9 of 10 River Terrace West and South I Report on Parks and Open Space Needs Figure 3. Conceptual Trail Network and Access Points s� sTy 9y F 1" -SW SCVAOLLS PERRL R°:' _ 6 - ER ILIA PARK• EXISTING Neigrborhood Park :' Stre a — • am — Existing Park SABRiNA PARR- Proposed Trail •......-• '.'0;37 m1 .Neighborhood Park : Existing School • 0.2 ml ••# __. Vegetated Corridor a • Wetlands • .,.r.. — 5WJEAN LOUSE RD CONCEPT O0 't i —Callecwr Revd a • 4 } • ••.Itreet/Pedestrfan Connection • i• " ' '• •-•MinorStreetConnection • Z ROSHAR •RIDGE PARK- ' 'Potential Beef Bend Connection 3 ;Neighborhood Park —Community Connectain 0 •••Troll Network • 0.27 mi • Trod Access Points(conceptual) SW BULL MOUNTAIN 00 ' 0 Troil Access Service Area(1/2 mi) I t n for plaarwog purt/ases.SeNfCe areas are ;6 6 shown vs a radius instead of ohar a [WEST] srreetltra+i r work • • a I ORCHARDPARK- Neighborhaod Park • • [SOUTH] ' Y. m 0.06 : A2 ,e.,.AS ICt.: ..•.....,„M1.„,.0i•_m_f_ =„.,.z:z.-il:o_..r miiE ,b Ir ...''-•-.,:: .. . I a '__I .. I Ep10gD I lip7 �.I—� $EEF9 AA S o 6 AL OA 2 o c , O a 0 Le 0v •50 900 1.800 2,700 root to '•'"" ”' l 3/18/2021 10 of 10 44.. 411 3111Fk./41 .. - 'I " --, . ..Itygl.:,,...;17,41-..........-16,...vt,...:-.71 '' 1.4. ..0).4*„.... r, I . , ..0.,i . , it. tr, -. i 44 fir. •y •,; '.�•'}-'t,..:',, "' it' �yry r ,�/ `' { �, I 1 _f-Y • • • •% i` r."' +'+� a'ff't'C!!''t�FF.F .fr e„,,--k':; ,•?'a "Y-r-17 .Y ii.� ,y ' 'fk,. ..„,..,4 . . # 5 ti. .a M • . ' .%•,14- 4' 1 ' ." " ' ' ' .. • . •Azi • o. ar 1.1;.;:. _ _ .. .% ��...ys • `r q` Fes ' 1T� 4I 1. r ''J`[i yrs , - ,, 10.1°1111. I r r . Vi n.%, #.Lk'I'i i a`i i f'14-- 7 r * , !7 i', .. ,01.1,364,0,.. T ... ,..• ..i- I i . kilo ' • .' ' - 6:! .41 , ....,4 1 • 4.. .I ' j .111 • r - '57:,,....v-....w.� ,+,( , y if 1 'A ,1o'�, .• i - .-•?.....1.4-.11.:r_tel. - ei.,:ig , ' ... '.3-4,11t 1.'. • • it Wil, • •-•.41P -ilr.:'-'-iliL IT I"" * 4.117%0•�*' 1." . f .,., �; ` #,. ; I I fit, I *;! .. t* �a'#T. " '• t '0. &• ...i .11 ;e. - .T ti-',.7- { F..;1 rte.' ,` )•{4 J1#• ; � r. e.c,' F r`' i K, * y 3 5 �,FY+ • `+ 7 4 .4 1 4 +. fie "i IRrue , 'F , . � �, _� . • .0, ....4. -.1n- X. . le ; r. ' I. L 0 I: .4.itt :.try4 • f ; 4' . :,.r • ..,... . A .,...y..„. .,,cie i t. . --1"1 . '1 11. *:, • r i'F.- -: .' ''.. , L.L. -,..- -Lr • . � it � + _ . - 1i 'i y ` a a , 16"0/1... WilMatih +• . ,f. • tr. .4' I :, " ,. - . Ysr M *" . . T s "y • iai f ram4, . Ii I' 4.lit • * _ fr + * ,F -y «l I. -, a • K y #zi ", iti - F , rti; Iri. a k • ,x `FIs .. *!. ,:. •; �' r • • :..i .14; r .- 4'.'`'t, • lid .. iiipi ,./..-...:'•�` 'a, , .. .,r4 :# F .j,,. ., •`k' 'a _ • iR I. IPi.� 1 4 �.�7 f1�.;� Atilt:I. l 14.!., s�^ •• s 3R r.�r ..l f it II .4I F• "? ► • ` .rr �.� * M`r a *�. . '` ' .L • �; „. _ ri - ti 1.1:'"I Tla I '•` ,� qui firia '. �y 'r `I • .� .. ' +. • .. iti!~moi ... # �RfiR .!f '�J. irtfilici , i )limurraysmilh Technical Memorandum Date: March 15, 2021 Project: River Terrace West and South Concept Plan To: Ms. Serah Breakstone, AICP Otak From: Mike Carr, PE Kevin Cook, PE Re: Sanitary Sewer Utility Needs Analysis Introduction The purpose of this technical memorandum is to describe sanitary sewer utility needs for annexation and development of the River Terrace West and South areas by the City of Tigard (City). This analysis includes a summary of existing sanitary sewer infrastructure, applicable standards for the sewer system, recommendations for providing sanitary service to River Terrace West and South, and planning-level cost estimates for the major improvements identified. Background In 2010, Washington County and City of Tigard adopted the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan. A portion of the area was subsequently annexed by the City of Tigard. The City then prepared the River Terrace Community Plan, which covered sewer infrastructure needs for all of the areas within the City of Tigard Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), as well as Urban Reserve Area 6C, on the west side of Bull Mountain, south of SW Scholls Ferry Road. The Community Plan outlined the need for additional regional infrastructure, including pump stations,force mains and trunk sewers, to convey wastewater downstream to Clean Water Services (CWS) conveyance and treatment facilities. CWS prepared a Siting Study for River Terrace Pump Stations and Force Mains in December 2014, and construction of the River Terrace North Pump Station was completed in 2016. In March 2017, CWS completed the Upper Tualatin Interceptor Study to address capacity issues related to near- and long-term growth in the west Bull Mountain and South Cooper Mountain areas, including the urban reserve areas that encompass the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan Area. A long- term infrastructure plan and capital improvement program (CIP) was recommended, which 20-2921 Page 1 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) included construction of the following projects needed for further development of the River Terrace area: 1. New River Terrace South Pump Station (PS) & Force Main (FM) 2. Gravity Sewer Trunk on Roy Rogers Road to River Terrace South PS 3. Expansion of the River Terrace North PS with force main extension south to Beef Bend Road 4. Capacity improvements in the Bull Mountain Trunk and Upper Tualatin Interceptor Sewers Construction of these projects was completed in 2020 and has been put into operation. Previous Studies Information from previous studies and master plans was used to provide recommended sanitary sewer approaches for River Terrace South and West, based on the recently constructed CWS infrastructure. These prior analyses provided information into potential phasing and considerations for future development as well as describing limitations to potential sanitary sewer service alternatives. These studies include: ■ Draft River Terrace South Pump Station and Roy Rogers Gravity Trunk Sewer Preliminary Design Technical Memorandum (Murraysmith, November 3, 2017) ■ Draft River Terrace South Pump Station Flow Development and Gravity Infrastructure Review (Murraysmith, October 31, 2017) ■ Upper Tualatin Interceptor Study (CH2M Hill, 2017) ■ 2014 Master Plan Addendum as part of the Tigard River Terrace Community Plan (Murray, Smith, and Associates, 2014) ■ King City Urban Reserve Area Concept Plan (Murray, Smith, and Associates, 2017) Existing Conditions The following sections detail the existing conditions at the River Terrace South and West planning areas related to existing land use, existing and planned infrastructure, and relevant standards and strategies used in planning. These existing conditions will establish the conditions used for sewer service recommendations. Topography The River Terrace West and South areas are approximately 300-acres and 190-acres, respectively. The River Terrace West has been divided into an Upper and Lower section for sewer service area discussion and are approximately 160-acres and 140-acres, respectively. Both River Terrace areas 20-2921 Page 2 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) have well defined flow paths with slopes exceeding 25% in some areas, with River Terrace West having ravines that were previously noted as being challenging for development. The land generally slopes from the northeast to the southwest, toward the Tualatin River. The areas were largely undeveloped pasture and farmland as shown in Figure 1. Existing and Planned Infrastructure and Service Areas Tigard Sanitary Sewer System The Tigard Sanitary Sewer System (SS) serves the area east of the River Terrace North PS, between SW Scholls Ferry Road and Jean Louise Road and is just east of River Terrace West (Upper). The collection system is predominantly 8-in to 12-in pipes and flow is conveyed north to the River Terrace North PS. River Terrace North PS The existing River Terrace North PS collects wastewater from the South Cooper Mountain and River Terrace North developments. It is currently configured to pump south via 16-in force main constructed along Roy Rogers Road with discharge to the Roy Rogers Gravity SS upstream of the River Terrace South PS. As development continues in the River Terrace and South Cooper Mountain areas, larger pumps will be installed in the River Terrace North PS to increase capacity, and the 16-force main will be extended east along Beef Bend Road to the Bull Mountain trunk, bypassing the River Terrace South PS. River Terrace South PS The River Terrace South PS conveys wastewater via a 16-in force main east to the Bull Mountain trunk sewer in Beef Bend Road. The pump station was designed to serve areas in the southwest quadrant of Bull Mountain, including developed areas in Tigard River Terrace, unincorporated Washington County, and the expansion areas River Terrace South and the western portion of the King City Beef Bend South. The station receives flows from the Roy Rogers Gravity SS. As development occurs in the River Terrace South and Beef Bend South areas, new trunk sewers will be constructed to convey flows to the pump station. It is anticipated the existing CWS Pleasant View PS will also be decommissioned and conveyed south via gravity through River Terrace South to the River Terrace South PS. Roy Rogers Gravity Sanitary Sewer The Roy Rogers Gravity SS is a 24-inch pipeline that conveys wastewater south to the River Terrace South PS. Currently, the sewer conveys flows from the River Terrace North PS. The sewer is sized to serve areas south of Bull Mountain Road and east of Roy Rogers Road. 20-2921 Page 3 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Bull Mountain Sanitary Sewer System The Bull Mountain SS services developed areas on the south side of Bull Mountain and north of Beef Bend Road near SW 150th Avenue, and includes the existing Bull Mountain PS. The Bull Mountain SS conveys flows to the Bull Mountain Trunk sanitary sewer, which is a shallow 21-in diameter pipe in Beef Bend Road in King City.The Bull Mountain Trunk sanitary sewer also receives the River Terrace South PS flows, and the future extension of the River Terrace North force main will discharge to the trunk sewer. Applicable Standards and Strategic Planning Standards Sewer planning efforts are determined by those standards as defined by CWS and the City. These standards help inform planning efforts including minimum pipe diameter and slopes, capacity limits for wet and dry weather flows, minimum pipe cover, and location. The standards used to inform sewer planning include: ■ Clean Water Services - Chapter 5 Conveyance Design (Updated December 2019); ■ Clean Water Services - Chapter 9 Wastewater Pump Stations and Force Mains (Updated December 2019); ■ City of Tigard—Public Improvement Design Standards (Accepted July 1998, revisions began in Spring 2020 with anticipated completion in 2021). For this analysis, flow projections for development were developed from preliminary water usage based on the number of people per dwelling unit, and the water use per person. Water demands were developed as part of the Portland State University Population Research Center and projected based on recent Tigard Water Service Area (TWSA) customer use data as detailed in the River Terrace West and South Concept Plan Water Utility Needs Analysis (Murraysmith, 2020). . Table 1 summarizes the projected build-out demands for River Terrace West and South based on the water utility estimates. These projections were developed for the combined River Terrace areas and then scaled by development area for smaller units of analysis. The following assumptions were used to develop preliminary sewer flows: ■ 4,541 dwelling units for total area (see Water Utility Analysis for more discussion); ■ 90 gallons per person per day (see Water Utility Analysis for more discussion); ■ 2.48 persons per dwelling unit (see Water Utility Analysis for more discussion); ■ 100% of water demand assumed to contribute to sanitary flows; ■ Peaking factor of 1.7 to calculate peak sanitary flow; 20-2921 Page 4 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) • 65% of gross area to contribute to inflow/infiltration (I/I) at a rate of 2,500 gallons per net area per day. Table 1: Sewer Flow Projections Based on Water Demand Average Area Total Area (ac) Net Area DWF Peak DWF I/I (mgd) Total Flo • -- (ac) (mgd)** (mgd) (mgd) River Terrace 490 319 1.04 1.77 0.80 2.56 West and South River Terrace 160 104 0.34 0.58 0.26 0.83 West (Upper)* River Terrace 140 91 0.29 0.50 0.23 0.73 West (Lower)* River Terrace 190 124 0.41 0.69 0.31 1.00 South* *Values scaled as a percentage total area as water demands established for River Terrace West and South as one unit of analysis. **Same as Average Daily Demand from Water Utility Analysis Needs Given that there are additional areas contributing to both River Terrace North PS and River Terrace South PS, any changes to contributing areas including Cooper Mountain and Beef Bend South should be compared against previous flow estimates and time frames to ensure that previous assumptions regarding sizing are maintained. Any significant changes to proposed development densities in these areas should be validated against previous planning efforts as well. Strategy The aforementioned analyses and planning have informed recent design and construction and have provided the necessary backbone for development of the River Terrace West and South areas. The recommendations provided herein for proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure include recommendations made in previous studies, with updates made to reflect recently constructed or planned infrastructure. Analysis shows that there have been minor changes to land use and density and flow assumptions since acceptance of those studies, but they have not resulted in significant changes to the analysis results and are considered suitable for this level of planning. Approximate cost estimates based on proposed sewer service will be developed in a manner consistent with the estimated land use and layout and projected water usage. Oversizing of sewer infrastructure and connection to or providing service to adjacent areas was not completed as part of the preferred alternative but is discussed as potential for further analysis. 20-2921 Page 5 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Proposed Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure The proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure needed to serve River Terrace West and South is based on the infrastructure assumed to be constructed at the time of development and does not account for connections of adjacent areas to the River Terrace areas. These recommendations consider previous feasibility studies and recommendations as well as the applicable standards and strategic planning guidelines. The proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure may be refined as connected service areas are more readily defined and are considered to provide guidance to incorporate these changes into sewer service for River Terrace West and South. Conservative pipe sizing estimates using minimum pipe slope and assumed connections to utilities based on proposed development intensity were used in this analysis. Proposed infrastructure is grouped by service area and project description and is described below. Other considerations for planning and sanitary service are discussed for each project and service area. See Figure 2 for a map detailing recommendation for sewer service. River Terrace West (Upper) A majority of flows from developable land generated in River Terrace West (Upper) were assumed to be conveyed to the River Terrace North PS via gravity service and connection to the 24-in sewer trunk that bisects the main development area of River Terrace West(Upper).The following project is recommended for sewer service in River Terrace West (Upper). T1 —10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to 24-in Trunk The main development and commercial areas in River Terrace West (Upper) were assumed to connect into the 24-in sewer trunk via a single 10-in sanitary sewer collector.This project assumes 500-ft of 10-in gravity sewer to provide service for the majority of River Terrace West (Upper), which is to the north of the 24-in sewer trunk. Other considerations for development within River Terrace West (Upper) include: ■ Approximately 10-acres in the southeast corner are sloped southwest towards a ravine. This area is assumed to connect by gravity into existing City of Tigard infrastructure in SW Jean Louise Road. ■ Developable areas in the south of River Terrace West (Upper) may be served by gravity sewer flowing north to the 24-in sewer trunk. The extent to which it can be served is dependent on connection to existing elevation at the sewer trunk due to topographic constraints and minimum ground cover. ■ Developable areas in western edge of River Terrace West (Upper) can be served by a gravity sewer flowing north along Vandermost Road to the 24-in sewer trunk on the north side of Scholls Ferry Road. Gravity service for land east of Vandermost Road will be limited as one moves south and east from Vandermost Road, toward the ravine that runs south. An estimated 5- to 10-acres in the southeastern portion of this area is likely too low to be 20-2921 Page 6 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) served by a gravity sewer in Vandermost Road, therefore pumping would be required for sewer service. Private pump systems for individual properties could be considered to facilitate low-density residential development this area. River Terrace West (Lower) Due to topography, flows generated in River Terrace West (Lower) cannot be conveyed to existing sewer infrastructure by gravity. It is necessary they be pumped to Roy Rogers Road to connect into the existing CWS infrastructure to flow via gravity to the River Terrace South PS. Sewers within the service area would convey flow to the southwest corner of the service area to the new pump station. The following projects are recommended for sewer service in River Terrace West (Lower): T2 —Pump Station Service to Local Collector The area to the north and west of the ravine that runs from east to west of the River Terrace West (Lower) were assumed to be served by a 135-gpm pump station, with 1,500-ft of 4-in force main to serve this subarea. The force main is recommended to pump to the northeast section of River Terrace West (Lower) where it would discharge to proposed gravity service and flow south towards the main development area. T3 —10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to River Terrace West(Lower) Pump Station The main development and commercial areas in River Terrace West(Lower)were assumed to flow to the proposed pump station (T4) in the southwest of the basin via a single main collector. This project assumed 500-ft of 10-in gravity sewer to provide service to the proposed T4 pump station from the main development area as well as additional flows from the area to the north of the ravine in River Terrace West (Lower) identified in T2. T4 —Pump Station Service to 24-in Roy Rogers Gravity Sanitary Sewer A proposed pump station would provide service for the entire area of River Terrace West (Lower). A 500-gpm pump station with 3,600-ft of force main was assumed to connect to the Roy Rogers Gravity SS. River Terrace South A majority of the flows in the west and central areas of River Terrace South can be conveyed directly via gravity to Roy Rogers Road and then to River Terrace South PS, with topographic limitations for service to the developable areas in the eastern edge of the basin. The following projects are recommended for sewer service in River Terrace South. T5—10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to Beef Bend Road 20-2921 Page 7 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) The main development and commercial areas in the west and central areas of River Terrace South were assumed to connect into a proposed gravity sewer along Beef Bend Road. This project was assumed to be 900-ft of 10-in gravity sewer. T6—10-in and 12-in Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road The majority of River Terrace South would be served by gravity sewer running from east to west along Beef Bend Road to the Roy Rogers Gravity SS. This project assumed 2,600-ft of 10-in (1,300- ft) and 12-in (1,300-ft) of gravity sewer to provide service for a majority of River Terrace South. Other considerations for development in River Terrace South include: ■ Service in River Terrace South excluded flows from Pleasant View PS and areas to the north. These areas were identified as potentially connecting to River Terrace South as part of development in previous studies by CWS, to allow decommissioning of the Pleasant View PS. Pipe sizing and peak flow estimates as part of this analysis were for River Terrace South only and did not include peak flows from the Pleasant View PS or areas to the north. Inclusion of these areas may require additional pipe upsizing. Further coordination with CWS is required. ■ Service in the eastern area of River Terrace South may require deep gravity sewer or pump station to connect into proposed gravity sewer identified in Project T6 or in Project T6 (Alt). ■ An alternative collector sewer similar to Project T6 has been proposed for the Beef Bend South area near the Tualatin River to convey flows from that area to the River Terrace South PS. This collector sewer could provide more efficient service for portions of the River Terrace South area and provide an opportunity to share costs across a larger area. This discussed as part of recommended future analyses. Further coordination with King City and CWS will be required. Preliminary Cost Estimates Cost estimates for each project are provided in Table 2. These do not include acquisition costs or local gravity collection system from development and are assumed to provide a backbone of sewer (10-in diameter and greater) needed to connect to existing or planned infrastructure. It was assumed that road resurfacing and other costs may be shared where utilities are co-located. 20-2921 Page 8 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Table 2: Preliminary Sewer Service Cost Estimates Project Description Cost T1-River Terrace West(Upper)-10-in Sanitary Sewer al $90,000 Collector to 24-in Trunk i T2-River Terrace West(Lower)-Pump Station Service $924,000 to Local Collector T3-River Terrace West(Lower)- 10-in Sanitary Sewer $261,000 Collector to River Terrace West(Lower) Pump Station T4-River Terrace West(Lower)-Pump Station Service $1,549,000 to 24-in Gravity Sanitary Sewer on Roy Rogers Road T5-River Terrace South-10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector $157,000 to Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road T6-River Terrace South-10-in and 12-in Sanitary Sewer $469,000 Collector along Beef Bend Road to Roy Rogers Road Total Construction Cost Estimate $4,485,000 (Including 30%Contingency) Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $45,000 20%Engineering Allowance $897,000 10% Permitting, Inspections, and Administration $449,000 Total Project Cost Estimate $5,876,000 ■ Notes: 1.Costs are in 2021 Dollars, indexed to the Engineering News - Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index (CCI) of 12,845.38 for Seattle,Washington (January 2021). 2.Does not include property acquisition costs. 3.T6(Alt)not costed.This project identified as an alternative and will require additional coordination with King City as part of Beef Bend South Development. Planning Considerations and Recommendations for Future Analysis Coordination with adjacent utility providers and development areas are recommended to facilitate cost-effective and feasible alternatives for development in River Terrace West and South. King City is planning to develop the Beef Bend South area, which is south of River Terrace South and Beef Bend Road. Many of these planning areas will be served by the River Terrace South PS, which presents an opportunity for shared sewer service. Future connections from Pleasant View PS and any areas north of River Terrace South are also recommended to be considered as part of any future connection between River Terrace South and Beef Bend South. Preliminary discussions with CWS have recommended further analysis to address utility coordination for these areas. This analysis ranges from small development level alternatives, such as replacing small pump stations with suspended ravine crossings, to analyzing regional sewer alternatives that could serve multiple areas. 20-2921 Page 9 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Figure 1 — Study Area -■ 1 ,--r .. , e.>un...r - - ' N Legend Discharge NIH =1 City Boundaries - . _ A • Existing PS Taxlots .L " - ferton • -- Existing FM Slope 25% , i. — Existing Gravity Slope 10% ' , tf\--..' � • r k l 1 ``r. 2sr, rrN PS I2"FA9 1 - I . �t Po .Ss. - a'umrrier;run ►��• rr • • r 400151- ~�• ns _ �I + • �� ] 1I 't4/1T est 1 :41Patill- 1��jFr1I t • ;i 1 ti .+- d J saCdrr s r I Z." L .i1'� I \ j n "'!` r �� .__��.... Ii 1 Z 1. �� f� ie West N�-y 1!• wer) al F.. .t • . li , I� °i , 1 Z . rer--- f_ iES2j,r".,--. • - ) ' p-...... 1)1/4 .1 • •• I ' . 11 1� I J t r 1 e R! Nr I e�� 1` � � 1 - 1 Bull Mvun[ain - • RT SouthI N utAriC • i Beef eetid 1_ '� N.___/-.. ti/ I sout King'City River Terrace e.r, I...."South PS 7F-:-: I-1 '\-:77.......7,,, . i. -1.\\; • o too 1.04606.2(61 * -y _ 1 T. 1. <I Ctty or Slpard,CWI, I P' Retro RUE-September 2020 I * • Oregon Geosp.tlnl Date CIe.rlpyaux(OGOC)- I r.... i� HAD 1.! 1' r in Her'FIFE 3601 Fee[ et • rro]ectlon:f�m6m Canrorm.l Conk i:- patvn:North American 1963 Sources:Esri, ERE,Garmin,Into a .incre o _ • Pa:olaan er:the eey m Tigard makes no revresencatans,express a Implied, F '�o - Jy a as to the accuracy,completeness andtlmenness ante leformatlon Rasp layer. .i.. USGS,FAO,NPS,NRCAN,GeoB se,IGN,Kadastbr N rdnae T. MU map Is net Suitable ter legal,engineering,or surveying purge.,Net.ika[len E DI 666 WK.IS 660,ealkd. Survey,Esri Japan,METI.,ksr ir�a:(Hbng Kong),q)ua nn,�StreStlitap ni I contributors,aild the GIS Lturreommunity L2 — • N> ■ River Terrace ✓ West and South Study Area TI(iAR❑ February, 2021 20-2921 20-2921 Page 10 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Figure 2 — Recommended Sewer Service ...n..,.,-_ n=. N I Legend , y. —P.- Proposed Gravity • Existing PS A Proposed Force Main -- Existing FM :on i Proposed PS — Existing Gravity : - Discharge MH = City Boundaries • - • ,I' I' -?-52„. RrTN P5 I2"AI �, - y s T1 _...-- A F-1 _ w R.T West _ i -. r; •.- Imo _ Li (UPP.er}� ,„ I i ! I I I_J Lam_-' = 1 e, I I L__i i Tigard 1 TiOar:drr ... River Terrace �_--_ I 1�1 North PS 1� �I_ r i rt.�.._�__ 1i: '1� I T2 Ifo,. 2Er/ I CRT West 1 . . 11 r..„, (Lower) E v. Ir...— I Te 11 - ,. . I _• _ EDI~ 1 I Pleasant View PS and area north of RT .\ i m_ri T4 i south may connect to RT south or Buil I I Mtn Trunk in future.Connection points - • and oversizrng of S5 in RT South notF. 1 analyzed and is shown for reference only, I tTn I J L a ..j Burl Mountain RT South __4 SS .. Pr r ° r :Mocli)Z 1. n c Western and central area of RT 8iir '' — _ _. +"� I South served via gravity to Roy 3z" ro” I _ Rogers Road and River Terrace I South PS. i T6 Eastern area of RT South • 1...__.l L Beef Bend wit need deep gravity 55 I or local PS to proposed SS King,City along Beef Bend Road or River Terrace 1 I T6 (Alt) service to Beef Bend South South PS d:.. . ...Area furthest 1 east assumed to tie into Bull _ . 1,,. Mountain SS. I I ci I I I • F . x l I--�'� 1 t• I I •�I ti ma taw x203 a,_a.�y u, r..e I —+ri. p.....„: .a„..d I= = - - City a Tigard,gacd,CCC I . - Metre 50$-September 2055 1- F Oregon Geoseatral Data Clearinghouse(DWG). Ir� r 0 IPSO StatePlan10,e Oregon 0. PIPS 3601 Feet n Prtl • .ttlen:i vibe-rypC . _. -- x'•`..,, 'I � E Data m /l.V}i ll Dacl.ane"-me cdr P ry..a make, raprevertatia...,ezprct or�mprea, ' Sources:Esti-HERE C �f J'/�p/�ape increme - • cirri. IIL..11llll s a W eha accanry.aamp�eeeness and eimehness 135 he infarmatian dupi.yed. LT: IJSGS,FAO,NPS.rUlWAN.U 'TAse,IGN-i4-ti sten NL,Ordnance - • Chas map r net suitable for legal,ooS050nr.,or surye els purposes.Nunscatern Survey.Esti Jape n.METI,Esti China:(I:� Kon y �.]OpenStreetMa want _ contributors.and the GIS I4ser-0nmmunity9 9 ; P Tx 111River Terrace Recommended t West and South Sewer Service • tnotraysirllnl T I GARP February, 2021 20-2921 Page 11 of 11 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) gt/(17)51-1-4,'-'7; ' 414 > #1,•we 4 � r t . i` *".r li i ' Ta'.'f'Cith./AI. '+\'''F.'l'a :.YF ii.� 4 • ' •f 4 1 # � 5 tit .a M }' • . :Irittk . • I I- '• } . - ' .I i} • + is -4 ' ,, • *▪ 1•-. Ike ; k s Y • �' ttp.r' 4. air 41Pe NA � }.:r 'J[i yrs , - ipoi. ' ,, y I bi.14'4 . .' 4 r .. , , I - .4 , ..ri 4 Ire. J I . aill kilo '' L 'IL ' .• ' i'l 41 . r• '44 • • 4*. )1 { r 31 1411t - I17 - w+S #' a I, r 'y 1s+" * r •I} fiJr r iAli, l' Wil, . R ;' 4111 X ▪ 't {l , .2.01:0 mir.5-. liL IT I' 4 %-.—/101ifut 1 I. pi ,. * ' 1 4 I,..it1/41 ...t r 0- :v.., leap in,. v• , _ .11; , -,r. if:4 ..0 e 4,..;:.,41 trrrXik ,r,ifc6E, • 6-,' ii 2 t iiify,Di''• til. . .:,Y,:id.f ' ' -, 2 .p„,C; /r-1,,.. , 'V' ' ' " ' 4,,r,--- /.4--▪.,. ,, .. . /., , .,. ._a .TO I.- -4 i id ' 'S S� '+ f I' -f.. Fr- a ter` - * '''s• % 44 ti. 11 1 ,:1. P1, y, iiiiiiiiiitrt,1 1 i il lii i' ,1 1 "' y A • 166 . is« ' 4 x '' ' . . ,.%.w `4. �` 'yIs ti wf ti* _ fr ' + F '' _ � ■. "b• , i 4i... Ej 1- . r **] ID 41:0 I .it 1�► '-'�y'1'y,� + # +' # T j *4 om• '.I L l - 1 a. el' ft 4 1*,..4,... • .:;iiiipgi .,,,_ ,,, .,,,,,t .t , , , ,, , • ,4 'a, ,',�.. i,r4 :# F .j,,. ,+ •`k a - • iR I. IP.� 1 4 �.�7 f1t.;� Wit. ' 4. • ` .. �.� * M`r 2 .1 ` ' L �ti L'll' '•` ,� q< i fi r , # i ii Technical Memorandum Date: March 12, 2021 Project: River Terrace West and South Concept Plan To: Ms. Serah Breakstone, AICP Otak From: Candace Coleman, PE Brian Ginter, PE Re: Update to Water Utility Needs Analysis Introduction This technical memorandum provides an analysis of the water infrastructure needs for the River Terrace West and South developments occurring within the City of Tigard Water Service Area (TWSA). This is an update to the preliminary analysis memorandum dated October 6, 2020, which provided a summary of existing conditions, applicable standards for the water system, proposed infrastructure for meeting those standards, and planning level cost estimates for the recommended major infrastructure needed to serve these areas. This update incorporates information provided by Otak for conceptual road alignments and land use projections to refine the previous analysis. Background In 2010, the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan was adopted by Washington County and the City of Tigard (the City). This area of West Bull Mountain was annexed to the City and is now known as River Terrace. In 2014, the City completed an addendum to their 2010 Water System Master Plan (2010 WSMP Addendum) that focused on the water infrastructure needs for the area of River Terrace, located on the western border of the TWSA, as shown in Figure 2 at the end of this document. The plan also considers the sizing of infrastructure needed to plan for water service to the River Terrace West and South areas, also known as Urban Reserve Area 6C. The City completed an updated WSMP in 2020. The WSMP provides updated water demand forecasts and includes projected demands in the River Terrace West and South areas, as well as the anticipated pumping and storage needs to serve these areas. Existing Conditions River Terrace West and South are located on the western and southern border of the previously annexed River Terrace area. The majority of the elevations in these areas fall in the City's 410 20-2921 Page 1 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Pressure Zone (PZ). A small portion of the northwest corner of the River Terrace West area falls in the elevation range of the 560 PZ. Existing large diameter mains to River Terrace include an 18- inch diameter main that extends from the 410 PZ west along SW Scholl's Ferry Road, connecting to smaller diameter mains at SW Roy Rogers Road. Additionally, a 16-inch diameter main extends from the 560 PZ west along SW Bull Mountain Road and can feed the 410 PZ through a pressure reducing valve (PRV). Figure 2 shows planned large diameter mains that will run through the River Terrace area. Planning Criteria and Standards Infrastructure needs are determined using planning criteria, which are dependent on projected customer demands. Preliminary demands for River Terrace West and South were forecasted using the number of dwelling units and developable acres provided by Otak. Note that the number of dwelling units projected in the 2020 WSMP for the River Terrace West and South areas were based on the dwelling unit density estimated for River Terrace as part of the 2010 WSMP Addendum. The number of dwelling units provided by Otak are nearly double the estimates from the 2010 WSMP Addendum as the new plan includes a much higher density to accommodate more multi- family units. Persons per dwelling unit was provided by Otak and the water use per person per day was projected using recent TWSA customer use data. Table 1 summarizes projected build-out demands for the combined River Terrace West and South areas. Table 2 summarizes the water demand by pressure zone. Residential demand was estimated by multiplying the number of total dwelling units by the use per person and the number of people per dwelling unit. Commercial demand was estimated by assuming five residential equivalent dwellings units per acre. Average day demand (ADD) combines the residential and commercial demand. Maximum day demand (MDD) was estimated using a peaking factor of two times ADD,which was determined using historical water use data for the TWSA.The peaking factor for peak hour demand (PHD) was determined using TWSA SCADA data and was calculated to be two times MDD. 20-2921 Page 2 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final Public Version.docx Table 1 — Customer Water Demands Use Persons Dwelling per per Residential Commercial Commercial ADD MDD PHD Units person Dwelling Use (mgd) EDUs* Use (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) (gpd) Unit RT 2,731 90 2.48 0.61 95 0.02 0.63 1.26 2.52 West RT 1810 90 2.48 0.40 20 0.004 0.41 0.82 1.63 South Total 44 90 I 2.48 1.01 0.03 1.04 2.08 4.16 milim *Commercial equivalent to five dwelling units per acre Table 2 — Water Demand by Pressure Zone Pressure Zone Residential Use Commercial Use ADD (mgd) MDD (mgd) PHD (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) 410 0.97 0.01 0.99 1.97 3.94 560 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.11 0.21 Planning criteria used in this analysis are summarized in Table 3. These same criteria were used in the WSMP. Supply, pumping, and storage standards are based on demands. Fire flow standards are based on flow for a specified duration based on customer type. 20-2921 Page 3 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final_Public Version.docx Table 3 — Planning Criteria Water System Component Evaluation Criterion Va Water Supply' Firm Capacity MDD Normal Range, during ADD 40-80 psi Maximum (without PRV) 80 psi Service Pressure Minimum, PHD 30 psi Minimum, during emergency or fire flow 20 psi Velocity during PHD or fire flow Not to exceed 10 fps Distribution Mains Minimum Pipe Diameter 8-inch Operational Storage Tank level set points Equalization Storage 25%of MDD Storage Required fire flow x flow Fire Storage duration Emergency Storage 2 x ADD Firm Capacity-Constant Pressure PHD+fire flow Pump Stations' Firm Capacity- Pump to Storage MDD Single Family Residential 1,500 gpm for 2 hours Required Fire Flow and Medium Density Residential 2,500 gpm for 2 hours Duration Commercial, Public, Industrial 3,000 gpm for 3 hours Notes: 1. Firm capacity is the total capacity with the largest well out of service 2. Firm capacity is the total capacity with the largest pump out of service Proposed Water Infrastructure Infrastructure needs were determined using a combination of the planning criteria and the water system hydraulic model. Planning criteria were used to size future storage reservoirs, pump 20-2921 Page 4 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final_Public Version.docx stations, and distribution mains.These facilities were added to the existing system hydraulic model along with the projected demands to verify adequate pressures, flows, and reservoir turnover. Storage Based on elevations, the majority of River Terrace West and South is located within the 410 PZ, which is currently served by Pump Station 5 (PS 5), nine storage reservoirs, and PRVs from the 470 PZ (Reservoir 10) and 560 PZ. The storage analysis in the draft 2020 WSMP indicates a storage deficit occurring between 2030 and 2040, with a total deficit of 3 million gallons (MG) by 2050, at which time the system is considered to have reached build-out conditions.This deficit includes the abandonment of several storage reservoirs that are aging and are located in areas not ideal with respect to recent changes in the system, including the growth on the west side of the system. A new 3 MG, 410 PZ reservoir (Reservoir 19) is recommended for the River Terrace area in the 2020 WSMP. The additional storage volume provided by Reservoir 19 is intended to serve River Terrace and the Beef Bend South area. With the increase in residential unit density estimated for the River Terrace and West and South areas, a 3 MG reservoir may no longer be sufficient. The actual volume needed can be estimated after the land use and water demands for the Beef Bend South area are determined. The 2020 WSMP recommends a new 560 PZ storage reservoir for the 560 PZ, Reservoir 18. There are multiple projects recommended in the WSMP intended to connect the existing segmented 560 subzones, allowing the combined 560 PZ to be served by the existing Reservoir 16 and the proposed Reservoir 18.These two reservoirs will have sufficient capacity to serve the small portion of River Terrace West and South located within the 560 PZ. Figure 1 shows the approximate boundaries of the pressure zones. A reservoir siting study was completed in 2018 (River Terrace Service Area 410-ft Reservoir Siting). This study ranked potential reservoir sites by site topography, property size, proximity to existing mains, proximity to geohazards and sensitive areas, and site access. Results of the study showed that the most desirable sites are located in the 560 PZ, which would help to serve the 560 PZ portion of River Terrace. The most favorable 410 PZ site is located at SW 150th Avenue south of SW Woodhue Street. However, this site requires further investigation, and the City is exploring potential reservoir sites on undeveloped parcels of land within the River Terrace area. This parcel should be at an elevation of approximately 390 to 410 feet to supply a head of 410 feet from a partially-buried to fully-buried reservoir with a height of 30 feet. Pumping As previously stated, pumping to the 410 PZ is provided through PS 5. This pump station has the capacity to serve growing demand including the demand of River Terrace West and South, and there is space for another pump when additional capacity is needed. The 560 PZ is supplied by PS 17, which has adequate firm capacity to supply the portion of the River Terrace West and South water demand in the 560 PZ. 20-2921 Page 5 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final Public Version.docx Distribution Mains Large diameter backbone mains are recommended to supply River Terrace West and South at reasonable velocities under PHD and fire flow conditions. Backbone mains are intended to supply smaller mains (8-inch to 12-inch diameter) that branch off and connect to customer service lines. For the purpose of this concept plan, only backbone mains are identified. In general, backbone pipe aligns with the potential major streets and connectors identified in Otak's land use plan. Proposed mains for River Terrace, River Terrace West, and River Terrace South are shown in Figure 2 and described below. Proposed backbone pipes for River Terrace South and West are 16-inch diameter. Proposed backbone piping for River Terrace West in the 410 PZ connects to the existing 18-inch diameter main at SW Scholl's Ferry Road and SW Roy Rogers Road in River Terrace, extends west approximately 1,700 feet, then extends south and east to SW Bull Mountain Road to connect to the proposed 18-inch diameter main at SW Roy Rogers Road intended to serve River Terrace. There are no large diameter mains in the 560 PZ adjacent to River Terrace West. The closest large diameter main is located in SW Leeding Way just west of SW Stahl Drive. Backbone pipe is proposed to connect at this point, extend west to SW River Terrace Boulevard, north to SW Appledale Road, west to SW Roy Rogers Road, north to SW Scholls Ferry Road, and west approximately 1,700 feet in Scholls Ferry Road. To serve the River Terrace South area, a backbone main is proposed that connects a planned River Terrace main in the SW River Terrace Road alignment that extends south to Beef Bend Road, then east to connect to the proposed River Terrace main at SW Taylor Road. Preliminary Cost Estimates Cost estimates are provided for the reservoir in Table 4.The cost of the reservoir does not include property acquisition costs and assumes 2,000 linear feet (LF) of pipe will be needed to connect to existing distribution mains. It is assumed at this time that Reservoir 19 will be 3 MG in volume, but depending on the needs of Beef Bend South, this reservoir may need to be larger and the cost portion of River Terrace West and South will be equivalent to 3 MG. 20-2921 Page 6 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final Public Version.docx Table 4 — Reservoir Cost Item Item Description Estimated Project Cost 1 Reservoir Structure&Appurtenances $2,580,000 2 Reservoir Foundation and Excavation $320,000 3 Yard Piping $288,000 4 Site Work and Landscaping $180,000 5 Electrical and I&C $50,000 6 2,000 LF of 16-inch diameter pipe $238,000 7 2,000 LF of Surface Replacement $128,000 8 Mobilization, Bonds, Insurance, Shop Drawings $303,000 9 30%Contingency $1,227,000 Total Construction Cost Estimate $5,314,000 10 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $54,000 11 20% Engineering Allowance $1,063,000 12 5% Permitting, Inspections,and Administration $266,000 Total Project Cost Estimate $6,697,000 Notes: 1. Costs are in 2021 Dollars 2.AWWA D110 prestressed circular concrete reservoir 3. No property acquisition costs 4. No easement or right-of-way costs 5.Sales tax included as separate line item 6. Project will require local roadway resurfacing 7. Engineering News-Record (ENR)Construction Cost Index(CCI) of 12,845.38 for Seattle,Washington (January 2021) Table 5 provides the cost for backbone piping. The cost assumes no road surfacing will be needed for the 410 PZ pipes as they will be installed in undeveloped land. The 560 PZ pipes will need road resurfacing. 20-2921 Page 7 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final_Public Version.docx Table 5 — Backbone Pipe Cost Item Item Description Estimated Project Cost 1 RT West 410 PZ-7,320 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe $871,000 2 RT West 560 PZ-5,100 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe $932,000 3 RT South-4,590 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe $546,000 4 Mobilization, Bonds, Insurance,Shop Drawings $70,000 5 30%Contingency $726,000 Total Construction Cost Estimate $3,145,000 6 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $32,000 7 20% Engineering Allowance $629,000 8 5%Permitting, Inspections,and Administration $158,000 Total Project Cost Estimate $3,964,000 Notes: 1. Costs are in 2021 Dollars 2. No property acquisition costs 3. No easement or right-of-way costs 4.Sales tax included as separate line item 5.Assumes street resurfacing only needed for 560 PZ 6. Engineering News-Record (ENR)Construction Cost Index(CCI) of 12,845.38 for Seattle,Washington (January 2021) References 2014 Tigard Water System Master Plan Addendum, Murraysmith 2018 River Terrace Service Area 410-ft Reservoir Siting, Murraysmith 2020 Tigard Water System Master Plan, Murraysmith 20-2921 Page 8 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) L:\Project\19500\19599\Planning\Task 5.4 Water\River Terrace West and South-Water Memo Final_Public Version.docx Figure 1 SW WEIR a❑ 1 \\NN 2 Legend r Pressure Zones m HGL 1' �� +'`� a 410 g y 530a a yw 21_i, 560 f N at Reservoir aGOP,- 640 3 n N et Sby Gri e40 1104 % 713 ._i, is.,,,'T.%. g3i} � ,r < Sw W ALNUT ST r�*0Ir r A River Terrace West/South ///s @ `°rte _ Y e► 5 re5r .11 — Reservoir 3 Reservoir 13 / / C l.ii-D- k \ ,i '. or 741 // ° Reservoir S N / SW MCOONALp Si iCRL.t WAY f// ■iZeservoir 2 `y` MEAdows RD * Reservoir rvOlf 10 Reservoir 1 1 SW BONITA RD • / Reservoir 16:.5w 1uULL LIVUN IAIN 1:1; Reservoir 4 4 • J/it 2 y 7/470 5 H �� SW BEEF SENO ED SW DURI}AM RD • ii' f / I !f c + y=am I I I li _ I I -SW SCHOL,s .7e..7-7) ..7 ,i „, SW IMLATIN RD )11 River Terrace West and South Pressure Zones Illi I TICAUD 20-2921 Page 9 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) Figure 2 Note: Water line maps are not publically available. 20-2921 Page 10 of 10 River Terrace West and South Concept Plan March 2021 Otak(City of Tigard) .1% .i-‘,..d.'•-•-f7r!'.v,k...,.--74 'il 4i-f ›,,,,44,, . .. !• . • ir - - ,:,,::et , f - ,, y? °�, . 1. . ,i ....... .,. • 14' i` 1..:" i V ' -a''f'ft''C!!'�FF.F'3 f... " ."" w.!; '•?'a':•:-:- Y '17 ,y ' •f.4i1 . . # � 5 ti. ; .a :AM'A,._. •qf, . • . } 0 + • ' 1 * Icy k %• ., 414,0' - -z•-*_••;.,,... :.. 7.111r.r...kafte..-' : 1 ��}.:r 'Jht `[i yrs , - ^1 • y I • 0;A, i.,L.P.'I'.i . 4 '..-.L'' .. -r .' , , - , .., • r, . 1 .. vivir- 1Latixs. • • iir..: • ,...... ! • s y} * 1', r. - I • `11V I• k to i1 r i,iiii. . . 0 " 9, r ,Asies i t ii, I r { r ,- 11411t - %4- _k. •. .-.. 1 r. , . • .1. . ''.1 P. . pi •,.. . 1641.e..••Ji•:::. # ''r 1&'.w i t '4.l 4� X 't {� ,. • • •31- ,F # J _f **''i`r s rte. - ' - i T I ...b. ';-.--/Nlirta 11 I • '" -r4tall '. Iv , 1 4.,5t,,,, r y ypyK ti11116)s r.' F # • * tl rik .4, ...., I g..r !., + --40 . • -1;- . . • 'rt. , . IA )1 ,-,:pc. 1 ef. .1, . 4 __ 1 - . le. .. . ..k. 4....irr,..1*, 7 /_ . "ri tt . .1 ,i. •,.: It ,,:: ...- . • .. :.....',.. '.. s;. ..z...r ,... • -,e. .4E i. . . 4. k . ....;.,... . ....L...."Nor, . , . t7 IN • ..', 1J• �1.y • x.• ' w "r' _ ? :ti, . „.0.-.1 ._ ..4,".0..,,,,,,,,,,ig 0,11'.1147.10-...- —IN •'14.4, .....r.-.41! , , la.. 1... ,, ' 1.,LL .' Illr, . r. 13,,, . i „iv , , . ; 1.,....i. ,.. .. .,.,101.;.1, 4' .,, .. . lir :. . (A ..;.. 1 li: „.... 4...;'.1:....I. '. ,.1.:.3•41 ... .., ' 4..tai r. al, :111 t• P •F. f� 4 y F 1 4 a y 1. '—'�y'ly,7 + #• +. . # T j *4 Tom• '... +• L l -moi, • tj d t 'a t' .". .,r4 :# • F .j,,. ., •`k' ,a - iR �. • til,, 1 4 .!1 11 f A) kIN .I' s�^ • . s 3R c2.r.. ..l•: 7„,. .li .�I ,..•,,,,,;444, `• .r1 `.i 4 M`r a *�. �ti L I r# � q4 : for . 1 ± ifel= ' Otak Technical Memorandum To: Lori Faha, PE—City of Tigard From: Kevin Timmins, PE; Phil Kenyon, PE Copies: File Date: March 15, 2021 Subject: River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis Project No.: 19599 Introduction The City of Tigard plans to request an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion to include River Terrace West and River Terrace South as shown below in Figure 1A. In 2015 Otak completed the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan (SMP), which was later adopted by City Council. This Preliminary Stormwater Needs Analysis provides preliminary findings for the stormwater management needs to serve a future Urban Growth Boundary expansion that would expand River Terrace to the West and to the South. It is anticipated that the River Terrace SMP will eventually need to be amended to include the additional area if it becomes part of the City. W A o.e a I IMiles W = a � sGND Sly PQ ST �1RR. Fd SGNOy�S 5* SW EULt MOUNTAIN River Terrace West 4,0 3 N River Terace 5\N Beef BEND RO Souto w 2�� o y O SW SGHOLLS-SHERWOOD 40' 0 N Figure 1A: River Terrace West and River Terrace South Planning areas in City of Tigard. 1:Iproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599__riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx 808 SW Third Avenue, Suite 800, Portland, OR 97204 • Phone (503) 287-6825 Fax (503)415-2304 otak.com Page 2 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 Background The River Terrace Area of Tigard was originally added to the UGB as part of Unincorporated Washington County and was referred to as West Bull Mountain. A significant planning effort was undertaken by Washington County prior to October 2010. After which, the area was annexed by the City of Tigard and identified as River Terrace. The area currently referred to in this plan as River Terrace South was studied and included in the West Bull Mountain planning effort and much background information exists. The planning area currently referred to as River Terrace West was outside of prior planning efforts but will contribute stormwater to the same small tributaries as other portions of River Terrace that have already been documented. The River Terrace SMP (Otak, 2015)summarizes available background information and key findings. Relevant background information used in this current planning effort are incorporated in the memorandum when applicable. Existing Conditions Existing conditions in River Terrace South and West are similar to the rest of River Terrace documented in the River Terrace SMP (Otak, 2015). A basic understanding of existing conditions was useful in developing this Preliminary Stormwater Needs Analysis and as a starting point for future development of the River Terrace South and West study areas. Key findings regarding existing study area conditions, as applicable to future development, are summarized as follows: • The pre-development land use in both River Terrace South and West is based upon land cover from 2011 when the area was added to the Urban Reserves. This is shown in Figure 2a and Figure 2b. • The River Terrace study area is drained by ten small drainage channels. Figure 1B shows all ten of the drainage channels. • Both the River Terrace South area and the River Terrace West area drain south and west. • Figure 3a and Figure 3b show the existing drainage basins and flow paths. • Culverts under Beef Bend Road for drainages T8 and T9 are under-capacity for existing flow rates. Conveyance improvements are needed to handle future flow rates from new development. • Fish passage requirements to modify existing culverts for fish passage will need to be evaluated at the time of design and implementation of improvements to Beef Bend Road. • Natural resources present in the planning area are being evaluated and described simultaneously to this Preliminary Stormwater Needs Analysis. Resource areas shown are based upon available information. • The existing drainage channels within and downstream of the River Terrace study area are steep and have a high potential for channel erosion due to the fine sediment characteristics of the area and the velocity conditions that exist in these steep drainages. This is described further in the next section of the memorandum. • Except for a small area in the western portion of River Terrace South, the infiltration potential is generally poor in the River Terrace area. The results of geotechnical drilling and laboratory testing conducted during the West Bull Mountain planning effort confirmed that the area is underlain by clayey residual soils derived from the underlying basalt bedrock. Additional infiltration testing should be conducted at the time of development in areas of fair infiltration to determine an appropriate infiltration rate for design. • The effects of infiltration on slope stability for developed conditions are expected to be problematic given the steep terrain and proximity to shallow bedrock. Therefore, infiltration of stormwater should be carefully considered. Strategy areas that call for LIDA facilities may need to be limited to flow-through type facilities that are constructed with an under drain and do not rely on infiltration of stormwater. • Site specific geologic and geotechnical conditions will be important to evaluate during the design and construction of stormwater management facilities in the River Terrace area. l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 3 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 Downstream Stormwater from the River Terrace area (existing and planned)discharges to one of ten small tributaries that flow south and west to the Tualatin River as shown in Figure 1 B. River Terrace West will discharge stormwater to T1, T2, T3, and T4. River Terrace South will discharge stormwater to T5, T6, T7, T8, T9, and T10. The existing downstream conditions are described in detail in the Existing Conditions for Seven Tributaries to the Tualatin River on West Bull Mountain, OR (Otak, 2015)for most of the downstream tributaries. Tributaries T6 and T7 were not investigated as part of the prior work but are described in limited detail in this section. Tributary T6 requires additional investigation. Available information suggests there is a storm sewer pipe near the intersection of SW Beef Bend Road and SW Roy Rogers Road that discharges to the west onto the Tualatin National Wildlife Refuge. Water flows through a swale like feature on the refuge property that discharges onto the Tualatin River floodplain within the refuge. The swale may have been designed as a water quality swale and may need to be redesigned to receive flow from additional areas. Tributary T7 was previously found to be a storm sewer pipe located under private property south of Beef Bend Road that appears to convey flow south to an unknown discharge location. For all of these tributaries, the conversion of land from its historic condition to agricultural uses and then to urban land uses in the River Terrace area and the greater Bull Mountain area results in an increase in runoff that produces flashier flow regimes for a given storm event. The altered hydrology in turn results in channel incision and bank collapse. These changes also affect the vegetation, habitat quality, and morphology of the stream corridor. The lower reaches of the tributaries are also impacted by backwatering effects from the Tualatin River. Most of the tributaries are in some advanced stage of channel degradation. Current trajectories of channel incision and widening are likely to continue under current conditions and will likely be exacerbated by additional upstream development. Additional changes in land use will need to employ best management practices to avoid even greater disturbance to these channels. Much of the flow from River Terrace South area will flow through the South Beef Bend Road planning area in King City. The Final stormwater management recommendations should be coordinated with King City. l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 4 River Terrace 2.0- Storm water Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 . rutl •1i 1 It I If I'kluoginD1.1 1.411111:=1111 I Imp L...1m..a. I114:44411" . II ] ) . I 1 . miTrim:t,=, 1. ,. i tw_ t .. ., __ ........._.....1 • 1 • 1 IJ. I ------1 -. AIM 1 IINT I - - if Ilk ' . :. • i� . �' 01/..' • Figure 1B: Map of the ten small tributaries that receive stormwater runoff from the River Terrace Area. See Existing Conditions for Seven Tributaries to the Tualatin River on West Bull Mountain, OR (Otak, 2015) for more information about conditions of streams downstream from River Terrace. 1:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599 riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 5 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 Standards & Strategy The City adopted the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan (Otak, 2015)that serves as a Sub-basin Strategy for River Terrace. Stormwater management to serve the River Terrace West and River Terrace South planning areas is recommended to be consistent with the standards and strategies adopted in the Sub-basin Strategy. The Sub- basin Strategy will need to be amended to include these new areas. The River Terrace SMP (Otak, 2015) calls for management of post-construction stormwater runoff that includes the following: ■ Water Quality treatment sized per the CWS Design and Construction Standards ■ Water Quantity for hydromodification sized using a flow-duration based design standard adopted by City of Tigard ■ Above ground, vegetated facilities that meet the low impact development approach requirement in the CWS Design & Construction Standards as well as the Community Amenity Standard adopted by the City of Tigard. It is recommended that the City adopt land use conditions from 2011 as the basis for determining predevelopment hydrology used in sizing stormwater management facilities. The River Terrace West and River Terrace South areas were added by Metro to the Urban Reserves in 2011. Figure 2a and Figure 2b in the attachments present the pre-developed land uses from 2011. The River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan (Otak, 2015) identified three regional strategies for application in the current River Terrace area. The three strategies are described in Table 1. Table 1: Required Stormwater Strategies for River Terrace Strategy Water Quality Water Quantity Area A Combined Regional Water Quality Treatment and Water Quantity Detention Facilities B Street, Site, and Neighborhood Scale Low Regional Water Quantity Detention Facilities Impact Development Approaches C Street, Site, and Neighborhood Scale Low Downstream Conveyance Improvements Impact Development Approaches (High-Flow Bypass/Stream Restoration) The area immediately north of River Terrace South was recommended to follow Strategy C in the River Terrace SMP but was found to be too challenging to implement ahead of development in that area. Instead, the City of Tigard has approved multiple development applications in the area north of River Terrace South that follow Strategy A. Additional coordination with King City and Clean Water Services is anticipated that may influence a future decision regarding the coordinated stormwater management strategy in River Terrace South. For the time being, this memorandum recommends the following Strategies: ■ River Terrace West = Strategy A ■ River Terrace South = Strategy A and Strategy B Preliminary Stormwater Concept Plan recommendations were prepared for River Terrace West and River Terrace South. The Stormwater Concept Plan schematically represents the specific regional stormwater infrastructure needs for River Terrace. The attached Figures 5D, and 5E were reproduced from the River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan and expanded to include the recommendations for the new areas. l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 6 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 The area contributing to two (2)of the proposed Regional Stormwater Management Facilities in River Terrace South area (facility numbers 33, and 34)will follow Strategy B. The two regional stormwater facilities are recommended to be co-located within existing wetland areas and manage stormwater quantity from approximately 39.4 acres of new development. These two facilities shall be designed to provide for enhancement and restoration of the wetlands. Existing wetland areas cannot be used to meet water quality requirements. Therefore, LIDA facilities located upstream of these two regional facilities is recommended to provide stormwater quality treatment for the areas that drain to these two facilities. LIDA facilities will be constructed and paid for by development as streets and neighborhoods are built. There is a total of thirteen (13) regional stormwater management facilities recommended to meet both water quality and quantity requirements following Strategy A for the remaining areas of River Terrace South and all of River Terrace West. In general, the conveyance of stormwater runoff throughout the River Terrace planning area is assumed to follow closely with the street, trail, and public right-of-way network. That level of detail is not available with the current concept plan. Conveyance paths will need to be further described by future planning and design efforts and may result in changes to future drainage basin boundaries assumed for this plan. An indication for the ability to use infiltration for stormwater management in the study area is mapped in Figure 6. Some fair infiltration potential is believed to exist in the southwest portion of the River Terrace South planning area. Good infiltration can increase the effectiveness of Low Impact Development Approaches at managing stormwater runoff and can reduce the size and reliance on regional facilities. It is recommended that geotechnical investigation and infiltration testing be performed during design of each facility in areas where Figure 6 shows "Good" and "Fair" infiltration potential. Proposed Stormwater Facility Calculations There is a strong correlation between impervious area and stormwater runoff. The first step toward sizing stormwater management facilities and estimating site runoff is to estimate the amount of impervious area anticipated for the River Terrace study area. The current concept plan calls for a mixture of housing types distributed throughout, with an average density throughout of 20 dwelling units per acre (DU/acre). Prior study of imperviousness associated with neighborhoods achieving a density of 20 DU/acre suggests that 75% of the developed land area is covered in impervious surfaces (roads, sidewalks, roof tops, driveways, etc.). This was the basis for performing calculations for this stormwater planning effort and an average imperviousness of 75% was applied to the area shown in Figure 1C as developable land. Future community planning may further specify various types of development that would suggest more variability of imperviousness in different parts of the River Terrace study area. Actual imperviousness will vary throughout the River Terrace study area and will need to be recalculated as development occurs. Several calculations were made when developing this plan and the cost estimates. Calculations include: ■ Sizing of Regional Stormwater Facilities for Water Quality ■ Sizing of Regional Stormwater Facilities for Water Quantity The engineering analysis and calculations completed for this stormwater management plan should be considered preliminary. Additional engineering analyses will be required during future community planning, and during detailed design phases of either public infrastructure or private development projects to verify the assumptions made in this planning level analysis. l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 7 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 MOUNTAINSIDE RIVER T E R RAC E HIGH [CONCEPT PLAN] — �'•.. , •'� FMILhA Collector Road I PARN ••.Street/Pedestrian Connection E '1 • •Potential Beef Bend Connection •Minor Street Connection ••-__ L_,.. H4I••.. __i--,A E0.I NA •••Trail Network j 'i:k, i '•..; - --j --Beef Bend Road Edge Treatment I [WEST] Commercial/Neighborhood Center ......:• ,n,,Employment Area , r Main Street Emphasis '•-•—:.71-.—.; .—:.r.—. •y J s Even Mix Feathered Edge I 4..-!,,_ ^Project Area y Imo- , �v Stream I.F' ] Existing wetlands I vegetated Corridor • I a Existing Park , ; Existing/Planned School r, I ORCHARD PARK - AEI [SOUTH]i. LLLMENLh±CNTARY ,• 4FA.44..4AAiFU0.• 1 . A' .. [2., v... . 0450 400 ,.800 2.700 h Ota I. Figure 1C: Concept Plan Preferred Alternative from January 26, 2021 showing Developable Land assumed for calculations presented in this stormwater planning effort. laproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599__riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 8 River Terrace 2.0-Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 Regional Stormwater Facilities for Water Quality This stormwater planning effort calls for the treatment of site runoff to be handled using a combination of regional water quality facilities, and LIDA. Site, Street, and Neighborhood LIDA will be sized as part of future public or private development projects. Regional stormwater facilities that are recommended to provide water quality treatment are assumed to fit within the footprint of the facilities sized to meet water quantity requirements. Water quality volume and flows were calculated for the regional facilities that will provide water quality treatment. The water quality volume and flow were calculated based upon current Design and Construction Standards. The current standards use impervious area draining to the facility. Impervious area requiring treatment was calculated for each of the subbasins based on land use assumptions within each drainage basin. The calculation of impervious area, water quality volume and water quality flow are reported below in Table 2. Table 2: Summary of Water Quality Calculations for Regional Facilities Contributing Basin mpervious Area Water Quality Water Quality Flow Area (acres) (acres) Volume (cf) (cfs) HIM-20 65.41 32.77 42,824 2.97 21 13.27 6.65 8,690 0.60 22 39.13 23.35 30,514 2.12 23 26.76 17.33 22,647 1.57 24 114.57 71.53 93,475 6.49 25 41.06 21.24 27,756 1.93 26 7.69 3.35 4,378 0.30 27 38.29 21.73 28,397 1.97 28 19.15 10.43 13,630 0.95 29 42.44 26.54 34,682 2.41 30 7.38 4.23 5,528 0.38 31 5.20 1.87 2,444 0.17 32 13.48 7.31 9,553 0.66 Regional Stormwater Facilities for Water Quantity The Tualatin River Urban Stormwater Tool (TRUST) model was developed for the River Terrace study area to calculate runoff and support design of water quantity facilities to match the flow duration-based design standard. The TRUST model was used to simulate developed conditions in River Terrace and estimate the regional stormwater facility volumes required at each recommended facility location to meet the City's stormwater design standards for River Terrace. Table 3 summarizes the estimated storage volumes and discharge structure for each regional detention facility for cost estimating and for comparison against future planning and design efforts. The use of LIDA facilities can have a measurable impact on the size of water quantity facilities sized to match a flow duration based design standard, such as the one adopted by the City of Tigard for River Terrace and the TRUST model can be used to quantify the benefits. The use of LIDA is required upstream of regional water quantity facilities (Strategy B)that are co-located in wetlands but was not included in calculations for this planning effort. As part of future planning efforts, the City should consider the opportunity to provide additional storage in these wetland resource areas above and beyond what is required to further mitigate stormwater runoff from offsite upstream areas that were previously developed under past standards. The extra available storage would most l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 9 River Terrace 2.0-Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 likely be based upon the volume available in the existing wetland, rather than the amount of upstream impervious area outside of River Terrace. Table 3: Summary of Regional Detention Facility Sizes Peal Discharge Structure Facility Storage Volume Orif ce Notch Weir Notch Weir Riser Diameter Riser ID Volume (cy) Diameter Width (feet) Height(feet) (inches) Height (cy) (inch) (feet) 20 12,885 19,200 6.28 0.57 1.80 54 4 21 5,648 8,700 1.85 0.07 1.66 18 4 22 15,075 18,000 3.35 0.28 0.52 18 4 23 7,166 8,800 3.72 0.21 0.92 18 4 24 38,845 47,000 6.74 0.76 0.71 54 4 25 16,631 20,800 3.24 0.23 0.92 18 4 26 719 1,100 2.59 0.05 1.80 18 4 27 8,375 10,000 4.49 0.31 1.00 18 4 28 3,422 4,400 3.10 0.57 1.00 18 4 29 7,953 10,600 6.23 0.29 1.80 18 4 30 3,051 5,200 1.64 0.05 1.80 18 4 31 489 800 1.89 0.02 1.80 18 4 32 4,278 5,600 2.29 0.07 1.29 18 4 33 6,588 10,200 6.79 0.90 0.90 18 2 34 6,145 8,400 4.89 1.24 0.60 18 2 Reclaimed Wastewater Opportunity Clean Water Services currently provides reclaimed wastewater from the Durham Wastewater Treatment Plant for irrigation. Based on discussions with King City and the City of Tigard, there is a desire to extend the system of delivery of reclaimed water further west near to the River Terrace South planning area. The concept plan should explore uses for this type of water supply. Since regional stormwater facilities are larger and require amenities, availability of this type of irrigation water might facilitate additional types of amenities to be considered. Cost Estimates Storm sewer and LIDA facilities applied at the site, street, and neighborhood scale are not regional facilities and are not included in the Stormwater Cost Estimate. It is expected that these conveyance and water quality facilities will be constructed and paid for by development as individual streets and/or sites are developed. Regional stormwater infrastructure will be the City's responsibility with funding strategies described in the Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategies memorandum being prepared in parallel. Costs for regional stormwater facilities were determined according to estimates for facility size (footprint and volume). Assumptions and calculations used to estimate facility sizes are presented previously in this memorandum. The following assumptions were made about the size, geometry, and needs of the regional stormwater management facilities to derive planning level cost estimates. l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 10 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 • Regional stormwater facilities for detention and water quality were sized using the TRUST software and based upon meeting the new River Terrace water quantity standard. Excavation volume estimates assumed up to four feet of storage depth with 3H:1V side slopes. • Regional water quality facilities were assumed to fit within the space required for meeting the water quantity standard. • Sizing of regional stormwater facilities for detention, where combined with wetland enhancement, was based upon an estimate to construct a similarly sized detention facility outside of a wetland area, but spread out over a larger footprint to minimize inundation depths (2 feet)that would be tolerable in a wetland enhancement design. Side slopes were still assumed to be 3H:1V. • Costs for inlet/outlet pipes, manholes, inlets, flow split manholes, and flow control devices in the right-of- way were based on recent bid tabulations. A construction contingency was included in the cost estimates to account for uncertainties that are inherent in the early planning stages for stormwater infrastructure. The contingency includes, but is not limited to variability in actual quantities, miscellaneous items such as fencing or signage, and unknown phasing for implementation. The estimate for land acquisition costs assumes purchase of land or easements for regional stormwater facilities. The total estimated cost for public stormwater infrastructure for the River Terrace South and River Terrace West study area is summarized in the following Table 4. Table 4: Regional Stormwater Infrastructure Total Estimated Cost LOCATION TOTAL** Construction $17,923,545 Engineering/Permitting $9,336,398 Land Acquisition $6,788,629 TOTAL $34,048,572 **These costs are slightly different than those used in the Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy due to last minute changes that were not available in time to complete final edits to the funding strategy. A detailed breakdown of the Stormwater Infrastructure Total Estimated Cost Summary is provided in the Attachments, as is a breakdown of the quantities assumed for each regional facility. References Clean Water Services. Design & Construction Standards: R&O 19-5 as Amended by R&O 19-22. November 2019. Accessed 9/11/20. Clean Water Services. LIDA Handbook. 2016. Accessed 9/11/20. Otak, Inc. Existing Conditions for Seven Tributaries to the Tualatin River on West Bull Mountain, Oregon: Final Technical Report Submitted to City of Tigard as part of the River Terrace Community Plan. October 9, 2015. Otak, Inc. River Terrace Stormwater Master Plan. Otak Project No. 16851. December 2015. Tigard, City of. River Terrace Development Program. https://www.tiaard- or.aov/riverterracedevelopment/index.php. Accessed September 12, 2020. l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx Page 11 River Terrace 2.0—Stormwater Needs Analysis March 15, 2021 ATTACHMENTS The following Figures from the River Terrace SMP were revised to describe the River Terrace West and River Terrace South planning area and to convey preliminary concepts. They are included by attachment to this memorandum. Figure 2a: River Terrace West Predeveloped Land Use Figure 2b: River Terrace South Predeveloped Land Use Figure 3a: Existing Drainage Basin Diagram (West) Figure 3b: Existing Drainage Basin Diagram (South) Figure 5D: Stormwater Concept Plan Diagram (River Terrace West) Figure 5E: Stormwater Concept Plan Diagram (River Terrace South) Figure 6: Soil Infiltration Potential The following are detailed versions of the quantity and cost estimates prepared as part of this planning effort. They are included by attachment to this memorandum. Regional Stormwater Infrastructure Cost Estimate (prepared in 2021) Regional Stormwater Infrastructure Quantity Calculations l:lproject1195001195991projectdocslreportslfinalstormwaterneedsmemo119599_riverterrace2.0 finalstormwaterneedsanalysis-21_0315.docx t rn. , • �- .: ., _ ' 104 y s•it .; _ ''$ - i tSM 6 �x,c..).A., ,.r.,..,..; -SW SEHOUS FERRYWDlir- -----r ellen' � ,,_ •:;---i jai '^� •••••••• ••• •,a . .,•.,�,, e ih $ } "a h ••♦••♦•• ♦•• •a • ♦•♦♦♦••4•. •. } i♦•i•♦•♦•!•• • _ r • • �i '"` t/r1 i ' ab e � • r, � ry i ^H� i ••♦!♦♦♦•••• �siS r�4 x s " _ s. ••••• • �, r r, . , •A• .; •♦••• l 1 O...'f of •'i -�-Pt •+,' II -T1Y - .(`-r—. r ,•1 r + •••• ,; �S - r�•• ' - r . ler .,-;:',1 --- °-•r •••[esti r 37 - •! 4 4 e.'11; ),.� •• •♦♦••••••• -- _- M. $�:_ k *; T2-6a •• �; 'It •• •••••• •t.! . ',VA 5 , ; - , '' !; {� • ♦♦1•♦♦1!•♦ ♦...' 1 •x_ j[r '41,0 �rrrr • ••••••• ,• •- ••• •• i° w 1 , •♦••••♦• . ••• • •• ...-••. +q ;S 4►�s .. _`F 7 ♦•♦••♦•• ♦♦•♦►• • • k as AO k.. 1• ♦♦••ii ♦ p RV •iii♦•♦♦►♦••••♦••♦♦• •''•• i!•i♦••♦•i•• ♦•• '•• :+�iy�t r t `- j. + ikt. a. _ ♦•♦♦♦♦•••♦ i• •. - ♦♦i♦i♦ ♦♦ 7-r.r. r ■ 1 ♦!♦!••♦♦ ♦ •••••• ••• - 4 .e• t +r* ••••••••• •. w • •••••• •••• * i #. i- ••i••••• ••♦••••i•♦♦•♦ ••�•* •••••••••••• ♦•♦♦♦ • �ir I ..�. ••••i•♦ i•♦1••••••••• ••♦•• ••♦ ••••♦.t �:II . `Ik I .} 9 0,4 0,1 . ,•„.....,..!•••••••i•♦♦ ♦••♦♦•♦♦ ♦♦ ••♦♦• t; •141.44411• was . ••►••♦♦ •♦•!1♦•♦♦♦••i♦•♦♦♦♦♦•♦ii •♦i♦•t•••♦•••••• •♦ •♦•♦t!•♦•♦ •., . '' r t, ie• !••. •••♦♦••!•i! •i•♦•••!♦ •!! !i!• • ♦i♦•! .•♦'!i♦'♦'•♦♦'♦♦♦♦♦' ♦'•'•'♦♦♦♦♦♦!i♦♦♦♦♦♦~•♦!i♦'♦♦• "i•♦♦♦ F.., _ • 'ter / i +. n ••♦ j1••••••••• ••••••••••••••i•• ♦• {{ , I. . •••!•♦• ••!•♦!••••♦•♦•♦•••♦•i ••♦•♦♦t♦•♦♦•i•i•!•♦•♦♦••♦•♦•i•♦♦!••••i•i• .. /�f ,� • !♦•••♦♦i• •♦•♦♦i♦!•♦!i•♦t••♦i •♦♦i!i!!••♦•i♦••♦•♦•♦!►•'•♦•'!♦•♦•♦•i♦♦••♦• / et ••t• •►••♦♦••♦•♦ •♦•♦♦•••♦♦•♦♦•♦••♦•♦•♦• r ♦••♦ ♦•••••••• ••••••••••••••♦•••♦••♦ *• • i♦•♦ •♦♦♦••i♦♦♦♦ •♦♦•♦•••♦♦•♦♦•♦iii♦♦♦•♦/ 11♦ii i111♦•t1i 1.11111•••iIf111i1•i111 / / 4 w a� ! •.•.•.•♦• ••••i♦ii♦ii'•.•.•.•i 'e•♦•i.•.•.•♦•.•.•iii•'♦iiai'♦♦♦'•.•.•.•••.•.• • ••♦ � � ..t 4 • •••• : •••••••♦••.. ••♦♦•♦••♦♦••••♦•••♦••!♦ ••• • ••• ••••••♦•••.•.• ••••••♦♦••••••••••••• •••• .•, r ♦1♦ ♦♦•••••••♦••••i•♦•••♦i♦•♦••!♦••!i•i y.ytt 4. • y •w+ ••••• •♦••♦♦♦•1♦♦• ••••♦♦♦♦•••♦••••••♦♦•♦♦•♦•♦♦•• •. • i••i•••♦ ••••♦!•♦•••••••i•••! •ii•♦••!♦i•••!♦i♦i•••♦•i••♦•♦1♦i♦••••i+•••♦•♦i•••••♦ ...v �.. • !I zr< .r� •••♦ •••••••♦•♦ ••♦♦••......••♦!••♦•••♦•♦ ••••♦ , .... .......... ......................... ••... .�,.. . a.. er,.2.>_ - = •••♦ •••••• ••• ♦♦♦►•♦••••♦♦♦+♦♦♦•••♦••♦ • �. !•♦ ♦••••••♦•♦ ••♦••••••♦•••♦•••••♦♦••• •• r ' . ,, e, ■ . •• ••••••• ••• •••••••••••••••••••i••• •• .i, 01, til• ♦•.i♦• ♦•♦•♦•t•♦•♦•ii♦.•♦! ♦•♦•♦•i•♦•♦♦ii•♦•♦•i•♦•••♦•••♦i♦♦♦•♦♦♦•♦•iii. ••♦ 1 ` " •• ♦♦•••i••i• ••••♦•••i•♦••••••••1•♦• •• F •! ••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••i••••• ♦♦ '� • • a ♦'♦♦i.•.•.•.•.•.•.'•i♦ii' ••.•.•.•.•.•♦tiiii♦i•'♦'♦'♦♦•♦i'i'♦♦.•.•.••♦ •••••• '.� ♦• •••••••••• ••••••♦•••••••••••••• •••a . �#-. ,. 1 a i,.t •••44 ••••♦•••••♦•♦i♦•• •*e•••♦••♦♦•••♦♦♦•♦•••••i•••♦•i•♦•••• ••••fake _ fir ••• •••♦♦♦•••• •••••••••••••••••• •••• ,� T►2 Tb • •••♦♦••♦ i••••••♦••i••t••♦• ••••••••• • ••i•••• ♦ • * - r y . - + * r ♦•♦•♦•••••♦•♦••♦♦ •♦•••♦•♦•i••w• .r 1� ••♦••♦• •i•••• �• , �. - . ••••♦• ♦••►♦♦ of , ,,� ••i••• •lioT2 aid • f' ►►, :. r1 lC t ,,, .r ';: ••••• •••••••t♦••••••• — r�_} - �� w• $ . ..1.:e. r r t ❖•❖.❖ r. 1 ."1• ,F"t�••. '. �•�,�'+.'Sw r .�1'.. ' F • ! '" + s'°., ♦••••••♦!•• ]■ "`" 'vorm, A4 c•w j + +d« "^ * � ' ti, 4 •♦♦•♦ 14 _ } air +; s S ',rr"•,4 " ; 3''l�'4f y J • L^r,, - T3_1 d —'- _ e,'I 4 .:i• .L t v :AO .p _- .......,410,- • •• I 4011r spr y • "'. .. . •. i�•••♦'i!••►♦♦♦♦•iii•••♦i��• _■e' + �! � se�.:_, ' •, •••••••••••••1• • ••••'♦•••••••••• •••••• t•F` f x ' 1 ••••••••• ••••••• - •••••••••• ••••••• #► P r 1 T3 2b IF u •♦;•••♦•♦♦♦•••♦♦♦♦ 1 .41#414a. ••••••••♦•♦♦•••••♦ • y. '. '. ., .7,-:, •, .. f ♦♦♦•••i•♦♦♦•••i!i♦♦•♦•♦•••••.4. 7 •H♦♦••♦•►♦♦♦♦•• , ••••••••••••••• L ••••••••••••••• ' �'►•• ♦♦♦♦♦••••♦♦♦•♦1' •••• + , '+- + _ ti ♦••••••••••••••: ; •••♦•• •• •• i• iia tr s ? •••••♦••♦♦♦•♦•• ♦•••♦•♦• a a♦ Ilk- ,S ••••••♦••••••♦♦ ►♦•••♦♦•�0 V ♦♦♦1♦•. r ,ry tt' i•!•••ii•!•i•i. ••••♦6+►♦ rP•••••••••••••• 1 . - , �: +''s ;,� 1 _ ••♦•i•1•♦••♦♦•'•♦♦i•i••••••"' 5 ♦•♦••♦i#♦i!t♦i ' i♦♦♦i♦•i♦•ti•'•'•►♦'•i♦♦!•♦'•' V� - AS •••••••••••••e V�6u-' i••• ••♦••• •!•♦•••••• 1� 1 . r � - 1. i•♦♦i♦•i♦♦♦ie ♦♦♦• •♦♦•♦♦♦•♦♦i♦♦♦••• • •♦i•••t•♦••♦♦• ' •♦•• ••••••••••••♦♦•••♦•• • •••••••♦••i••• i•ii ♦1♦•i•i•♦•♦•♦•••ii••♦i gUe F ••♦i♦•♦•♦•♦!1•♦•♦•♦•♦!••♦i♦1 • .e•••♦ , ♦♦ii•♦•••♦•♦!♦•♦•♦•••••••••••••♦•••♦•••♦•••••••♦• 7-,— •••••••••••••• •♦.' ••••t•♦••♦♦♦•••♦♦•••••♦••• • •♦••♦•♦♦♦•♦♦•♦ •• • • •••••••••••••••• ie. _ t •••••••••••••• 4e 8 •.•••••••••••••••. ••••• '� ❑ ♦••♦i••i•♦•••4 cry Z' • - •• . •••••i•♦ •i••• • rl II .Q` J Y a, a ,^ ••♦•i•♦♦!i♦•••♦••i♦•i•••♦•♦ •••♦•at •*♦ •. '. e•♦•• ': s..•. '� �,; ••••♦!••••••♦!♦•••••••••• • ♦'i♦•♦♦► ••a;. i r 1.� w` ♦•••♦ii•••••♦ ••••♦ ♦i •••♦••♦•••♦•• •1♦•• • • r • ' •i•••♦'••♦'♦'i•♦•i••'••♦••♦• •-••••••••••• ♦•, �.,o 3;1 +x s. P. �° -• -W ••••••••••••••♦•♦•••♦•♦•••••♦•••••♦•♦•••••♦.• •.' ♦••' :: a�° ° • • • - : ••♦••••1•••1•♦••••••••♦ • •• as p .:kar K. ••i •i••••♦♦•••••••••••••••••••••••♦•••i' ••• ; + . ••♦♦i♦♦•♦♦•ii•♦i♦♦♦ • ,"-..A,1i•:riirt:- 4 •••••♦••••!••••••••♦. ••/.. ••.,. t ata •••♦•i•••••••••••♦• r ••••♦•••♦•♦•♦•••••••i!♦•♦•••♦•••••♦ • •••` • , .rY ]-1 •i••♦••••••••♦••♦. •♦ - • ii.♦i♦•♦•♦i♦i♦•♦!♦i♦•♦•!ii♦•♦ •♦i d �r �� •i•••••i•'•♦•••••'♦••••i•♦ •♦•••i ' T4_2b ••••••••••• • ••••• rkr •••••••••••F ••••• -. ••••••••• ••••• I —i•••♦•♦•♦i♦• t.�' •♦' •• ••••••• ••••••!i•••••••, a=sr ••♦•♦•••i••♦•••••♦♦•i•i i••i . . i•iaa••♦i•e a • , , ., ., / , , i11,4_ i ,, _ !I 4 rtL , . II 'I ' 1 •t 1 jj. . 10111,. 4111 a '. , 3,.„ i • • 1 1r H ! 'IilhilgOlcli . 1 ill 0 [11E11 1 ' �1 r0i11:111111 ll f' ,,��I a y ti ° • * IIV i i l{ -�,}-i. IAA I,`1 P'1,11'I•I I'll -L'-I 1.e.I T1 i,�4:'lii 14 (;. -.F _ _ I �; :, E,iy 111 4r ' kifh ••• '"' • r ....,d Vii, .. •'} I �'• 4 :,:. .. ;1 wit Y :4:,-: .li,. �••••••••• - ,. • -- -14 3a . r Iii ••••:.• ••♦iii•• i••♦•♦••• • ., k- +��A•Ai • d �, Y , .,s, y .3.0,..„•....C. r li•i.sl,i( .;1+A' i . ... IJ River Terrace West and South Legend N Figure 2a: Streams 2011 Predevelopment Landuse Predeveloped Land Use Major Roads m ii Forest- 104.9 acres o �,oaa Impervious- 18.8 acres (`v, Feet (West) m Proposed Basins Lawn - 21.6 acres Information on this map is from,or derived from,data provided by rom 7 City of Tigard, Washington County andlor Metro.This information Otak L a RiverTerrace Reserves 111111 Pasture- 162.2 acres was developed at multiple scales and accuracies.No warranty is made with this map. /r\ j. Wetland -0.3 acres Oacumenl Palk L•Probecttl9`AOL195E2ACRWIGISNINDVANM/65913_rAMrertace_SYH1A_OIek1,9sA,3_HverTemrece_SYMA_OLek_FlgureAlCGW_PJ:erT,ace_SNJA_Olak_flguressr2 Proltlrg Lab 3.1111O21 I X ' rt . • aue) iFF''°11l fa .,t3 �yc - I r - elf f 4 A �; �#. -�� 7 r&.� ..yi > Pf ' rr . `..� , `, 1 -Vt.674 1.4- r; r T4 aa1 ' 1'. -i.t : 3 R t .. �`• T li . hP ez O �� f� a •, r'a�..:x IS• n 1• s" ti-. j'� ^I : - _ _ r yb • ,Si • ,,, i 1, ----:'.—'`'-' '."R :tea=-*irs� Oil�"." - {•�' r• . S• .r {T.w 441i 4.. .. r ,.. •:.''', F. rP�-V�'.._ _.v' e l 'f4-': r• 1 •• ".*-1 r1 • T4 3a , A ,. ,I' L • w ••, • - • a��! .~ err—..•.`� - - r`. t r.w �•; a ,' i+7r: ` i.� .s 1 ` z ` ego �4,-.�'a� `,, 4i.4(3Y sit- .�/ t-..*i r , S„ IP' ir.+,+' �, _ g{ i _ ; • �s a+o T - r t�^ _ s. < r._ . ��. f" ,moi' d n e - - 4°,14%;- eA •.rt w $+A'e•.t`Y ° `; -s�S #..`Ii.' , .yir r . .-;-'-',7-1.----..i:, '11 ""'m e��y "{ 1 - . � ,. -�.f..... • til'. : •i I F f ItIt: rr I �. „6-li '.-7°- d . .r A. _ IIYY L,,J�•�1 'Yyri� • r1./4 i... .: i .f.: .;-;:e.f„.,...1, i ''-'1i40',el- ''' - ,....7';:::, .8.7:-.4,...7 : Tiiik:J.;-: . : , - ' IWI:.':n r ' . - .A.' ,,i i-S--7,.. 7 I i T '.41*`', ..� i iv � . T8k4a b -I , i - , A " ' ..�.• _ t� • *r". •mac`.':' [� - It.I• 11. 4 ^ -_ R �.3 rl.. A '� r T9_3b ' 1. f '� s #:' " T8•_4Ib f :.+1: , IlliPlijalia e - . F `. •••• ♦•:•••♦• IPA,. i••.• •.`:d: 41j :y 'X € , lir-771; i+:; t s=1'.1 �•�, F lir• •i 1,' '•••••♦ - LICr T8 4d y�r'` r-: s:� ,�'; ��'� .r �ii�* j ••ii*i • . -ANL ••-.4-,.., ilif ww-t -:;_;/. ,,,,-,-....—_,„7,. 1141r16a-•riPer". edir , ly A'r--,...,• , In 1141461 , ft '101/4, M 1 --...1111sp-14 es _ (----.441:--- 11:,- iptutok.114 ,-4Fatillr.1. r. 4 , .- . _,.... 1k .( -441\10.L_ ...1.- IrIL. i f „ell"''1' ,A ' K i �� ` _ ! hp \� � err,� • _ �* _-1, ter � zit* 1 III 4. ' i �� .'�,ye •..1 1w i 5.,. i tjoir fir` i ; , ' r # • , 4:1, 411, ilb s 11. Lk . I 1 )- ,LID '---- :Li / .41 ,, iv t ,-0._ - . -fie _ ....._....1 ) ( \\\ --, __, ,____,,______/,., -N,,, , I. . .ae4/14.40 . IP 114 t_w 44010.0,: 1111.le,;'11111°. :-------------_.-11111"--•------------- N----.------' ..'.------------..... ' JO.` 111111111 - • /1••• 11111717.1„: . (set ritmrido..: . . 4.,---.__.__• , ..--,---.•-:-\: ---- ..,. •::'. 40' -----..._. .-.7 7,'.., ,,,..,,,..41 ,,...,4 ..,,.; , r„._4-.. l'''.V.,,.; :'-'--------___--------7..'''--,,,Ti-..:\.,N----fl..-------. 'r, ...:-..,"::.:'1.'''.:•\ ' _1...4.-. '-----;-..-,:.„,,.1,.,..1_::....r.L;....,4,..."'1;i•r„.,....;:-'.,,i.o.;;•.:-.,.:....„_;_.i.„.....: 7111. .. -11111‘;:' •,.:',.......:•.:.:;:. ...4..,...uit‘,.."111".;11114:11H-4?. i .,. ......._ ___ . ,L4 ,.. . ___•,,,,.,_ r LL • , ......________ 0 •. ..,, Air,:,)...[.... .,A oss\...L.:.. ., it -�Y ''a ..a. 1 (.7, , . . . . .. "f:::.. . ,•-•-,_:. . ••-. Ic.,.... . '., .. ...Niovi ,,,,:•,.,..,,.\\•4.,:.•,.;:•.,•,,,Z r ,/1/7-',/,.____..../._,....: 7.:,,. *.! „..:::.,.1444..1.1.-- .r •i•,'♦ — �•� /..,..= .r .,... , . .. ..,..*:,.4., ---------7-N--v— / 'i ''' :.::'. 47- \\\:----r- N µ ; • j�.l Se.� � 't y ;@, F.�''y, :1: r'. !S p y' i Vii.#:F r • r 44, ei,,,:li!•\•kk.51"..,.: Alf • .4101111h EL' 'Nill; /.. K------ -- ''"-•--:re' . . ' :r. 'rT <1 1—��1 a ' .. I �! 1 '•,i''r "� . Nri.,,, jr t Iry �l �7—It .1! 1*,; tt-,--rte • °N 1 '1 �` - : ;••;: -- a:,t1 .. -'< -. .� �' .. _ r '.� S W-SCIHOh[.'.L-S FERF?YI)RD. — .- a7E._.�i,;, • _ ''' - I . • ''.', • • ''--;Ell ''• :'.4 Itir.••.:-, •••,':.• .."'" „.,.. '.•••-• '.••‘--... ., . . 46 • • • ••.430- - 1610.111.01.1 t n • • • , - .- — ,-' •: . 7, ti),. .. la. ..hini-;,. _i,. ,.1 '• . i:: .''--v-;).1.•,-::ii:i --*Eivir. /- _•- n'.. . ....,4,:.: ir,. .,........„. .. + 1 1.1• �+,� 1 i 2&4 ..# r• Y" �1 i ii,JILA • ) _I) .,•,' Ai '••* 1 . .. em ` •; .fr , 0413,,...t.::.,:-.:.,7::••.' ~:+n . �: . . • ;� _ .�.. rr 036,, ti �, ti. h t (_: i..,:.,_.c..‘,__• _.10.., _ 1 �n y. • �a. I1. ill ' uo - Ito,le! ii;. ..: Wt1.11:.,a,._"ii•,±....:7. - ... . .....,.:.,,,.,., . •,.r, -, ,,.5,......... 4 er.,.,... .• ••• L . ... . _.,..„ • • ,,. .....07.*i. ::. ,-,2. ,, ,,...,r7:.;.,..-,,...,i,L.,4k,,,,:„...,..:.:.:,... a 410.h,til ,. • ._,. ,,, .••., ,.......;..y..A •........., '-1 r.: .4.._ F. EL'..). . ' 7., • - - .., • • 0, • — r . -: L-44V:'1'1' I • ,ri,ii-:H4,*-.!• 4 . . : :_..,....:„. .iv. -,A 14' • 1. Li -A \f-------. 4- 1 '-',..-,,,..........._. • . �_ x�t d h.. • rF T3-2 r ... . ... . •L - :: S • _J ' • li}q J .. �� 7 U71 • • . c ip 1 . Y ± + �) , - `�;yam . µ • �, I ick• �'. ` •I. .y I .3 s .., C►ir J �� NAN . .1.- '..•:.•••;-• . . .. ;-11'3 1 . - 00,•-7: le . ' .• .1. ., •:_ i • ' t''"'t vi.': . -,14.:t.,••. 141110'.. .. • t.. ' -W i ,, .1- . ., ,.; , ' , 1 t.,-L-. Mr ./ ., _• .„ , . p. , .k.:Iii.,-:..• ', ,,, (1 1 ! , -.:r . . ...,. .. '!Vr'' . '..4..: '% '•./• • . .' • ..f.t.i, . •' . - j • i ttqA• '7' .P1• .. •. ....' • . ill • \ • .:1141111110--- X1RIE ...: 1 • F' 7 •V r. ti"!� F • ° _ f .` ' r'� t p�as'tIr;:• G Inti tr r n u y f �' 'I .i. '41 ` 7:.:.t...:4.:, t.• irt k-_____. • r. � 4.:.:'..t6 5.- TSC River Terrace West and South Legend N =Existing Subbasin Natural Resource Buffers Figure 3A: -IF' Overland Flow Direction Existing Regional Stormwater Facilities a 1,600 10 ft.Contour Line —Major Roads Feet Existing Drainage Sensitive Areas --Streams Significant Wetlands Basin Diagram (West) Inventoried Wetlands ctak Data fila map IS from Washington County a Metro's —/, RLIS database.This information wag developed at muidpl e scales and accliradas.No warranty Is made with this map. Dacunern Pan'UPujech1950019544,:-.4:.0.n.u,........01_Roure__Wdeled em knVrq Oats:501112021 _ _ r �► , ........,-,„„„:77.: E„,—. --•.,--.;.,„,,,,i ms's'' 74F410$111-0. : -4...7.,,-;,.. .... x7 7.. . 4•N1 9 : " *cC ,• ' ,,. r 5:1 i' l --..1,4_:5: ,6t � 4 yb ;,, y • It: ' t P' • _ - .� . 44,' ` Jl" i .I � , l. . ' , _ �"„it: ' ' f9 4. . _ ,-.„, .0*.-_•':',.. , , -44.v. r. .- - V 1 Iiiiiivirir ., _ 1.. _ IV lair" ,.+ tr.* , . ,,- .....",10 .-,. kit -4,,,,...41 •• r Atc. '''''. ;,..ii—ti ler 11114w. i.'" ' =- . - A' . -I. - • . -e'• ;r-•,- r ''.,,' . ' 4' •41ini - - - .. ig.; 4 jt • _‘ , tilt,' •i i:, ' • . ,,-- , if t VSIVI •' 1-2 '1; r 1LG1 +i�p :: � tit.:f M.I. y.• :'I .;i' •,FF •r: ore. ' . 1-pit ��{1,��Ik - ' ... .__ N _.,,,,,,.. . • • ' ' --r'' ' '4.' - irtatAdowtE,..4-7-- . ..,, 7 . t:fk_ ��` '� Y. l7r'► Ut'it• .�'> ''- �,•• I — f� it. • .,"--'' .k olilot_.. , . , 13 A � ryy [ �, - i-. *jr`.. -1 r_ .. 116-4.146..!" --- c, +rr � ; _ . 11 '. • T9..,3 -T11 2 .jam e... lir x _ y t I . - ....a ... - ,'*..., . i i." -tiiiiiiir:, '1/4 Aio., ttits ,..,,,,,,,,,,, • .--,- 0•-, . ..134=0 ,•;,,, :, , __________,. _,,,-\\___ . . .. .4, 1 • / --4 , .1 d - kj ' OF . \I ' -Li I e.4449, ..),e,r ft l71-4firf-' . Ilk,.•fv::'''.74:'%frraill -11VIK 444 41.:: "Hai ' . iiki .. . i li ,«. 4 r/ ..,e,r ,.::/:04 . , ..... . . 11,11 4- . . 1111r eill'h. / , iir re- 414:4 ii �% r rte" 6i x Il li t 23 ail a .. I ; 1 I$ r Off, 7. 0 i .1 'i 1111" '•T7 3 - 1 ti _ 1T9112 Orle4 ;,.....:. • .,_ - it ', . ' . ' - ‘ N Oft . - Fil y y .Q0.' ',,-:k r i ':y, �»• ' .. ;fir -- } 'I�j\-F =v' .j� i.- z iiikt.N.N.F.\ . V. .. •-: I.i tl • BmT_I ,t ..:,400,. .. .... •, 07./ , 1 - __ - ..,... ,, . _ "ya y 4 / F 4.Vi.ithilia ' . iiik,, '5f:ilk r: OP4 _ ww ` AO%', . /' f • fri ', 044-, d z - -0'5. ,s t .� ,A,11EE :rr .r y „ 'tr.$b .--_________-4--4.A _.. ,,,... -. ___.., =-, . „.3.-4, ...4.--•.:,,-, , .... .!: -_/ , it= 4.,4„.,,,,,,,. .._________„. . , L.r-.' 7 .:. :,I,' T8 1 - _._ . -\S , ,,, . r \.___..,, . ''.-,- C .,.. .., r. ----r. 1 - .. - s;: - ` 7' "•� 51" — .l ;/ - !•fit. - .i.,.,.- ,,-,P.,, , -. I -:.- 'ir''''' - '''.1! ' - >-<'--7--'''- - - _,-:,_,;-''' . ilt . . , : • of •4 .. .T River Terrace West and South Legend N =Existing Subbasin Existing Drainageway A Figure 3B: Overland Flow Direction Tualatin River 0 1,800 =MO MEM OEM 10 ft.Contour Line M Existing Regional Stormwater Facilities 4 Existing Drainage Sensitive Areas — Feet Streams Inventoried Wetlands Basin Diagram (South) —Major Roads Otak Data on this map Is from Washington County and Metro's -_„ RLIS database.This Information was developed at muldpla scales and accuracies.No warranty Is mads wtth this map Dac.mari Pan:L'Wm,ec510500H9d901MADD3IS+MW1sl1e6F_Figure-7-updated epnr Rmuny Oats:511212021 FERRY Rp v OLLS SMB�- SW SCH10 ' '''r """ illiir _ 1 1:1:5ac ppm.. ,=smrismarsr ININIMMININI1111111111 hE'lli'mm.4.'IME NE M.--- II------C-1E IIMININE MI I\ .It , . ., . .......0e.:•• •,,„,„,. , ... . ....„, .... - . • . . \ ..,. • 1 _ ' .i.....1..f.(.. ',-,ki,....,.,::,..,.,,:::i.,...:,..:... t._ 'T .,,: .• ., 4Y. ,.::,:.ii..:...:.:0. ,. .-.,..:,.',....,,,..t..,iite: ....,,.,...''''''''''''''''''' I::: �# 1F bar�i Sj , AT :.:;_.....' :I:Li ..;,..s"5,.1,4`4,..•••4".....,-,:. :. ,:is..„. t �.� � .....: _:iv. Th __` 6.� r � : . . -•� Sac t,' , . ' . 6 Sac :i...;.:._.. - 4-. __` fi- .' r 0..' .,:.:.:...-...::::..:it'',11,15'.'-'i.. .;.:-.•..::.- t:" 9a � .7ji-:1-1-:::./,/..,,,,,:.:..:,,,:.:, r \-- s :;,-.. _ ,,, s.iT2 5a 65.5ac a°t ' 1 - ( 04B ,..7.:.::......J.,1-„:'.1:::-'.,:,.:1 . AIM 1 Vitt .-: .:'•r• • ' .,71:3' ' '.'' '.:*%.'• .,•*........ '.7 • r. \-f__ • �yvt� -- - .. 11.11jW_ ..� _} v T24c �� 5.7 04A L :.A ; ` ��46apm.c 03B dej ,4 iftr, v. „ •,.... 2, t - T2-5b__ z 19.7ac W T 4 'II Iirengeigm —. --- --___ . N NioNiilys. . .iii.",. .w....,.J.,......,......v.:400: -; - - .--? ''. ' 1....11:-b-i- ii. . - �r2 _ i 0 119.1ac T3.•1 d 0 k 11.9ac 41' T73.. \ r. 08 77a2cc . • % f., .1 : ni. 4.�. 7'' 1- — : /4.,. .--- 10 T3 la ilk • ti , - L. ' 1..T3 2a : II 4. 1,9r3ac • Q1 ac` • • . . ... ........_.,-.. :. t } p.y - 1 IL.... / -•ti'r ..^ - is.f ll • T3 b Tr4_2b� 1114.6ac .. -. 6 14.2ac 10 -„,..:r-; • III ,0. o III ,;f 01 .:,5 F .. ''• •• lip) I` w. T4 3an IlL , .:.,..::,.!.- ,L14-1. . IOW- NW iriaLimi ...._(....,4614,0011111111 I ` ..T.,„„_ EA4b� ,17.3a.4 River Terrace West and South Legend 1_1 River Terrace West Sensitive Areas Stormwater Conveyance Streams iii//A Significant Wetlands rte— Closed Conveyance Figure 5D: 1/iiii/ Inventoried Wetlands -I- Open Conveyance Major Roads Stormwater Concept Plan o Proposed Subbasins Natural Resource Buffers Regional Stormwater Facility i—i Water Quality and Quantity-Strategy A Diagram (Strategy Area West) ”' Overland Flow Direction Preserve Existing Storage-Strategy B 10 ft. Contour LineN i—i Water Quantity Only-Strategy B Otak A 500 0 500 %A\ Data on this map is from Washington County and Metro's RLIS database.This information was developed at multiple Feet scales and accuracies. No warranty is made with this man noting Oate',5/l/202r i"w,i"aa,..nuu,.a"'uw.ua"v _ro --y . y I ./.....71THEin. T1 113_1b46\ 1 T4 4a 29ac A!Illep T4 4b' f • •7.7ac�le: ,!I �^ �' 17.3ac 1Ips _ '}.. :� :-1 �/ I , f 12 . fairr, ' , _y..Vr . 4b� I J - • I ti ..,•• 4p...- .. It /iii; "-..&' : 70=0 .;:_ / 1 I {. � ; , 4- l lac � ' w27.9a, ?P' r :,?';•1e-11.‘ ."‘•;" - : , - - `•ao•� a % �� 1: .,--"'k:r. "-... .=. . . . . _ T =5a -- T5_6b �` T8_,-- ,• ....- ..,-,. , 4a ;, / _ 1 ,�7ac - f19:9ac = – . tilt gll 1 ,,,� K 1. _i 25 tr .I--i 1 . ., liti.:12,i..! % .::* : JQT6l380L?Ili ` ill . , 3 h• , . . . : / „ ,,....._•:, ,,, ,!iv... - • - *5 ir J 8 47 Y_ . / : .„ ra .• T , ./ -I---7 s %%ce / 14 Sac - Al T9 3b ` a A. 19\-lac B q ii ; � •i • F� \ '' I M iI f ti 7 ; ;T9_4 - T',33 ,,�•• / ,:1 g i I;Iii h 99 13 lac ./. ;i 1 `11.8ac +� , i�i� T8"3a kit / �j� .e /�� 1 1 \ ,� I :I 1,1 ,.: ::,,,,E.yar,t , �`x'- ;� •ir :� Ili, 10_3 . t. � ippiripleiliNide .. .. � t \ � WQ103a om � �1/713 ac M . ..v T6 L 22a ��y °. m 37.2 a 99.2ac ,. \ T9_2a • �� I4017 T8 2a .�i :. •, , 1 -N/� 42.441 51t- .* '� 4. '.r. - i 4.' e sI1 52acA 1WB?EJEdRD& �i�411 ��• • 'L�� . •�•�41 Y - - - - / ii. , 40 I _ �j I cz z .:... I I i•I I I I r:1 „ii i. , - - I''.c°1maRaj‘.111111114//- 1 I \il/II y - O 0 O , cX - 07 C)-------\ /---\ - 1 Legend River Terrace West and South , River Terrace South Sensitive Areas Stormwater Conveyance o Proposed Subbasins 1/////A Inventoried Wetlands •4– Closed Conveyance; Figure 5E: Streams Natural Resource Buffers + Open Conveyance Stormwater Concept Plan Major Roads — Existing Drainageway Regional Stormwater Facility iii Water Quality and Quantity-Strategy A Diagram (Strategy Area South) ~01.:. Overland Flow Direction lifil Preserve Existing Storage-Strategy B 10 ft. Contour LineN i—i Water Quantity Only-Strategy B Otak n 500 0 500 //„ /VM=M= Data on this map is from Washington County and Metro's Feet RLIS database.This information was developed at multiplE scales and accuracies. No warranty is made with this man Znhng Dale'15/]/2021 V Q Z A<<'QA� OR m N SWT WHEE Z r SW SCHOLLS FERRY I I ., SWB , . . • ► SW ONEILL C'l S RD r SW FRIENDLY LN Q w .14." Z SV' LUKE LN U DTR. E ,R L 1-4. -- Q1. J h S N FIR REE Al'R Q u cvo _� - 1 h S N BRISTL=CONE WAY \ SWEDI G L NDEW DR CO ST AHL DR � ISU' SW TUSCA.•IY ST ct i Z S14 MILA1 S7 j - W U) S BAKER LN illCC I st U) cC 0 = s y, cn O `tet° ' �di>, CC Cl) 1 W L SW COLONY PR o O i to p - SD✓B LLMOUNTAII�lRD ti I `n 1 V) ' J ',.�- SW RAY LAP' Cl) W i 3 p Q FII K'4LB r SW BURGUNDY ST t--- = r . 1 L s [ / CABERNETtF? vi SW'SgPHt LN , .----JZ 1\-- U u) IlL : ii cn I r- NIIIII . i Z : ,, - : :. 1 ' U) i W LASICH LN . O r iN , , Q 0 SW BEEF BEND RD zr (,) LEGEND N 0 2,000 West Bull Mountain Planning Area West Bull Mountain Study Area n N Feet Soil Infiltration FIGURE 1 INCH EQUALS 800 FEET SOIL INFILTRATION i Good Potential Fair Potential Poor Potential Data on this map is from Washington County and Metro's RLIS database.This information was developed at multiple File:J:1M-A10tak11lOtak-31-01\Revised Figures\Olak-31-01-F5.mxd Printing Date:4/17/2009 00 712009 9 Water scales and accuracies. No warranty is made with this map. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT PRICE MI REGIONAL STORMWATER FACILITIESIIIt TOTALS _L_____20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 MOBILIZATION 10% $184,317 $88,257 $173,637 $88,627 $436,417 $199,257 $16,690 $100,490 $47,783 $105,863 $56,080 $13,756 $58,891 $121,114 $101,175 $1,792,355 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL 2% $36,863 $17,651 $34,727 $17,725 $87,283 $39,851 $3,338 $20,098 $9,557 $21,173 $11,216 $2,751 $11,778 $24,223 $20,235 $358,471 TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL 2% $36,863 $17,651 $34,727 $17,725 $87,283 $39,851 $3,338 $20,098 $9,557 $21,173 $11,216 $2,751 $11,778 $24,223 $20,235 $358,471 EXCAVATION&GRADING CY $20 $383,418 $173,633 $359,981 $174,434 $940,141 $416,233 $21,445 $200,181 $86,516 $211,862 $104,250 $15,580 $110,276 $204,200 $167,869 $3,570,021 AMENDED SOIL CY $40 $139,083 $59,853 $130,153 $60,151 $353,674 $151,609 $5,262 $69,761 $27,847 $74,136 $34,273 $3,428 $36,471 $0 $0 $1,145,701 ESTABLISHMENT ENT RING& $175,000 $454,634 $214,375 $428,007 $215,304 $1,080,476 $491,856 $32,253 $245,100 $112,177 $258,578 $133,220 $24,505 $140,336 $391,074 $323,347 $4,545,242 ESTABLISHMENT IRRIGATION AC BIODEGRADABLE GEOTEXTILE SY $6 $75,443 $35,574 $71,025 $35,728 $179,297 $81,620 $5,352 $40,673 $18,615 $42,909 $22,107 $4,066 $23,288 $64,896 $53,657 $754,250 3"RIVER ROCK CY $50 $43,463 $18,704 $40,673 $18,797 $110,523 $47,378 $1,645 $21,800 $8,702 $23,167 $10,710 $1,071 $11,397 $40,017 $32,684 $430,732 PRE-TREATMENT DEVICE EA $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $180,000 DITCH INLET EA $1,800 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 $54,000 MAINTENANCE ACCESS ROAD SF $5 $32,140 I $21,600 $31,140 $21,650 $50,360 $33,490 $7,460 $23,200 $15,210 $23,870 $16,710 $6,310 $17,190 $30,300 $27,470 $358,100 FLOW CONTROL MANHOLE EA $12,000 $12,000 I $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $180,000 24 INCH STORM SEW PIPE,10 FT LF $70 $3,500 I $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 $52,500 ENERGY DISSIPATER OUTFALL EA 500 $500 I $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $7,500 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY 30% $425,348 $203,670 $400,701 $204,523 $1,007,117 $459,824 $38,515 $231,901 $110,269 $244,299 $129,415 $31,746 $135,901 $279,494 $233,482 $4,136,203 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS I I $1,843,175 $882,569 $1,736,371 $886,265 $4,364,172 $1,992,570 $166,897 $1,004,904 $477,832 $1,058,629 $560,796 $137,565 $588,906 $1,211,141 $1,011,754 $17,923,545 I PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING 25% $460,794 I $220,642 I $434,093 I $221,566 I $1,091,043 $498,142 I $41,724 $251,226 $119,458 $264,657 $140,199 $34,391 $147,226 $302,785 $252,939 $4,480,886 PERMITTING 5% $92,159 $44,128 $86,819 $44,313 $218,209 $99,628 $8,345 $50,245 $23,892 $52,931 $28,040 $6,878 $29,445 $60,557 $50,588 $896,177 CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING 20% $368,635 $176,514 $347,274 $177,253 $872,834 $398,514 $33,379 $200,981 $95,566 $211,726 $112,159 $27,513 $117,781 $242,228 $202,351 $3,584,709 TOTAL(WITH ENGINEERING& $2,764,762 $1323 854 $2604,556 $1329 398 $6 546 258 $2 988 855 $250 346 $1 507 356 $716 748 $1587 944 $841 195 $206 347 $883 358 $1 816 711 $1517 631 IPERMITTING) > > > > > > > > > , , , , , , , , , , , , , $26,885, LAND/EASEMENT ACQUISITION** $6.00 � $678,990 I $320,166 I $639,222 I $321,554 I $1,613,676 I $734,580 I $48,169 I $366,054 I $167,534 I $386,182 I $198,962 $36,598 $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 ( I $209,590 I $584,064 I $482,914 $6,788,254 STAFFING COSTS LS 1 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 I $20,000 $20,000 $300,000 APPRAISAL COSTS LS 1 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $75,000 TOTAL IMPLEMENTATION I $3,468,752 $1,669,020 $3,268,778 $1,675,951 $8,184,934 $3,748,435 $323,515 $1,898,410 $909,283 $1,999,126 $1,065,157 $267,945 $1,117,948 $2,425,775 $2,025,545 $34,048,572 I L:\Project\19500\19599\ProjectDocs\CostEstim\FinalDesign-SMP_Update-21_0304 3/15/2021 Regional Stormwater Infrastructure Quantity Calculations ITEM DESCRIPTION I UNIT I AMOUNT I WATER QUALITY AND DETENTION POND m 20 I 21 22 I 23 I 24 I 25 I 26 I 27 I 28 I 29 I 30 I 31 I 32 I 33 I 34 EXCAVATION&GRADING CY 163,725 19171 8682 17999 8722 47007 20812 1072 6446 2415 10593 5212 779 5514 5105 4197 AMENDED SOIL CY 26,202 3477 1496 3254 1504 8842 3790 132 0 0 1853 857 86 912 0 0 LANDSCAPE PLANTING& AC 28 2.60 1.23 2.45 1.23 6.17 2.81 0.18 2.80 1.08 1.48 0.76 0.14 0.80 2.23 1.85 ESTABLISHMENT IRRIGATION BIODEGRADABLE GEOTEXTILE SY 134,646 12574 5929 11837 5955 29883 13603 892 13572 5247 7152 3684 678 3881 10816 8943 3"RIVER ROCK CY 9,390 869 374 813 376 2210 948 33 1018 368 463 214 21 228 800 654 PRE-TREATMENT DEVICE EA 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 DITCH INLET EA 30 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 MAINTENANCE ACCESS ROAD SF 74,914 6428 4320 6228 4330 10072 6698 1492 6810 4166 4774 3342 1262 3438 6060 5494 FLOW CONTROL MANHOLE EA 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 24 INCH STORM SEW PIPE,10 FT LF 750 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ENERGY DISSIPATER OUTFALL LS 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \\pdx-ae.otak.com\proj\Project\19500\19599\ProjectDocs\CostEstim\FinalDesign-SMP_Update-21_0223 STM-Quantities 2/24/2021 • , . 162' ' • 'Li illFS- �'� ��• 1 P I SLI �,Y kr J+ yas a..i-iie,.. , " —i,4,404.il*.4 . - - 1 .., ' - •.•'''.- 4 4 4 L - . •ie. ..itV. Zall ..,Ak- Irt4 , }�`r7flrr • 1 I r„ I r 1 +w,r Ono 1w I r #"iitir ''� * 2 1, F1,0. 1 }� `. + i 'lid I 5 s,#i. tk..1., -�y , {N. n �Ye �n * AO's a�i 1 '7Aorfi. , , . ,j. ; . * 0 I ' b 17' 7 •ftiik - _. a : • . 'al W r'14 ••• M �:._ 'r ` lk h.. ''"?"- +`4L '1 ... ,. riT•i-..:.. 4 it.' •Y M 1• s w ' h= . . --4.. ¢'; I rte- t., #- *, f J,�7' i, ,, •i.,. ." _# NM Le F-p[. gm= Ai% - fl PrP:{ .. i T f' y r.•. 'a. �� -AY.'. -t, tri . F�, �+ram+ .+.a -1.- I-1 MEP 1 err r " t 1i • ,; ali r` *. -- • ib ~4.,,,V,.1:11t +. . lm' } • n, ' f ;' 5 :� 01 - d "'k" a. at ' 4.', 'a # II I' # i+*.'' 4 -. Ati'“4,-..ii--, .. -0- , . . . (1„,s, - 4 _ . il Srti I SIJ" f- -.' 4r x qr ' VI '4144 r I• ,i .i r 7 t.�'F .„ ti VA" ....norbf:iiil .,„." flo_flr i . . ,, , ..... , .... „_ .. , .NW I '-• 4 .144101%444/=1._ __7_ __. - - or ... 14_ --- - ; ' ,, i 1. 011,15-4g.4 --- ' r . .,a IIIP 0-•-_.%lc , stS #r .'..- 1 • it i r" 11- 11"° a• � �: ' i' i ire a '• .• + J s r .fir•, Ei ! ' '1k1 ?`, < re rt I' r . ....4. ri; .. , . .4 itor .....Ar . •.1. a n • 1 a . re r -- '11 . vi '11 411. . • ... 4.N., � �t�• VI`y+ . ' J � fly '• ' + '4 - ?' 1 1= Jai ,�' ,—.1-...,_ !1 h 4 1... .J ; + 1Q..y-';-3" ' y i ti4 iT r ' '_I. �, t-'RFT { I' ' +' # ,t' • ./ Y #• J 1 . '1 � :, ' • alp : ...N,,,tk..,.., li a _`r _:, "�r t,..0_, . ,'�� --ION, �a� •r L rJSI ; .1 s:' •f 4 4. ' V, .-. * k' ,t '' �, .�« - v. / 5'' . .iL � fh .1",.-.,' I "�►, � �; 111 �r.-N River Terrace 2.0 Concept Plan Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Date April 4, 2021 To Serah Breakstone, Otak From Brian Vanneman and Sam Brookham, Leland Consulting Group Introduction The City of Tigard has initiated a Concept Plan for River Terrace 2.0,two urban reserve areas to the west and south of the current River Terrace 1.0 area. Concept planning provides a high-level vision for how these areas are expected to develop and connect with the rest of the city. It is the first step in a three-step process for planning for these areas. The City anticipates that the Concept Plan will result in a vision for a complete neighborhood,with a range of housing opportunities, accessible parks and open space, diverse transportation options, supportive commercial services and employment opportunities, and the needed infrastructure to support development.The Concept Plan is led by Otak, Inc. In order for River Terrace 2.0(the"plan area")to develop in a manner consistent with community goals and market potential,the study area's +/- 500 acres will require a variety of new infrastructure.This memorandum summarizes the significant public infrastructure that has been recommended by the Concept Plan team (including transportation, parks, stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water) and a preliminary funding strategy for that infrastructure.This preliminary funding strategy will be refined further as planning for River Terrace 2.0 becomes more detailed, and in particular in the Community Plan phase,which will follow adoption of the Concept Plan. Contents This document is organized as follows: Background and Context 2 Transportation 7 Parks 11 Stormwater 16 Sanitary Sewer 18 Water 19 Appendices 21 112 LELAND CONSULTING GROUP People Places Prosperity I www.lelandconsulting.com 610 SW Alder Street,Suite 1200,Portland,Oregon 97205 1503.222.1600 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Background and Context Infrastructure Types As stated above, this funding analysis considers five types of infrastructure, which are shown below, along with the River Terrace team member that led the preparation of the infrastructure plans and cost estimates: • Transportation DKS Associates • Parks &Trails Otak Inc. • Stormwater Otak Inc. • Sanitary Sewer Murraysmith • Water Murraysmith This analysis draws extensively on the River Terrace (1.0) Funding Strategy, completed in December 2014, by FCS Group, and includes some references to that study. Other sources, such as the City of Tigard's current budgets and Capital Improvement Plan documents, are also referenced. The cost figures shown in this report are intended to reflect estimated total project costs, including construction costs (or"hard costs");design and engineering; administration;and land acquisition/right of way. In some cases (e.g.,water projects within existing right of way), there are no right of way costs.The cost estimates used in this analysis were developed by other consultants (DKS Associates, Otak, and Murraysmith) and therefore LCG cannot guarantee their accuracy. Except where otherwise noted, all cost figures are in 2021 dollars. Purpose of a funding strategy In some cases—for example, when a relatively small property is controlled by a single property owner/developer—there is no need for a concept plan or a funding strategy that takes into account a range of infrastructure investments to be made by a range of public agencies and private developers. In that example, the developer is likely to take the lead, ideally at little or no cost to the public sector. However, a funding strategy is warranted for this plan area,for a number of reasons: • Complexity and clarity. Property ownership in the River Terrace 2.0 area is fragmented and controlled by numerous different private owners; it is likely to be developed by numerous developers in the future. In addition, multiple jurisdictions will be involved in regulating,funding, building, and maintaining the infrastructure.These include the City of Tigard, Washington County, and Clean Water Services, and may include other agencies such as King City, Metro, and ODOT. Given the range of parties involved,there is a benefit to clarifying how infrastructure will be paid for and provided. • Potential fiscal impacts to the City and other public agencies. It is prudent for the City and other public agencies to understand the infrastructure investments that will be expected of them. • Planning requirement. Metro's Title 11 Functional Plan requires that areas added to the UGB include"provision(s) for financing of local and state public facilities and services." Page 2 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Infrastructure Scales This funding strategy divides infrastructure into the four general infrastructure scales that are summarized in the table below.These categories generally correspond to the"service area" of the infrastructure—i.e., the geographical area in which existing or new households or businesses will generate demand for the infrastructure—and are arranged from smallest to largest service area below. Leland Consulting Group (LCG) recommends that the costs of infrastructure generally be allocated to the beneficiaries of the infrastructure within the service area.Thus,the cost of infrastructure that benefits a large area (e.g.,Washington County)would be spread over a large area,while the cost of infrastructure that benefits a small area (e.g., a local street), would be allocated just to the developers of the adjacent property. Inf. Scale Description Who pays? Example While local and subdistrict infrastructure are important, they are not the focus of this analysis. Local • Local or on-site infrastructure is located on or Private A local road Infrastructure sometimes adjacent to a property and usually serves developer and/or 8"water the subdivision or other development that will be pipe. completed by single developer/property owner. • This infrastructure may include transportation, sanitary sewer,water, or stormwater infrastructure. Local infrastructure is typically of the minimum size required by the city for project approval (e.g., a local street cross section, or 8-inch sewer or water pipe). Subdistrict • Some infrastructure benefits numerous properties, but Typically, Water quality and Infrastructure an area that is much smaller than the entire plan area. multiple quantity We refer to this as "subdistrict" scale infrastructure. private detention ponds developers; ("regional • A good example is the 15 water quality and quantity reimbursement stormwater detention ponds (or"regional stormwater facilities") districts may facilities") that are proposed for River Terrace 2.0. be used. • In many cases, one or more developers that control large areas will build this infrastructure, and then work with the appropriate public agency to create a reimbursement district that enables them to be paid back over time by other nearby developers who make use of the infrastructure and develop later. • In some cases,the City or other public agency may take the lead by building subdistrict infrastructure and creating reimbursement districts in order to be paid back later.This is a more pro-development approach and can be employed by public agencies when they see a larger public benefit to their involvement or want to "jump start"development. Page 3 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy District and Major infrastructure are the primary focus of this analysis. District • District infrastructure serves residents and businesses Public agency Collector Roads Infrastructure in the entire plan area and is fundamental to the or private such as achievement of the plan vision. It is also usually larger developer(s); If Mountainside and more costly than "subdistrict" and "local" private Way and Bull infrastructure. developer(s), Mountain Road. The collector roads proposed for the plan area are developers • Community and examples of district infrastructure.These collector typically Neighborhood roads have additional transportation and design receive credit Parks. features that go beyond those in local roads—they for the cost of benefit all future residents and businesses who will oversized locate in the plan area. components. • An important concept for district infrastructure is the "oversize" cost.This is the difference between the typical local infrastructure costs (e.g., a local road), and the cost of the district infrastructure (e.g., a collector road). Since all developers will be required to build and pay for local infrastructure to serve their properties, it is the oversize cost that is typically credited back to developers who build district infrastructure. • District infrastructure is a primary focus of this funding strategy because a) it is not always clear what party will pay for and build the infrastructure, b) it is important to equitably allocate these larger costs among multiple parties, and c) unduly burdening some developers with a much greater share of costs can significantly reduce the financial feasibility of developing their land, lead them to delay or forgo development, and prevent the plan from being achieved. Major • Major infrastructure typically serves residents and Public Improvements to Infrastructure businesses in a large area that extends well beyond agencies SW Roy Rogers the plan area, for example, to the City, County, or even Road and Beef region. Bend Road. • These improvements may be within the plan area but are also often adjacent to or outside the plan area ("off-sites"). • For this reason, major off-site infrastructure is almost always funded by a public agency, such as the City, County, or special district (e.g., Clean Water Services). • Major infrastructure is often indirectly paid for by developers, residents, and businesses within the plan area via development fees (e.g., Systems Development Charges or SDCs), monthly utility fees, or other fees Page 4 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy and charges.The benefit of these fees and charges is that they have the potential to spread the costs of major projects equitably among many households and businesses, and over many years. Plan Context As shown in the figure below, the Concept Plan for River Terrace 2.0 is not a carbon copy of River Terrace 1.0.While the gross size of both areas is similar(about 500 acres), significantly more dwelling units and commercial and employment area are planned for River Terrace 2.0. In addition, the types of dwelling units are expected to be more diverse—a larger share of housing units such as cottage clusters, duplexes, and triplexes, rowhouses, etc. are planned, in order to provide housing that is affordable to Tigard residents at a range of income levels. From an infrastructure funding point of view, this is likely to be positive, as the cost of infrastructure can be shared across more homes and businesses. Figure 1. River Terrace 1.0 and 2.0: Plan Metrics Comparison RT 1.0 RT 2.0 Change Gross Area +/- 500 ac. +/- 500 ac. - Total Dwelling Units 2,587 4,547 76% Commercial &Emp. Building Area 40,000 265,000 563% Source:Urbsworks, Leland Consulting Group, FCS Group.All RT 1.0 figures are from RT 1.0 Funding Plan. The commercial and employment areas shown are an average between the low and high scenarios. Page 5 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Residential development.As shown below,this analysis assumes a 10% residential "underbuild"—the same percentage that was used for the River Terrace 1.0 funding plan. So,while more than 4,500 dwelling units are planned for the area, this analysis assumes about 4,090 are actually built, in order to make the projections of fees, taxes, and other public revenues more conservative compared to the public revenues that would be received if all planned development is built. An additional consideration is that builders of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are currently exempt from paying Tigard's transportation and parks SDCs, in order to maximize the affordability of these units.ADU builders do pay other fees, such as the Washington County Transportation Development Tax (TDT) and Clean Water Services fees. In order to be conservative, this funding analysis assumes that Tigard's current ADU SDC exemption continues during buildout of River Terrace 2.0, and that therefore no City of Tigard transportation or parks SDCs or supplemental fees are received from these units during buildout. Figure 2.Total Residential Units by Type and Adjusted Units Assuming Underbuild Total Housing Units Total Under- Adjusted Unit Type Units Build Units Cottage cluster 1,909 10% 1,718 Duplex 319 10% 287 Triplex 544 10% 490 Quads 625 10% 563 Garden rowhouse 130 10% 117 Urban rowhouse 208 10% 187 Courtyard unit 320 10% 288 ADU 397 10% 357 Single detached house 95 10% 86 Total 4,547 4,093 ADU Units 357 Units that Pay Tigard Transp.and Parks SDCs 3,736 Total 4,093 Residential absorption. Residential and commercial development will take place over time.The pace of this build out is often called an "absorption" rate in real estate development. LCG reviewed five years of development at River Terrace 1.0, between 2016 and 2020 (through August 2020), as well as the projections made for the River Terrace 1.0 plan. During the four years for which we have complete data, 155 homes per year sold in River Terrace. During the years 2017 to 2019,when home building in River Terrace 1.0 was fully underway, 189 homes per year sold.Assuming a buildout of 155 homes per year for River Terrace 2.0 and a 10% underbuild, the area would take 26 years to build out.Assuming a buildout of 189 homes per year and a 10% underbuild, the area would take 22 years to build out.Therefore, LCG recommends that the City assume that most or all of the area will build out within about 25 years once the area is annexed,zoned, and otherwise shovel ready. Commercial and employment development.As shown below and based on the Commercial and Employment Market Analysis completed by LCG, we expect that the River Terrace Concept Plan will allow between 240,000 and 290,000 square feet of commercial and employment space.As shown below,the midpoint between the low and high is 265,000 square feet.This funding analysis assumes a 50%commercial/employment"underbuild" due to the more speculative nature of commercial and employment development in this location.This results in a reasonable projection of about 130,000 square feet of development, or one grocery anchored center and one"unanchored" commercial center for the area.The River Terrace 1.0 funding plan assumed a 100% underbuild; i.e., it assumed no commercial construction.The timing of commercial and employment development is more unpredictable than residential development and none of this development should be expected before year 10 of buildout. Page 6 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Estimated Under- Adjusted SF Build SF Commercial 165,000 50% 82,500 Employment 100,000 50% 50,000 Total 265,000 132,500 Additional detail about the amount and type of homes, commercial and employment space proposed for River Terrace 2.0 is shown in the appendices. Transportation Transportation Projects and Costs The transportation projects and costs prepared by DKS Associates for River Terrace 2.0 are shown below.The projects are grouped into three categories, consistent with the framework of infrastructure scales described above. The developer-built projects are local projects;their size (e.g., right of way width) is no larger than that required as a condition of approval, and they do not require any unusually costly components, such as a bridge. District projects are shown next.These have an "oversize" component:they either have a wider right of way (and therefore greater cost of construction, land, and other costs), more expensive design features, or a special feature such as a bridge. Major projects are shown last.These projects are all within right of way controlled by Washington County. On average, DKS projects that transportation demand (trips) generated by River Terrace 2.0 will make up about 9% of all trips in these arterial roads and intersections;the remaining 91%of transportation demand will come from travelers from around the county and perhaps beyond.These projects should be guided by the Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP) Bonding Cost-sharing Program for high-growth residential areas that is guided by the County and local cities.' 1 https://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/TransportationFunding/costsharingtransportationprogram.cfm• https://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/TransportationFunding/upload/MSTI P-High-Growth-Project-List-Draft-06-05-15.pdf Page 7 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 3.Transportation Projects Project Project Delivery Project Name Project ROW Bridge? # Type Width 5 Developers Build Extend SW Sabrina Avenue 2-lane neighborhood road 56 6 Improve SW Vandermost Road 2-lane neighborhood road 56 9 Extend SW Woodhue Street west 2-lane neighborhood road 56 10 Extend SW Lasich Lane 2-lane neighborhood road 56 11 Extend SW Elsner Road 2-lane neighborhood road 56 23 Extend SW Jean Louise Road west 2-lane collector,residential 56 A2 Developers Build Extend SW Mountainside Way 3-lane collector,commercial 72 A3 Receive Credit Extend SW Mountainside Way 2-lane collector,residential 56 Yes A4 For Oversize Extend SW Mountainside Way 2-lane collector,residential 56 Yes 7 Improve SW Bull Mountain Road 3-lane collector,commercial 72 8 Extend SW River Terrace Boulevard 3-lane collector,RT Blvd Design 61 14 Improve SW Beef Bend Road 3-lane County arterial 72 15 Improve SW 150th Avenue 3-lane collector,residential 68 12 Washington County Improve SW Scholls Ferry Road 5-lane County arterial 0 13 Improve SW Roy Rogers Road 5-lane County arterial 96 16 Improve the SW Roy Rogers Road Improve Intersection 0 17 Improve SW Roy Rogers Road intersection Improve Intersection 0 18 Improve SW Roy Rogers Road intersection Improve Intersection 0 19 Improve SW Bull Mountain Road intersection Improve Intersection 50 20 Improve SW Beef Bend Road intersection Improve Intersection 50 21 Improve SW Beef Bend Road intersection Improve Intersection 50 22 Improve the SW Beef Bend Road intersection Improve Intersection 50 Source:DKS Associates, Leland Consulting Group. Funding Sources The proposed sources of funding for transportation projects are shown below. Developers are expected to pay the total cost of all local projects out of pocket. For district projects, developers are also expected to pay the total cost of all projects. LCG recommends an area-specific, River Terrace 2.0 transportation supplemental fee or SDC be put in place to cover local oversize costs.This is comparable to the practice in River Terrace 1.0,where transportation SDCs (and some other SDC5) are higher than those in the rest of the City in order to pay for district-wide infrastructure.The additional transportation charges to developers of River Terrace 2.0 are referred to here as a supplemental fee based on City input, as the methodology used to calculate SDCs may vary from a supplemental fee. Developers who make district/oversized infrastructure improvements would receive credits in the amount of the oversized costs they pay against the River Terrace supplemental fees, and therefore would pay lower(or sometimes no) supplemental fees. The cost and implementation of the major transportation improvements will be determined in more detail by Washington County, the City of Tigard, and potentially other parties.These projects are covered further below. Page 8 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 4.Transportation Funding Sources Project Project Delivery Oversize Total # Cost Cost 5 Developers Build $0 $4,200,000 6 $0 $1,220,000 9 $0 $4,130,000 10 $0 $6,820,000 11 $0 $3,130,000 23 $0 $460,000 Subtotal $0 $19,960,000 A2 Developers Build $510,000 $2,480,000 A3 Receive Credit $720,000 $3,000,000 A4 For Oversize $480,000 $3,000,000 7 $300,000 $2,360,000 8 $1,460,000 $5,580,000 14 $0 $10,470,000 15 $0 $1,290,000 Subtotal $3,470,000 $28,180,000 12 Washington County $0 $8,300,000 13 $0 $13,150,000 16 $0 $500,000 17 $0 $500,000 18 $0 $500,000 19 $0 $470,000 20 $0 $1,280,000 21 $0 $1,280,000 22 $0 $1,280,000 Subtotal $0 $27,260,000 Total $3,470,000 $75,400,000 Figure 55 shows the total cost of the oversized district transportation infrastructure within the plan area, and the way in which LCG recommends that this cost be allocated to residential, commercial, and employment development as an area-specific supplemental fee.This supplemental fee would be charged in addition to the City's current citywide transportation SDCs.The allocation percentages below are based on the amount of current, citywide SDCs that would be paid by the different uses, and therefore reflect the estimated trip generation of the various uses.Additional detail is shown in the appendices. Page 9 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 5. River Terrace 2.0 Transportation Supplemental Fee calculation Total Cost of Oversized Transportation Infrastructure $3,470,000 Allocation to: Residential 93% $3,210,601 Commercial and Employment 7% $259,399 Total $3,470,000 Residential Total Units RT 2.0 Fee Per Unit Single Family Detached 4% $124,654 86 $1,449 /unit Other Residential Dwelling 96% $3,085,947 3,650 $845 /unit Total $3,210,601 3,736 Commercial and Employment RT 2.0 Fee/1,000 SF Commercial 68% $177,278 82,500 $2,149 1,000 SF Employment 32% $82,121 50,000 $1,642 1,000 SF Total $259,399 132,500 Figure 66 below compares the estimated costs of the major infrastructure associated with River Terrace 2.0 with the two main transportation fees that will be generated by development in River Terrace 2.0:the Washington County Transportation Development Tax (TDT) and existing City of Tigard transportation SDC.The area-specific supplemental fee is not shown here since revenues and expenses associated with this fee are expected to remain within River Terrace 2.0.As shown below, the transportation fees to be generated are about $11.3 million greater than the cost of the major infrastructure, even though River Terrace 2.0 will make up a small amount of the trips on these roads.A detailed calculation of the Washington County TDT and Tigard TSDC is shown in the appendix. This is appropriate, since fees generated by River Terrace 2.0 will also go towards other capital improvements in other parts of the City and County, which River Terrace 2.0 residents and businesses will also rely on to access goods and services. This comparison is made for informational purposes only.The fees generated by River Terrace 2.0 will not directly pay for the major infrastructure, but rather,will be directed to the two agencies,which have a plan to divide the costs of certain infrastructure and build it over time. Details are covered by Washington County's MSTIP Bonding Cost-sharing Program for high-growth residential areas documents. Figure 6. Comparison of Major Infrastructure Costs and Transportation Fees Generated by River Terrace 2.0 Revenue:Transportation Fees Generated by RT 2.0 Washington County TDT $24,833,847 Tigard TSDC(Base) $15,908,074 Total $40,741,921 Cost of Major Infrastructure WA.County MSTIP Cost-sharing Program $29,386,000 Surplus or Deficit $11,355,921 Page 10 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Parks Parks Projects A summary of the parks projects planned for River Terrace 2.0 by Otak is shown below.Twenty-nine parks facilities have been proposed, including a range of community, neighborhood, and linear parks, open space, and trails. In addition, other, generally smaller, open spaces may be required per the development standards of the Tigard Municipal Code (certain sections, including Planned Developments and Residential Development Standards include additional open space requirements). Community, Neighborhood, and Linear Parks total 65 acres of space. 3 miles of trails are planned, along with 48 acres of open space. Figure 7. Summary of Park Projects Park Category Size Community Parks 34 ac. Neighborhood Parks 17 ac. Linear Parks 14 ac. Trails 3 mi. Open Space 48 ac. Total 113 ac. Source:Otak. Land Acquisition Cost. Land acquisition will comprise a significant share of the cost of building the River Terrace 2.0 park system. LCG received some estimates of land acquisition cost, reviewed documented public land acquisitions, and reviewed private properties in the area that are currently for sale.These are summarized below. Figure 8. Land Values Property/Reference $/SF $/Acre River Terrace 1.0 Parks Land Acquisition Estimate $8.95 $390,000 Undeveloped Land/ROW for Transportation Acquisitions, 2021 (DKS) $8.95 $390,000 Gorman/Bellairs THPRD Acquisitions, 2015 and 2016* $6.64 $290,000 For Sale 2021: 14705 SW Sunrise Ln, Tigard $5.24 $230,000 For Sale 2021: 17895 SW Shadypeak Ln, Beaverton $4.03 $175,000 Dirksen Nature Park, Tigard,Acquired 2010* $3.31 $145,000 Average used for Funding Analysis $6.20 $270,000 Sources:City of Tigard;DKS;THPRD;CoStar;Metro. $8.95 per square foot is the land acquisition cost estimate used in the River Terrace 1.0 planning process and by DKS in their cost estimations for right of way acquisition.THPRD documented several park acquisitions in 2015 and 2016;these costs were escalated to 2021 values. Several residential properties are for sale near River Terrace in the $4 to $5 per square foot range and are shown above (other properties for sale or sold were reviewed but not deemed to be comparable). Lastly, Dirksen Nature Park was acquired in 2010, and the acquisition price was also escalated to 2021. Land values range relatively widely—from $8.95 to $3.31 per square foot—which is not surprising, since land for parks can vary from land that is flat and could readily be developed with homes (and therefore valuable)to land that is much lower value due to slopes, wetlands, other natural features, or other conditions.Therefore, a single representative land Page 11 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy value is difficult to estimate. However,the average of these land value estimates and transactions is $6.20 per square foot, which is used in this report. A summary of park and open space projects and costs is shown below.The total cost of all proposed parks and open spaces is about $39.0 million. However, because some of these improvements (e.g., most trails)will be completed by developers as part of the development process, the base district or oversize cost for which funding sources needs to be identified is about $35.5 million. Figure 10 shows which categories of parks and open space are considered district versus local infrastructure (for further definition of these terms, see Infrastructure Scales, above). Community and Neighborhood Parks are parks shared by many homes and businesses and are not required to be built by the developer of one subdivision, and therefore are considered oversized or district infrastructure. Consistent with the City's practice in River Terrace 1.0, 100 percent of the costs that developers pay towards these park spaces can be credited towards SDCs owed.A large share (75%) of linear parks are also district/oversized/creditable infrastructure. Based on City input, most or all trails will be provided by developers as part of the site development process and are not creditable; however, in order to be conservative, we assume here that some (25%)will trails will exceed minimum site development requirements and therefore be creditable. Open space is assumed to be land that is undevelopable by developers and is therefore donated to the City; no capital cost is assumed for open space.The amount and quality of open space will be dependent on land dedications. Figure 9. District and Local Parks Infrastructure Park Category District Local Infrastructure Inf.; Part of (Oversize) Development Community Park 100% 0% Neighborhood Park 100% 0% Linear Park 75% 25% Trail 25% 75% Open Space NA NA A summary of park and open space projects and costs is shown below.The total cost of all proposed parks and open spaces is about $39.0 million. However, because some of these improvements (e.g., most trails)will be completed by developers as part of the development process, the base district or oversize cost for which funding sources needs to be identified is about $35.5 million. Figure 10. Parks Projects and Costs Park Category Size Number Cost Land Improvements Total District/ District/ Oversize% Oversize Community Parks 34 ac. 4 $9,125,733 $10,415,000 $19,540,733 100% $19,540,733 Neighborhood Parks 17 ac. 7 $4,561,516 $5,650,000 $10,211,516 100% $10,211,516 Linear Parks 14 ac. 7 $2,851,960 $4,065,000 $6,916,960 75% $5,187,720 Trails 3 mi. 3 $197,828 $2,180,000 $2,377,828 25% $594,457 Open Space 48 ac. 8 $0 $0 $0 0% $0 Total 113 ac. 21 $16,737,037 $22,310,000 $39,047,037 $35,534,426 Source:Otak, City of Tigard, Leland Consulting Group. Page 12 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy However, based on the City's work with developers at River Terrace 1.0,the City has determined that developers' cost of building parks and open spaces is about 30% less than the City's cost.A 30 percent reduction to the parks and open space improvement costs shown above would mean a reduction of about $6.7 million to the total cost. Page 13 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Funding Sources SDCs.Tigard currently has two levels of parks SDCs: one within River Terrace 1.0, and another that applies elsewhere in the City.As shown below, the River Terrace parks SDC is about $540 higher for a single family home in River Terrace. In order to provide adequate funding for the parks and open spaces proposed for this plan, LCG recommends a higher parks SDC for River Terrace 2.0, as shown below. Figure 11. Parks SDCs: Citywide and in River Terrace Land Use Citywide RT 1.0 RT 2.0 Single Family Detached per unit $10,013 $10,554 $10,987 Other Residential Dwelling per unit $7,347 $7,755 $8,081 Non Residential per employee $621 $621 $621 LCG's preliminary recommendation for parks funding is shown below. SDCs are the primary funding source.This plan assumes that 90%of the parks SDCs generated by development in River Terrace 2.0 fund park space in River Terrace 2.0. The remaining 10% (about $2.8 million)would go towards park improvements elsewhere in the City. No SDC funds from development in other parts of the City would fund parks improvements in River Terrace. Figure 12. Parks Funding Sources Funding Source Assumptions Amount Parks SDC 90%of SDCs generated within RT 2.0 are dedicated to RT 2.0 $27,597,006 Grants Based on RT 1.0 Funding Plan, plus escalation $1,200,000 Cost Reductions Due to lower costs of privately built parks,design refinements, and/or value engineering, $6,737,420 completed during RT 2.0 Community Plan and/or project build out. Other Other regional,state,or city sources;see below. Total $35,534,426 The parks funding sources above assume some grants can be secured for some parks improvements.This is based on a review of grants secured for park projects identified in the City's Adopted Budget and 2021-2026 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and on the River Terrace 1.0 funding plan, which assumed $1 million in grant funding could be secured.While grant funding is very limited and competitive, parks projects in the City's current six-year CIP are expected to receive grant funds from Metro's Regional Flexible Funds program,the State/ODOT's Connect Oregon program, and the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). Regional flexible funds and Connect Oregon grants tend to be for projects that enable non-auto travel.While Metro's Nature in Neighborhoods program is no longer active, it was a significant source of grant funds in the past. LCG views the $1.2 million target above as aspirational but achievable for River Terrace's 25 year buildout period. The primary remaining funding source shown above is cost reductions, which can be created in several ways. First, assuming that private developers build about as many of the parks in River Terrace 2.0 as they have in River Terrace 1.0, and that costs continue to be about 30% less for private developers compared to the City,then these cost reductions can be achieved by private developers. If this is not possible, then aspects of the plan (e.g., the size or design features of parks) can be revised during the next, more detailed, phases of planning. Other Considerations and Options.The funding sources above represent the most likely ones for River Terrace 2.0. There are other potential funding sources, but these are largely unknown, unpredictable, and in some cases, come with Page 14 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy many caveats and criteria that mean they can only occasionally be used to fund parks projects.These other funding sources are covered briefly here but cannot be expected to generate revenue for the study area. In 2010,Tigard voters approved a $17 million bond measure to acquire, preserve and protect parks and open spaces. LCG's understanding is that the 2010 bond funds have been largely or entirely allocated. However, in the future (for example, in 2030 or 2035, as River Terrace 2.0 builds out) it is possible that voters could approve a future parks bond that would provide funds for park improvements citywide, including some parks and open spaces in the study area. The following list of"other"funding sources is based on sources of funds used for current and near-future parks projects in the City's 2020-2026 CIP.This range of sources suggests that creative approaches to parks funding are possible. Many of these funding sources are very limited in the types of parks projects they can help to fund, and some limitations are mentioned below: • Urban Forestry program, "a street tree program funded by developers who are unable to meet urban forestry requirements on their project sites." • Transportation SDC (Limited to transportation projects) • Metro Regional Flexible Funds Allocation (RFFA) Grant(mentioned above) • Transient Lodging Tax • Connect Oregon Grant (ODOT, mentioned above • National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) Grants • Gas Tax (Limited to use within right of ways.) • Clean Water Services • Washington County Major Streets Transportation Improvement Program (MSTIP) • Stormwater Fund (Very limited;the City cannot use these funds for parks. However, some parks of stormwater fund/water quality funded projects could have small parts of trails and overlooks in them.) Page 15 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Stormwater Stormwater Projects and Costs Otak's stormwater analysis for River Terrace 2.0 identified 15 "regional" stormwater facilities/water quality and detention ponds, which are shown below.These facilities serve a range of"contributing" or surrounding areas, of between 5 and 114 acres, though all but two facilities serve 45 acres or less.Therefore,we view these facilities as "subdistrict" improvements, as described above. Notably,there is only one type of facility in this category;for example, while the size and scale of facilities varies, unlike the transportation improvements described above, none are off-site or serve areas outside of River Terrace 2.0. Figure 13. River Terrace 2.0 Estimated Stormwater Costs Regional Stormwater Total Facility# Cost 20 $3,468,752 21 $1,669,020 22 $3,268,778 23 $1,675,951 24 $8,184,934 25 $3,748,435 26 $323,515 27 $2,706,958 28 $1,119,543 29 $1,999,126 30 $1,065,157 31 $267,945 32 $1,117,948 33 $1,117,948 34 $1,825,457 Total $33,559,465 Funding Sources Several approaches to funding stormwater facilities are discussed here. Approach 1 is consistent with subdistrict facilities as described in the Infrastructure Scales section above: because each of these facilities will serve a relatively small group of property owners,these property owners/developers can be required to take on all of the associated capital costs. Some facilities may be built by individual property owners. Others may be built via a cost-sharing agreement by multiple property owners. Still others could be built by one or more "early-in" developers who set up a reimbursement district that later-in developers must pay in to.2 In any case, Strategy 1 does not assume any City/public funding. 2 Clean Water Services reimbursement district information:https://www.cleanwaterservices.org/media/1934/reimbursement-districts.pdf Page 16 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 14. Stormwater Funding Strategy 1 Sources of Funds Developer Capital Expenditures $33,559,465 100% Total $33,559,465 100% Other Approaches. Other approaches are possible, and assume a more assertive, pro-development approach by the City and/or Clean Water Services (CWS). These agencies may take such an approach in order to encourage development that meets multiple goals (e.g., high quality place making,water quality, and stream preservation), or because stormwater facilities in certain basins are so expensive or difficult to accomplish (e.g.,the would be located on others' properties)that the requirement for developers to manage stormwater could be an insurmountable barrier for developers. The City recently completed a Stormwater Master Plan. Following on that plan, in January 2020, the City raised its stormwater surcharge, in order to fund a range of enhanced stormwater management efforts. Therefore, another approach is for the City to allocate funds from the Stormwater Fund to build one or more regional stormwater facilities.The City would then create reimbursement districts in order to be reimbursed in part or in full.The figure below assumes that developers reimburse the City for about 80%of its expenditures; details would depend on the location and potentially, known support from existing developers. It is possible that the City could recoup 100%of its investment, however, there is some risk associated with building stormwater facilities, as development could fail to materialize in a given location, take more time than expected, etc.The City could identify the detention ponds that are most promising in terms of enhancing water quality and/or accelerating development. Figure 15. City Led Reimbursement District Approach Sources of Funds Developers $26,847,572 80% City Led Reimbursement Districts Initial City Investment via Stormwater Fund $6,711,893 20% Reimbursement District Payments (City Revenue) $5,369,514 16% Net City Investment $1,342,379 4% Total $33,559,465 100% Another approach is to utilize the CWS Regional Stormwater Management Charge (RMSC) approach, similar to the approach that CWS is implementing at the North Bethany subarea. This option will be available because the city will ask CWS to approve the River Terrace 2.0 stormwater strategy as an approved "sub-basin strategy." This is somewhat similar to the reimbursement district approach, however, CWS could build multiple stormwater facilities, serving some or all of River Terrace 2.0, and then would be reimbursed by developers via a Regional Stormwater Management Charge (RSMC), similar to a reimbursement fee or systems development charge.An RSMC is currently being charged in North Bethany and CWS is considering applying the approach elsewhere. This CWS-led approach should benefit the City and developers, as both the City and developers would take on less financial risk.While some developers could pay more on a per-door basis for stormwater management, the approach will appeal to many developers because the cost will be known and fixed in advance rather than unpredictable, variable, and potentially large; and they will not have to initiate and pay for regional detention facilities. LCG recommends that the City pursue the RMSC approach to the maximum extent possible. Page 17 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Sanitary Sewer Sanitary Sewer Projects, Costs, and Funding Sources A summary of MurraySmith's analysis of sanitary sewer projects is shown below. Various parties have responsibilities for different types of sanitary sewer infrastructure in this area. Clean Water Services (CWS) is the sanitary sewer service provider for the River Terrace area and funds projects for gravity sewer lines that are larger than 12 inches in diameter.The River Terrace 1.0 Funding Strategy proposed that the CWS Capital Fund provide a majority of sanitary sewer funding necessary for River Terrace 2.0 ($4.1 million, or just over 70%), and in particular funding for force mains and pump stations.The City has responsibility for maintaining gravity lines under 24 inches in diameter.Within River Terrace 1.0, developers built and paid for 10 and 12 inch lines.The funding allocation below is a continuation of these policies including the City's approach in River Terrace 1.0. This funding analysis assumes that CWS pays for the majority of sanitary sewer costs in River Terrace 2.0. CWS will generate significant funds from River Terrace 2.0, primarily via its Sewer Construction SDC, which is set at $5,800 per water meter of 3/4" or less (e.g., serving a single family home or multifamily project of five units or less). Developers will pay for the remainder of costs, associated with collector lines.The T6 project may be an exception and may qualify for some CWS funds,to be determined during subsequent planning efforts. Figure 16. Sanitary Sewer Projects and Costs Lead Agency and Project Total Clean Water Services T2-River Terrace West(Lower)- Pump Station Service to Local Collector $1,561,640 T4-River Terrace West(Lower)- Pump Station Service to 24-in Gravity Sanitary Sewer on Roy Rogers Road $2,617,840 Subtotal $4,179,480 Developers T1 -River Terrace West(Upper)- 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to 24-in Trunk $152,100 T3 -River Terrace West(Lower)- 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to River Terrace West(Lower) Pump Station $441,160 T5 -River Terrace South- 10-in Sanitary Sewer Collector to Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road $265,420 T6-River Terrace South- 10-in and 12-in Sanitary Sewer Collector along Beef Bend Road to Roy Rogers Road $792,640 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $45,000 Subtotal $1,696,320 Total $5,876,000 Source:MurraySmith, Leland Consulting Group. Note:Some numbers may not sum correctly due to rounding. The Corporate Activity Tax(CAT) was adopted in the State of Oregon in 2019 and is imposed on all types of business entities with taxable Oregon commercial activity in excess of$1 million. Page 18 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Water Water Projects and Costs The City of Tigard is the service provider for water in River Terrace.A summary of MurraySmith's analysis of proposed water projects for River Terrace 2.0 is shown below.This builds on the 2020 Water System Master Plan (WSMP) also completed by MurraySmith. The first project, R1 —Reservoir 19,will serve River Terrace and the Beef Bend South area. This project is included in the WSMP Capital Improvement Program and is proposed to be built after 2030. The other three projects are large diameter(16-inch) backbone water distribution mains whose purpose is to provide water service for development in River Terrace 2.0.The P1 and P3 backbone main projects would be built within new planned collectors within River Terrace 2.0. P2 would be constructed within the right of way of several existing arterial roads that are adjacent to River Terrace 2.0, including Scholls Ferry and Roy Rogers Road. Backbone mains are intended to supply smaller mains (8-inch to 12-inch diameter) that branch off and connect to customer service lines. For the purpose of this concept plan, only backbone mains are identified.The oversize cost shown below is the cost difference between the cost of installing a 12 inch pipe and the planned 16 inch pipe. Figure 177.Water Projects and Costs Project Notes Oversize Total Cost Project Cost R1 Reservoir 19 New 3 MG reservoir $0 $6,697,000 P1 RT West 410 PZ-7,320 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe In new planned RT collector. $622,708 $1,453,500 P2 RT West 560 PZ-5,100 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe In developed roadways(Scholls Ferry,Roy Rogers) $486,632 $1,552,500 P3 RT South-4,590 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe In new planned RT collector. $396,647 $925,400 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $32,000 Total $1,506,000 $10,661,000 Source:MurraySmith, Leland Consulting Group. Note:Some numbers may not sum correctly due to rounding. The Corporate Activity Tax(CAT) was adopted in the State of Oregon in 2019 and is imposed on all types of business entities with taxable Oregon commercial activity in excess of$1 million. Page 19 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Funding Sources As shown below,the City is expected to fund and build project R1, Reservoir 19, as it is a large project that will serve not only River Terrace 2.0 but also other areas This project is in the WSMP and the City is best positioned to collect fees from these multiple areas in order to fund it. Funds for this project is expected to come from a combination of water utility fees and water SDCs.A conceptual split—with 30%of funds coming from utility fees and 70%of funds coming from water SDCs, based on the cost split shown in the RT 1.0 Funding Strategy—is shown below. The City anticipates conducting an evaluation of water rates and SDCs in support of the WSMP CIP in the near future. The City should proceed on the assumption that the P1, P2, and P3 projects will be funded and built by developers, who would receive SDC credits for the oversized costs (about $1.5 million, see above). Figure 18.Water Funding Sources Project Infrastructure Approach Funding Total Scale Sources Project Cost City R1 Reservoir 19 Major City leads Water utility fees and SDCs $6,697,000 Subtotal $6,697,000 Developers P1 RT West 410 PZ-7,320 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe District Developers build,receive credits for oversize $1,453,500 P2 RT West 560 PZ-5,100 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe Major Developers build,receive credits for oversize $1,552,500 P3 RT South-4,590 LF of 16-inch DI Pipe District Developers build,receive credits for oversize $925,400 Oregon Corporate Activity Tax $32,000 Subtotal $3,964,000 Total $10,661,000 Source: MurraySmith, Leland Consulting Group. One variation is that, because the P2 pipe is to be largely constructed within existing roadways, including the Roy Rogers and Schools Ferry (arterial) rights of way, it may make sense for the City to construct this improvement, and then create either a reimbursement district or City water meter fee surcharge to recoup the cost.This is to be determined in future, more detailed planning for the area. Page 20 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Appendices The land use programs are drafts, based on the most recent information available to LCG.They are subject to change as the Concept Plan process proceeds. Figure 19. River Terrace 2.0 Land Use Program Total Housing Units Adj.Units(Underbuild) Total Under- Adjusted Unit Type West South Total Unit Type Units Build Units Cottage cluster 1,185 724 1,909 Cottage cluster 1,909 10% 1,718 Duplex 172 147 319 Duplex 319 10% 287 Triplex 336 208 544 Triplex 544 10% 490 Quads 362 263 625 Quads 625 10% 563 Garden rowhouse 81 49 130 Garden rowhouse 130 10% 117 Urban rowhouse 98 110 208 Urban rowhouse 208 10% 187 Courtyard unit 176 144 320 Courtyard unit 320 10% 288 ADU 266 131 397 ADU 397 10% 357 Single detached house 58 37 95 Single detached house 95 10% 86 Total 2,734 1,813 4,547 Total 4,547 4,093 Residential Underbuild Factor ADU Units 357 RT 2.0 10% Units that Pay Tigard Transp.and Parks SDCs 3,736 RT 1.0 10% Total 4,093 Type and Location Gross Bldg.Area (SF) Low Average High Commercial RT West at Scholls Ferry 80,000 85,000 90,000 RT West at Roy Rogers 30,000 40,000 50,000 RT South at Beef Bend 30,000 40,000 50,000 Subtotal 140,000 165,000 190,000 Employment 100,000 100,000 100,000 Total 240,000 265,000 290,000 Adjusted Total Estimated Under- Adjusted SF Build SF Commercial 165,000 50% 82,500 Employment 100,000 50% 50,000 Total 265,000 132,500 Page 21 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy The following construction cost index was used to compare cost estimates from the 2014 River Terrace Funding Strategy to current cost estimates. Figure 20. ENR Construction Cost Index (National) Year ENR CCI Index Values 2010 8,802 2011 9,070 2012 9,308 2013 9,547 2014 RT 1.0 Concept Plan 9,807 9,807 9,807 2015 10,034 10,034 10,034 2016 10,331 10,331 10,331 2017 10,736 10,736 10,736 2018 11,062 11,062 11,062 2019 11,281 11,281 11,281 2020 11,466 11,466 11,466 2021 RT 2.0 Concept Plan 11,768 Time Period 2014-2020 2014-2021 2010-2020 CAGR 2.6% 2.6% 2.7% Cumulative Change 16.9% 20.0% 27.2% Page 22 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 181.Transportation SDC projections Transportation WA County TDT Category Units Tigard TSDC Category Units Condominium/Towhouse 1,909 Other Residential Dwelling 1,909 Condominium/Towhouse 319 Other Residential Dwelling 319 Condominium/Towhouse 544 Other Residential Dwelling 544 Condominium/Towhouse 625 Other Residential Dwelling 625 Condominium/Towhouse 130 Other Residential Dwelling 130 Condominium/Towhouse 208 Other Residential Dwelling 208 Apartment 320 Other Residential Dwelling 320 Apartment 397 Other Residential Dwelling ADUs Exempt Single Family Detached 95 Single Family Detached 95 4,547 Total 4,150 Single Family Detached 86 Single Family Detached 86 Apartment 645 Other Residential Dwelling 3,650 Condominium/Towhouse 3362 Adjusted Total 4,093 Adjusted Total 3,736 Revenues Per Unit Per Unit Single Family Detached $9,269 Single Family Detached $6,645 Apartment $6,064 Other Residential Dwelling $3,876 Condominium/Towhouse $5,544 Total Total Single Family Detached $797,134 Single Family Detached $571,470 Apartment $3,911,280 Other Residential Dwelling $14,147,400 Condominium/Towhouse $18,638,928 Total $23347,342 Total $14,718,870 Page 23 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Transportation WA County TDT Category Units Tigard TSDC Category Units Shopping Center 82,500 Shopping Center 82,500 Office Park 50,000 Office Park 50,000 Revenues Per Unit Per 1,000 SF Shopping Center $12,314 Shopping Center $9,851 Office Park $9,412 Office Park $7,530 Total Total Shopping Center $1,015,905 Shopping Center $812,724 Office Park $470,600 Office Park $376,480 Total $1,486,505 Total $1,189,204 Total Residential $23,347,342 94% Residential $14,718,870 Commercial and Employmen $1,486,505 6% Commercial $1,189,204 Total $24,833,847 100%Total $15,908,074 Page 24 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 192. Parks SDC Projection Parks Tigard Parks System Development Charge RT 2.0 Additional Charge Other Residential Dwelling 1,909 Other Residential Dwelling 1,909 Other Residential Dwelling 319 Other Residential Dwelling 319 Other Residential Dwelling 544 Other Residential Dwelling 544 Other Residential Dwelling 625 Other Residential Dwelling 625 Other Residential Dwelling 130 Other Residential Dwelling 130 Other Residential Dwelling 208 Other Residential Dwelling 208 Other Residential Dwelling 320 Other Residential Dwelling 320 Other Residential Dwelling ADUs Exempt Other Residential Dwelling ADUs Exempt Single Family Detached 95 Single Family Detached 95 4,150 4,150 Single Family Detached 86 Single Family Detached 86 Other Residential Dwelling 3,650 Other Residential Dwelling 3,650 Adjusted Total 3,736 Adjusted Total 3,736 Per Unit Per Unit RT 2.0 Single Family Detached $10,013 Single Family Detached $974 Other Residential Dwelling $7,347 Other Residential Dwelling $734 Total Total Single Family Detached $861,118 Single Family Detached $83,747 Other Residential Dwelling $26,816,550 Other Residential Dwelling $2,680,560 Total $27,677,668 Total $2,764,307 Page 25 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Parks Tigard Parks System Development Charge RT 2.0 Additional Charge Employees per SF Commercial 390 Employment 345 Area(SF) Commercial 82,500 Employment 50,000 Employees Commercial 212 Employment 145 Total 356 Revenues Per Employee Per Unit RT 2.0 Per Employee $621 Per Employee $0 Total Total Commercial and Employment $221,365 Commercial and Employment $0 Total Residential $27,677,668 Residential $2,764,307 Commercial and Employment $221,365 Commercial and Employment $0 Total $27,899,033 Total $2,764,307 Allocation 1 -Combined City Base Parks SDC and RT 2.0 Within RT 2.0 $27,597,006 90% To other projects,Citywide $2,789,903 10% Page 26 River Terrace 2.0: Preliminary Infrastructure Funding Strategy Figure 203. River Terrace 1.0: Residential Units Sold by Type, 2016 to August 2020 City documents state that, "development in River Terrace began in earnest in the summer of 2015." 400 350 300 274 250 210 200 60 150 100 --- 83 78 53 150 • 50 ■ . i i 0 2016 2017 2018 2019 i 2020 Total 53 274 210 83 78 ■Att I Condominium 13 5 •Att I Townhouse 83 60 1 25 ■Det I Single Family 53 191 150 69 48 Source:Metrostudy, Leland Consulting Group. Page 27