City Council Packet - 06/20/2006
i
T)G,'~ ~ \ . ~ ~ CM ` ~ ` IMWING.'
June 20,,2006
C' ~U W"''~ MEET,.~ WKTSE ,
, ~~D
T E L E, Vi
.
ksTOfs\Donwa'slecpkE2
ORevised June 16, 2006 to add Executive Session and change staxt time to 6:00 p.m.
IGARD CITY COUNCIL
ORKSHOP MEETING June 20, 2006
0 p.m. - Execurive Session p.m. - Workshop Meering
F30
TIGARD CITY HALL
13125 SW HALL BLVD
TIGARD, OR 97223
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Upon request, the Ciry will endeavor to arrange for the following services:
• Qualified sign language interpxeters for pexsons with speech or hearing impaixments; and
• Qualified bilingual interpreters.
Since these services must be scheduled with outside service pxoviders, it is important to allow as much
lead time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the
meeting by calltng: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications
Devices for the Dea~.
SEE ATTACHED AGENDA
COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 20, 2006 - page 1
AGENDA
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MEETING
. JUNE 20, 2006
(:0(1 PM
• EXECUTNE SESSION - The Tigard City Council will go into Executive Session with
. legal counsel for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding
current litigation or litigation likely to be filed under ORS 192.660(2)(h). All discussions are
confidential and those present may disclose nothing fxom the Session. Representatives of the
news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as pxovided 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.
6:3o i>M
1. WORKSHOP MEETING
1.1 Call to Order - Tigard City Council
1.2 Roll Call
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items
G:35 PM
2. DISCUSS CITY OF BULL MOUNTAIN INCORPORATION
• Staff Report: Acinunistration Department
7:05 PM
3. RECEIVE COMMUNITY ATTITUDE SURVEY RESULTS
• Staff Report: Communiry Development Department
7:50 PM
4. REVIEW THE PROPOSED DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
• Staff Report: Community Development Department
8:35 PM
5. RECEIVE INFO1tMATION ON THE METROPOLITAN T'ItANSPORTATION
_ IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (MTIP) PROPOSALS
• Staff RepoYt: Community Development Department
COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 20, 2006 page 2
6. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS
7. NON AGENDA ITEMS
• Special Council Meeting Scheduled for July 6, 2006. Deternzine if ineeting should start at 6
or 6:30 p.m. Only topic to date is the Ciry Center Advisory Commission.
8. EXECUTNE 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.
9:00 PM
9. ADJOURNMENT
i:~edmkathylccaU0081060620rev).AOc
COUNCIL AGENDA - JUNE 20, 2006 page 3
City of Tigard, Oregon '
Affidavit of Posting
In the Matter of the PYOposed Notification of a Change in the Start-Time for the June 20,
2006, City Council Meeting
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington ) ss.
Ciry of Tigard . )
24 I, G Wrbeing first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath
(oY affirmation), depose and say:
That I posted in
➢ Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon
➢ Tigard Public Library, 13500 SW Hall Boulevaxd, Tigard, Oregon
➢ Tigard Permit Center, 13125 SW Hall Boulevaxd, Tigard, Oregon
a copy of Notice of a Change in the Start-Time for the June 20, 2006, City Council
Meeting. A copy of said Notic eing hereto attached and by reference made a part
hereof, on the ~'day of h-G_ , 20 67C '
Signa e of Person who Pexformed P ting
Subscribed and sworn (or affirmed) before me this ~ day of
Zo~~.
eSignature of Notary Public
f r Oregon
_
postingaff
IAedm\cethylcouncllMeetinp natices\2006=041 8 change in staM time post e(I.doc
:
City of Tigard, Oregon
Affidavit of Notification
In the Matter of the Proposed Notification of a Change in the Staxt-Tixne fox the June 20,
2006, Ciry Council Meeting
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Washington ) ss.
Ciry of Ti ard )
~
I, ~~d~ being fixst duly sworn (or affitmed), by oath
(or affitmation), depose and say:
That I notified the following people/organizations by fax of a Change in the Start-Time for
the June 20, 2006, City Council Meeting
C' Baxbata Sherman, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724)
Q~ NewsYOOm, The Oxegonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061)
GL Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397)
A copy of said Notice being • to attached and by refexence made a part hereof, on the
day of Gl , 20 4~7 6
Signature of Person who Performe otification
Subscried and sworn (or affirmed) before me this day of
(.!/X , 20 06,,, .
OFFICIAL SEAI. Signature of Notary ublic for Oregon
JILL AA BYARS
'NOTARY PUBLIC-OREQON
COMMIS910N NO. 381793
MY COMMIS310N EXPIRES JUNE 14, 2008
iAetlmXcathylwunGlVneeting nolice5\20061060620 chanpe In stert lime natice aH.AOc
06/16/2006 08:59 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard ~001
TX REPORT
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO 1279 ,
CONNECTION TEL 5039686061
SUBADDRESS
CONNECTION ID Oregonian -
ST. TIME 06/16 08:59
USAGE T 00'16
PGS. SENT 1
RESULT OK
i
V
a
. . ,
CITY OF TIGARD
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START-TIME FOR THE
J[JNE, 20 2006, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please forward to:
❑ Baxbara Shennau, Newsroom, Tigaxd Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724)
❑ Newsroom, The Oregonia.n (Fax No. 503-968-6461)
❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Faaz No. 503-968-7397) ' Notice is hereby given that the June 20, 2006, Councal meeting will begin at 6 p.m. as the City
Council meets in an Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) to discuss pending lirigation.
The regulat Workshop Meeting of the City Council is open to the public and scheduled to
Uegin at 630 p.m.
Fox further infotmation, please contact Depury Ciry Recorder Carol Krager by calling 503-639-
4171, Ext 2419.
Depury City Recorder
Date:
Post: Tieatd Citv Hall '
06/16/2006 09:00 FAX 5036847297 City of Tigard CN01
TX REPORT sss
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO 1280
CONNECTION TEL 15033712635
SUBADDRESS
. CONNECTION ID Valley
ST. TIME 06/16 09:00
USAGE T 00'16
PGS. SENT 1
RESULT OK
v
. ^
.
CITY OF TIGARD
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START-TIME FOR THE
. JUNE, 20 2006, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PJ.ease fotward to:
❑ Barbara She+-man, Newsroom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724)
❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061)
❑ Editor, The Regal Coutiet (Fax No. 503-968-7397)
Notice is hereby given that the June 20, 2006, Council meetun.g will begin at 6 pm. as the City
Council meets in an Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) to discuss pending litigation.
The regular Workshop Meeting of the City Council is open to the public and scheduled to
begin at 6:30 p.m.
Fox fuxthex ia£ormation, please contact Deputy City Recoider Cazol Ktager by calling 503-639-
4171, Ext 2419.
Deputy City Recorder
Date: fg o~ ~aa
Post TiQatd City Hall
06/16/2006 09:01 FAX 5036847297 City of TiSard ~j0-01
• TX REPORT sss
TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 1281
CONNECTION TEL 5039687397
SUBADDRESS
CONNECTION ID Regal Courier
ST. TIME 06/16 09:01
USAGE T 00'39 .
PGS. SENT 1
RESULT OR
v
. ~
CITY OF TIGARD
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START-TIME FOR THE
JLTNE, 20 2006, CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Please forward to:
❑ Barbaxa Sheunan, News=oom, Tigard Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724)
❑ Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061)
❑ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397)
Notice is hereby given that the June 20, 2006, Council meeting will begin at 6 p.m. as the Ciry
Council meets in an Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) to discuss pending litigation.
The regu.Lar Workshop Meeting of the City Council is open to the public and scheduled to
begin at 6:30 p.m.
For fixxth.er infoxnna,tion, please contact Deputy City Recorder Carol Kxager by calling 503-639-
4171, Ext 2419.
Deputy City Recoxdex
Date: !~O o;2
Post: Tigard City Hall
. V
. .
~
. . ~ ~
CITY OF TIGARD
NOTICE OF CHANGE IN START-TIME FOR THE
JLTNE, 20 2006, CITY COLTNCIL MEETING
Please forward to:
0 Barba.ra Sherman, Newsxoom, Tigatd Times (Fax No. 503-546-0724)
0' Newsroom, The Oregonian (Fax No. 503-968-6061)
LR~ Editor, The Regal Courier (Fax No. 503-968-7397)
Norice is hexeby given that the June 20, 2006, Council meeting will begin at 6 p.m. as the City
Council meets in an Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(h) to discuss pending litigation.
The regxlar Workshop Meeting of the City Council is open to the public and scheduled to
begin at 6:30 p.m.
For fiirther information, please contact Deputy, City Recorder Catol Ktager by calling 503-639-
4171, Ext 2419.
Depury Ciry Recorder
Date:
Lil-il,
Post. Tigard City Hall
Tigud Peimit Centex
Tigaxd Public Library
FAadm\caNy\counGlYneeting notices\2006\060620 tlhanpe in slaN lhne.dx
Agenda Item No. lo R =
For Agenda of Av,q
OD6
. . ~
Tigard City Council Meeting Minutes
Date: June 20, 2006
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Place: TigaYd Ciry Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard
Tigaxd, Oregon
Attending: Mayor Cxaig Dirksen Presicling
Councilor Sally Harding
Councilor Sydney Sherwood
Councilor Nick Wilson
Councilor Tom Woodruff
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
Executive The meeting was called to ordex at 6:01 p.m. The
Session Council went into Executive Session under ORS
192.660(2) (h) to discuss with legal counsel the legal
xights and duties concerning litigation or litigation
likely to be filed.
The Executive Session concluded at 6:37 .m.
Workshop 1.1 Mayor Dixksen called the City Council to Order
Meeting at 6:43 p.m.
1.2 Council Present: MayoY Dirksen, Councilors
Harding, Sherwood, Wilson, and Woodruff.
1.3 Pledge of Allegiance
1.4 Council Communications & Liaison Reports
Please see Agenda Item No. 6.
1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items:
None
2. Discuss City Staff Yeport was given by Interim Communiry
of Bull Development Ditector Coffee. Mr. Coffee xeviewed
Mountain his June 14, 2006 memoxandum xegaYding
Incorporation preluliuiary findings for the City of Bull Mountain
Economic Feasibility Statement. A copy of this
memorandum is on file in the City Recorder's
Office.
June 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes p1ge
~
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
Representing the group of citizens working on the
incorporation of a new city - City of Bull Mountain
- were the following: Lisa Hamilton-Treick, Dick
Franzke, Keshniita McVey, Laxry Derr, and John
Tapogna. A copy of the transcript of the discussion
for this agenda item is on file in the City Recorder's
Office. Highlights of the discussion include the
following:
Interun Community Development Dixectox Coffee's
staff report included the following highlights:
• City of Tigard staff reviewed the feasibility
report for the proposed City of Bull
Mountain and provided comments on
various issues.
• The memo is intended to be a starting point
for discussing issues raised by the feasibility
report to allow dialog between the City and
the people who are interested in forming a
new city on Bull Mountain.
• Staff looked to state law to see what factors
the County will be considering when the
question is before it as to whether to put the
issue of a new city on the ballot.
• The law indicates that the economic
feasibility study should indicate that the
pxoposed city must plan for and provide
urban services in a cost effective manner at
the ininunum level adequate to meet current
needs and pxojected growth.
• Mr. Coffee clarified that there is an error in
the memorandum. With xegard to library
services, he clarified that the City of Bull
Mountain would be the only city in
Washington County with a population over
2,100 that does not have a library.
• The final section of the memorandum
discusses three services: paxks, library, and
police. In reviewing how the Ciry of Bull
Mountain would propose to addtess those
services, thexe is an indication that this could
have some impact on the City of Tigard in
providing those services and the associated
costs.
June 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Meeung Minutes page 2
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
• The County will be holding a public hearing
on July 25 regaxding the incorporation of the
City of Bull Mountain.
Lisa Hamilton-TYeick, 13565 SW Beef Bend Road,
unincorpoxated aYea of Bull Mountain - Lisa
Hamilton-Txeick's comments are as follows:
• She thanked the City of Tigard for the
oppoxtunity to discuss the economic
feasibility study.
• She advised that they were here by the
invitarion of the City of Tigard; this is not a
legal xequirement.
• She said they look forward to the future as
neighbors of the City of Tigard.
• John Tapogna was introduced by Lisa
Hamilton-Treick.
Mr. Tapogna is a managing director of
ECONorthwest, who prepaxed the economic
feasibility study for the FYiends of Bull Mountain.
ECONoYthwest woxked closely with the Friends of
Bull Mountain and a number of service pxoviders to
prepare the report.
• The economic feasibility study attempts to
give the Friends of Bull Mountaip the best
picture of the costs and levels of service they
can expect for a city of their size if the
citizens elect to incorporate.
• He noted appreciation for the City of
Tigard's review of the study and advised that
the more people cririquing and pointing out
the details of it, the better.
• Mr. Tapogna encouraged the Fxiends of Bull
Mountain to share the information from the
City of Tigard with all interested parties who
are potential votexs on this matter should it
come to a vote.
• He said he believed the City's review was
not a balanced review. He did not believe
that the staff had been pxessing to look for
assumptions that woxked in the opposite
clirection of the conclusions of the memo
where revenues could be hi her or costs
June 20, 2006 'I'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 3
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
lowex.
MY. Tapogna identified the following items where
the economic feasibility study was conservative:
• Multi-family dwellings (town homes) were
assumed to be at $97,500 which is correct
for today's market; however, studies of town
homes indicate that this assumption could
be double and still be reasonable going
forward.
• The study assumes that each full-time
employee of Bull Mountain would be
compensated an average of $14,000 a year in
health, life and disability insuxance. The
national average is $8,200 peY employee;
thexefore this was a"professionally cautious
estimate."
• The planning costs were estimated to be
recovered at the rate of 25% of cost per
service thxough fees for service. From
looking at budgets, including the City of
Sherwood's budget, these fees for service
could cover as much as 50% of the cost.
• Other areas where savings could be realized
would be backing off on the compensation
for the mayor and council and some of the
benefit expenditures estimated.
• Mr. Tapogna said that ECONorthwest was
professionally cautious in the amount of
franchise fees or the level of franchise fees
that the pxoposed city could ultunately raise.
• Mr. Tapogna said that he thought the
bxoader question that needed to be asked
was does the $2.84 per thousand of assessed
value lead to an economically feasible city in
the state of Oregon. He said that after his
analysis he would say it would be.
June 20, 2006 T'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes rage 4
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
• He commented on the final section of the
memorandum which dealt with the potential
unpacts on the City of Tigaxd of the
incorpoxation of the City of Bull Mountain:
• Police services - TigaYd was concerned that
the service level would be lowex than what
exists now and there would be an adverse
unpact regarding potential calls for the City
of Tigard to xespond to the City of Bull
Mountain. Mx. Tapogna said that they have
contacted the Sheriff of Washington County
who said the level of service would be
comparable to what the Bull Mountain axea
is xeceiving now. In fact, the Sheriff
indicated that the service level would be
somewhat better because there would be
dedicated detectives within the boundaries
of the City of Bull Mountain, whexeas the
existing condition is that of a"zone" and
there is no guarantee that thexe is a detective
within the Bull Mountain area at any
particular point in time. The Sheriff has been
very clear that they do not anticipate adverse
unpacts on the City of Tigard relative to the
status quo.
• With regaYd to Paxks, Mr. Tapogna advised
that xegardless of who governs the area, it
will take some time to develop park land.
The existing area has none. There will need
to be capital acquisition including capital
fundraising and acquisition of park land
befoxe parks can be developed and
maintained. He advised that he did not see
how this could be any diffexent from the
status quo. PaYks have been assumed as part
of the permanent operating tax rate and
property taxes would be sufficient to pay for
those services.
• Mr. Tapogna commented on the libxary
services and said that to the extent that theYe
would be an adverse unpact to the City of
TigaYd, he said that is no different than it is
toda . If it does become an adverse im act,
June 20, 20061'igard City Council Wockshop Meeting Minutes page 5
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
he said he would assume the City would
have the ability to chaxge user fees to non-
city residents who axe using that particular
City of Tigard service.
Mayox Dirksen noted he appreciated Mx. Tapogna's
remarks. He agreed that staff did the analysis to
determine what impact this has on the City of
Tigard. Also, he said the staff looked at it to
determine whether they thought the economic •
impact statement was valid. He advised it was
another pxofessional review of feasibility. He agreed
that the primary question is whetheY ox not the tax
xate was sufficient to support and sustain the city.
Mayor Dirksen noted that Ms. Hamilton-Treick
indicated some concern regarding meeting with the
Tigard City Council and the Yeceprion that the
friends of Bull Mountain might receive. He said that
he would say fox himself, and thought he also spoke
for the xest of the Council, that their position is that
the best situation foY the area inside the urban
gYOwth boundary would be to come inside the City
of Tigard. "That's been our standard from the
Ueginning and I still believe that to be so. But, that
being not a choice that was made, the best option is
for the area to incorporate on its own, as opposed to
remauung unincorporated as it is now."
• Mayor Dirksen advised that the City of Tigard did
not intend to actively oppose the incorporation
efforts for the City of Bull Mountain. The analysis
pexformed on the economic feasibility statement
was to deteYmine what unpact it would have on the
Ciry of Tigard. Based on that analysis, the City of
Tigaxd does have some concerns. Not only are
theYe issues identified in the staff inemo that deal
with advexse effects on the City of Tigard, but there
are other issues that the Friends of Bull Mountain
might want to consider regarding what level of
services would be needed and what level of revenue
would suppoxt those services.
Mayor Dirksen noted that there are other issues the
City would bring up to the County when it comes to
a hearin rocess, includin some ieces of ro er
Junc 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Meeung Minutcs page 6
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
that ate located within the proposed area.
Ms. Hamilton-Treick asked for clarification on the
pxoperties Yeferred to by the Mayor. Staff inembers
provided a map showing the properties, which are
known as the Cache Creek propexty, Menlor
property and Clute property. Thexe is also a
property known as the High ToY property. The City
is in negotiations to purchase other property within
the area.
She advised that she appreciated the Mayor's
comments and said, "I take what you're saying to
mean that you would support the people on
unincorporated Bull Mountain having a vote to
decide if incorporation works best for them. And, I
also read a little bit in thexe that you would be
. willing to offer helpful infoxmation once this ball
•
rolls forwaYd...to incorporation. There may be
things we can do cooperatively to benefit the City of
Tigard residents as well as the residents of the Ciry
of Bull Mountain, if I undeYStood you coxxecdy."
Mayor Dixksen said, "I believe that's fait to say.
Yes."
Larry Derr, attorney repxesenting the Friends of Bull
Mountain, asked fox clarification xegarding the
property under the Intergovernmental Water
Agreement.
City Manager Prossex responded that this property
included the Menlor sites and anothex piece of
property to the south.
Mr. DexY said, "That's paxt of the confusion - just
literally City of Tigaxd property, it seemed less. But
if you're talking about property that Tigard has
influence over under that agreement that makes
sense."
Ms. Hanvlton-Treick asked whetheY there would be
a public process with regard to the City acquiring
more Tigaxd Water District property in advance of
the incorpoxation effort. If Tigaxd is in advance
oin to urchase those Yo exties, "those would be
)une 20, 2006 1'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes pagc 7
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
assets that would presumably likely become assets of
the City of Bull Mountain."
Councilor Woodruff advised that the
Intergovernmental Water Board met last week and
discussed the property purchase and annexation
issues. This discussion was held in Executive
Session.
Dick Franzke commented on the feasibility study
and the fact that two professional xeviews had taken
place which wexe 180 degrees "out of sync." He
questioned whether the City of Tigaxd could pxovide
information with xegard to the souYCes that led it to
its conclusion with Yegard to the economic feasibility
study.
Intexim Community Development Director Coffee
responded that the sources were various agencies in
City Hall including the Finance Department, Public
Works and the various people who have expertise in
these components of city budget and services. Mr.
Coffee advised that staff did not begin with a
pxeconceived notion of undeYStating costs and
overstating xevenues. Mr. Coffee said that he
accepted that, if the staff had looked harder, they
may have found where they had underestimated the
value of townhouses, foY example.
Mayor Dixksen gave as an example of whexe
pYOperty tax revenue was overestimated was with
the areas 63 and 64, insofar as 15% of those areas
would be developed by the third year of the budget
for the City of Bull Mountain. He noted that it was
the opinion of the development department and the
Community Development Directox that this would
be an extremely optimistic view.
Mr. Tapogna agreed that "staxs would have to align
foY that to happen." HoweveY, he advised the City's
economic future was not tied to the gxowth fox
those areas. He noted that the area was now on the
relatively concentrated high property value base. In
fact, if "it were to stay at its cutrent level, it could
provide services adequately."
June 20, 2006'1'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutcs pagc 8
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
Councilox Wilson advised that he did not think the
spirit of what this meeting was about was to "nit-
pick" the economic feasibility statement. He said
the City of Tigard had been concerned that a tax
rate would be presented which would be
unrealistically low; however, $2.84 per thousand of
assessed value appears to be a xesponsible proposal.
While thexe may be some concerns for economies of
scale with a smaller city, there axe smallex cities
within the state of Oregon. The concerns have been
identified by the City of Tigard and in particular
those are with library, paxks and police services for
the new city if it is foYmed. When the statement is
made that this is no different than it is now, he said
"I would just respond...that's what we've been
saying all along."
Councilor Wilson said the sooner we can get parks
and libraxies addressed the better it is for oux
cirizens. He said the City of Tigard "wouldn't try to
fight you ox get some technicality to stop the thing.
Let the people decide."
Keshinira McVey said she appreciated the
oppoxtunity this evening and the warm, heartfelt
support and input.
She added that she hoped they could come to a win-
win solution for the community and partner
together in the future.
Lisa Hamilton-TYeick said that she was excited that
the economic feasibility pxesents a new model for
government. She noted that they could take
advantage of some good services offered through
Clean Watex Services, the Fire Disttict, and the
Sheriff's patrol. By capitalizing on these good
relationships, services could be provided to a
growing community making it affordable and
efficient. She also noted that they would finally be
able to address the parks situation on Bull Mountain,
acknowledging that it would take time; however, it
would have taken time if the area would have come
into the City of Tigard. She added that, " but at
least we would finally have a way to begin
addxessin those issues that have become difficult
June 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutcs page 9
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
for you and difficult for us."
Councilor Sherwood noted her agreement with the
comments made by Councilor Wilson and advised
that the City Council needs to look out fox the
property that the City of Tigard owns. She advised
that they would be remiss if they did not addxess
those items of concern for the citizens of Tigard and
for the Water Board.
Councilor Woodruff advised that he was unpressed
with the cointnitment and tenacity of the core group
of people that have had this vision and have.worked
on it for so long in a variety of venues. He agreed
that it was easy for anyone to be biased based on
their particular point of view. He noted the purpose
of a review by the City was to detexmine whether
there was enough money not only to operate the city
but to meet capital needs and to let people
understand what would be needed. "Will there be
differences that are better than what you have now
or better than what you would have had as part of
Tigard. And, to that degree that's all out in the
public and they can see and make a decision on it -
then, the people make the decision."
Mayor Dirksen thanked the repxesentarives fxom the
unincorporated axea of Bull Mountain for attending
the meeting.
3. Receive Consultants from Riley Reseaxch Mike Riley and
Community John Campbell reviewed the survey results with the
Attitudes Council. A copy of their PowexPoint pxesentation is
Survey Results on file in the City Recorder's Office. A copy of the
text of theix results is also on file in the City
RecoYder's Office.
Overall satisfaction with the City of Tigaxd services
and with Tigard as a place to live scored slightly
highex than what is often the case for similar surveys
in other cities.
In response to a question from Councilor Haxding
regarding how the survey compares to similar
questions on Metto's survey regarding infrastructure
and densi , Ma or Dirksen advised that he xecalled
Junc 20, 2006 'I'igard City Council Wotkshop Mceting Minutcs pagc 10
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
that the percentages and level of satisfaction wex.e
very similar.
Mr. R.iley said that the high xatings fox services
pYesent a nice baseline and that the challenge will be
to see if the satisfaction level can go up.
Additional comments are suintnarized as follows:
• The library is the "crown jewel" of Tigaxd.
• The police depaYtment scoxed very high with
overall satisfaction.
• City's accessibility and location are good, but
this is thYeatened by traffic issues.
• Intexun Community Development Ditector
Coffee offered to obtain comparisons of
similar surveys from other cities.
• The survey results will be used to assist with
the Comprehensive Plan Review.
• People realize growth is coming and
expressed the need to preserve greenspaces.
The consultants will xeview this again at the City
Council meeting of June 27, 2006.
4. Review Senior Planner Nachbar presented the staff report.
Proposed He also distributed an updated version of the TigaYd
Downtown Downtown Implementation Strategy dated June
Implementarion 2006. A copy of this document is on file in the City
Strategy Recorder's Office.
Also on ftle in the City Recorder's Office is a copy
of the PowerPoint presentation reviewed by Mr.
Nachbar during his presentation to the City Council.
Infoxmation shared with the Council included
backgxound on what the Downtown
Implementation Stxategy consists of, how it was
developed, how it is intended to be used, and how
Yedevelopment would be encouraged and facilitated.
Also reviewed by Mr. Nachbax were suggestions to
develop Fanno Creek Park and the open space
system, and to develop comprehensive street and
cixculation ixnpxovements. He reviewed the one-
year woxk pxogram. The work program will include
duties assigned to the City Center Advisory
Coininission as well as Yeview b the Plannin
June 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 11
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
Couimission. He advised that the revisions to the
implementation strategy that was distributed to the
Council included more information regaxding public
involvement and a section on new housing
development.
Councilox Wilson said that he thought the overall
implementation strategy was a good piece of work;
howeveY, he inquired about a faCade unprovement
progxam that he thought was to have been included.
Mr. Nachbar advised that this was something that
may be included. He noted that the early stages of
the plan identify important faciliry impYOVements.
He noted the need to ftnd funding sources to
unplement some of these unprovements this year.
Councilor Wilson said that a modest program with
regard to architectural standards could be
considered. Interim Community Development
Director Coffee suggested developing design
guidelines first. Mayor Dirksen said he liked the
approach of a design service accompanied by an
offer of some funding. Councilor HaYding sald it
was important fox Tigard to develop a footpYint of
compatibility with regard to design elements. She
added thexe is a need for a cost-effective way to
unprove aesthetics in the downtown.
Councilox Sherwood noted that she had heaxd some
criticisms about providing affordable housing. She
said she has explained the City would be looking foY
ways to encouYage affordable housing in the
downtown area. She noted that with commuter xail
coming to the area there may be some grants
available. She said there was a need to give builders
an incentive to build affordable housing units.
Senior Planner Nachbar said one of the strategies
did include a refexence to affoxdable housing and
suggested a range of income levels for housing.
TheYe are ways to include both market rate and
affordable housing in the same project; i.e., tax
incentives and other programs. There was some
discussion on the possibility of exploring state and
~ fedexal grants foY affordable housing, the mix of
housing units (integration) that could be made
available in the aYea, and grants that may be available
with trans ortation dollars. Councilor Sherwood
June 20, 2006 "1'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 12
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
noted there are county non-profit organizations that
build affoxdable housing units, which is anothex
resouxce to check out. The Tigard Downtown
Implementation Strategy will return to the City
Council in July for formal adoption. (City Recorder's
note: This item was moved from the July Agendas
to the August 8`" Agenda.)
City Center Advisory Comniission Member Alice
Ellis-Gaut noted that the implementation strategy
represents a lot of haxd work and long discussions.
The document has gone through a number of
changes from "week to week." She said she was
glad that the initial reaction to the document was
positive. Ms. Ellis-Gaut refeYred to the proposed
location of the Fanno Creek public area and pointed
out that the text of the document is clear that the
public area would be adjacent to the park. Howevex,
in the gYaphic, because of size and scale, it is difficult
to see this. She said she is looking forward to
actually getting the woxk done.
CCAC Member Gretchen Buehner said she agxeed
with Ms. Ellis-Gaut and said the CCAC saw this
document as a sales tool foY the development
community sharing a vision of how the Tigard
downtown could be re-developed. Mayor Dirksen
agreed that developers will be crucial for this area.
Interitn Community Development Director Coffee
said the CCAC will be discussing the developer
contact pYOCess soon.
In response to a question from Councilox Wilson,
Senior Planner Nachbar noted that he did not know
if the existing storm drain would be day-lighted. Mr.
Nachbar said theYe aYe two themes:
sustainability/natural ecology and another idea of an
urban cxeek or water featuYe. There may be a way to
make both themes work.
InteYUn Community Development Dixector Coffee
said when he was tallking about the Downtown Plan
last fall and winter, someone pointed out that the
water feature in Sequoia Paxkway as one way to
visualize what might be possible in the downtown
area.
June 20, 2006 T'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 13
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
The Plan is to come back to the City Center
Development Agency for formal adoption
Downtown Implementation Strategy.
5. Metropolitan Associate Planner Robexts presented the staff
Transportation report. Metro distributes money fxom the MTIP to
Improvement local jurisdictions, public agencies and special
Program districts based on applications submitted by project
Project sponsoYS. Metro cutrently is accepting applications
Proposals for the 2008-2011 MTIP funding cycle. Tigard is
limited to submitting only two pxojects by Metro
and the County has imposed a dollar limit of $2.7
million. Applications are due June 30, 2006.
SenioY Plannex Nachbar gave an overview of two
projects proposed fox submittal for MTIP funding.
The first project proposed is the "Design/Con-
struction of Main Street Improvements." This
project would provide engineering drawings and
construction funds to xetrofit a portion of
downtown Main Street to full "green street"
standaYds to get some compxehensive improvements
early on. He noted the design fox Main Street
starting from the railroad going south to the entry at
99W. Therefore, about half Main Street would be at
full engineering design level and construction at the
streetscape standards developed thYOUgh the
streetscape design process. In addition, there would
be re-YOUting and conveyance of the storm water
system to Yeflect the green concept. This would
mean ways for better infiltration and the use of
holding cells and a series of techniques that axe
currendy applied to handle storm water. The
estimated cost would be $2.9 inillion with $2.4
million requested fxom the grant and $500,000 (gas
tax) to be matched by the City. The project would
be funded in 2010/2011.
The second project is the "Re-design of the
Transit Center Site." Mr. Nachbar said Commuter
Rail Station will be going in on the other side of the
rail from the Transit Centex Site, which does not
function as a pedestrian-orientated place. The
thought was to try to create a txansit center that has
a laza as art of it. De endin on the
Junc 20, 2006'1'igard City Council Workshop Mecting Minutes page 14 '
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
reconfiguring of the transit (bus) use at this location,
there might be an option to put a small
redevelopment on that site. The money would be
used to create a master plan outlining some options
for redesign of the Transit Center site and to
evaluate a moxe efficient bus transit system for the
site. The goal is to allow for a more pedestrian- '
oriented use to accommodate people getting off the
bus and going across the xail to the commuter rail
station. The site could serve as a catalyst for what
goes on next to it in terms of stimulating
redevelopment of adjacent propeYty. The project
would consist of a masteY plan for a joint
redevelopment project with Tri-Met for the existing
bus transit center site.
The cost of the second pYOject is estimated to be
$300,000 funded by a grant and $100,000 from the
City of Tigard. He said the estimate might be a litde
high and staff would need to do more review. Senior
Planner NachbaY confirmed that the site is owned
by TYi-Met. Tri-Met is woxking with staff with the
application. Txi-Met is supportive and they feel that
the existing layout out is inefficient and could be
designed bettex. They recognize that we are in a
Metro Town CenteY and that this project would
support the City's goals and Metrds goals.
Councilor Wilson commented that it seemed to him
that the Transit Center is bigger than what is needed
foY the number of busses it supports. He wondered
that in light of Txi-Met's support fox the commuter
rail, if they might be willing to give up most of the
Txansit Center site fox housing development, which
would support commuter rail. Further study might
come up with some site development options.
Mayor Dixksen noted if we were to use our gxant
money to support a Tri-Met facility, then the City
should get something from them in return and this
should be part of the dialogue. Councilox Wilson if
Tri-Met built housing, presumably they would profit
fxom it. He pointed out the Ciry was not necessaxily
interested in making money, but we wanted to get
new development in the area. He said Tri-Met
might be able to sell the land at maYket rate to a
developer in exchange for building a cextain type of
housin , com arible with the downtown, and
June 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 15
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
provide money through tax incxement financing to
help fund other projects. This would have the potential of spurring othex developers to continue to
develop.
Senior Planner Nachbar noted that different
alignnlent options also exist, depending on how this
axea develops.
Transportation Mr. Roberts advised staff will be seeking Council
Enhancement authorization to submit two applicarions for grants
and Oregon available through the Transportation Enhancement
Bicycle and and the Oxegon Bicycle and Pedestrian Gxant
Pedestrian Programs, as a means of pYOViding needed funding
GYant foY the construction of sidewalk infill on Hall
Proposals Boulevard near Bonita Road. When Txi-Met
provides bus service along Bonita Road, they are
interested in placing a bus stop and shelter at that
location. In pYeparation for future bus service on
Bonita, we are pxoposing grant funding for sidewalk
unprovement and a retairung wall. This would be an
expensive project: $3-400,000. Seeking assistance
from the two grant pxogxams should incxease the
chances of being selected for funding. Txi-Met is
suppoxtive of the project and will submit a letter of
endoYSement for the project. Funding years are
08/09 for one of the gxants with the other grant
available a year latex. The matching fund
requirement is 10 percent.
This item will be scheduled fox Council
consideration on the June 27, 2006 consent agenda.
6. Council Councilor Sherwood repoxted on an Oregon
Liaison Reports Leadership St,mmit on Ending Chronic
Homelessness she attended earlier today. There is
an uutiative to end chxonic homelessness. TheYe is
a new approach to the pYOblem, which supports
uninediately placing people into housing, gaining
trust their trust and encouraging them to utilize
services. She xefexred to a study tracking the
indirect costs of to take care of homeless people.
Costs are gready reduced when housing is provided.
She noted that this pYOgram is "taking off '
nationwide and a ears to be a cost effective and
func 20, 2006'1'igard City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 16
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
good way to addtess the homeless problem. She
refeYred to a progYam curxendy being attempted
locally called "Homeless Connect." This program
offers healthcare and other services and pxovides an
opportunity to get a good count to determine what
services axe needed. Councilor Sherwood said it
has been proven that this program has the potential
to save huge amounts of dollars. She urged the
Council to get behind this politically. A statewide
effort is being organized.
City Manager Prosser said he received a call from a
mail-carriex saying hundreds of flyeYS were being
distributed by an organization called "Tigard First"
saying a Wal-Mart is coming to Tigard. He
Yequested that any Council members who receive a
flyer let staff know. Mayox Dirksen noted that
Representative Galizio advised him that he is not
promoting this activity. There has not been a pre-
application conference for a Wal-Maxt with any
officials at the City of Tigaxd. The City has set up a
sepaYate voice mail box to receive calls and to advise
callers no Wal-Mart applications are in pxocess.
PacTrust has made the initial contact for a potential
large retail space. Councilor Wilson noted that he
talked to a Yepresentative several months ago who
was discussing the possibility of a business center
with light industrial development. Mayox Dirksen
noted that he met with two representatives of
PacTrust who had a footprint proposal fox a
development in the area. There were three
buildings, one large and two smaller. They were
talking about adding parking undex the building.
The PacTrust representatives could not disclose
who their client was as they had signed a non-
disclosure agreement. The Council was reminded
that this is a potential land-use acrion that could
come before the Council and any ex-parte contact
would need to be disclosed. The Council was asked
to keep track of their contacts. '
Mayor Dirksen noted that he had received a lettex
from the National League of Ciries asking the Ciry
of Tigard to parricipate in the Conference to be held
in Reno with a display of the Good Govexnance
Award that the Ci received in 2005. The Good
June 20, 2006 Tigard City Council Workshop Mecting Minutcs pagc 17
enda Item Discussion & Comments Action Items follow u
Governance Award was related to the downtown
public infoxmation efforts. It was estimated that it
would cost about $5,000 to make the display booth.
After discussion Council decided that rather than
make the booth at the NLC they would prefex to
put the money into an entry sign in the downtown
area.
Councilor Harding referxed to an e-mail she received
where a TVCTV ex-pxoducer would like to have a
group from Multnomah County produce, at no
charge, prograrrunuig for a Toastmaster club.
CounciloY Harding said that this group should pay a
fee as it is not serving Tigard and their taxes are not
supporting TVCTV. In addition, this type of
pxogramming is fox pexsonal growth and
development. Consensus of Council was in
agreement with Councilor Harding. Councilor
Harding cannot attend the meeting on Thursday; IT
Director Ehrenfeld will attend. In another
Execurive Session matter, City Council affirmed that
Councilor HaYding should review and direct IT
Director Ehrenfeld on what the City of Tigard's
position is.
Councilox Harding commented about mowing the
lawn at the libxary. General discussion was that
theYe had been a prefexence of a cominittee to keep
the area "natural"; however, this could be revisited
and some maintenance considered. Thexe have
been a number of negative comments received. City
Manager Prosser advised he will visit with Public
WoYks Ditector Koellermeier about this.
7. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 8:57 pm Motion by Councilor
of Meeting Woodruff, seconded by Wilson
to adjourn meeting.
The motion was approved by a
unanimous vote of Council
present.
Mayor Dirksen Yes
Councilor Harding Yes
Councilor Wilson Yes
Councilor Woodruff Yes
Council Sherwood Yes
June 20, 2006'I'igatd City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes page 18
Oa4(A2~AAI I-LP ttJ
Catherine Wheadey, City Reco der
Attest:
~
Mayor, ity of Tigard
Date: c'O
Jiuie 20, 2006'Tigard City Council Workshop Mecung Minutes page 19
-
' MEMORANDUM
TIGARD
TO: Craig Prosser, City Manager
rROM: Tom Coffee, Interim CD Director
1ZE:• Preliminary Findings for the City of Bull Mountain Economic Feasibiliry
Statement
DATE: June 14, 2006
'City staff from appropriate departments have been reviewing the Economic Feasibiliry
Statement (EFS) for the City of Bull Mountain. This memorandum summarizes the
preliminary findings made by staff regarding the EFS. Staff is continuing its evaluation and
will provide a final report to City Council for its meeting on July 11, 2006.
State Law Evaluation Criteria Review of the EFS was undertaken in accordance with applicable state law. ORS 221
requires that the EFS: "Indicate that the proposed city must plan for and provide utban
services in a cost-effective manner at the minimum level adequate to meet current needs and
projected growth." State law specifies that the EFS shall conta.in: "Proposed first and third
year budgets for the new city demonstrating its economic feasibility." ORS 221 also allows
for the governing body of a neighboring city to raise objections to the proposed
incorporation if it finds that it will adversely affect the city. Furthermore, the City of Tigard
would be a major property owner in the proposed city.
Cost Effective Provision of Urban Services
Water - The EFS assumes that the Tigard Water District will continue to provide water
through the third year budget. That budget is predicated on development of Areas 2 and 3
(Areas 63 & 64) to 15% of their projected density. Areas 2 and 3 axe outside the boundaries
of the Tigard Water District. The current agreement does not obligate Tigard to provide
water outside the 1994 boundaries of the Water District.
Parks - The EFS estimates that approxirriately 61 acres of parks are needed to meet the
minimum level of service for the current residents of the City of Bull Mountain. Given
current land values in the area, staff estimates that approxirnately $39.7 million would be
needed to obtain and develop the 61 acres of parks. The proposed budgets do not include
funding for the acquisition and development of a minimum level of park services. The EFS
1
does however provide budget amounts for annual operation and maintenance of the non-
existent parks.
Parks SDC is discussed as a source of fund.ing for parks; however, because the city would
have no parks initially, an additional revenue source would have to be identified to fund
those portions of projects that would not meet SDC funding criteria.
Police - The provision of police services is proposed to be through a contract with the
Washington County Sheriff's Office. The level of service under the contract is proposed to
be the equivalent of .5 officer per thousand. This would be a reduction in service of -.5
officer per thousand from the current Enhanced Sheriffls Patrol District of 1.0 officer per
thousand. Projected population increases in the proposed city will further degrade police
service levels from the .5 officer per thousand ratio that is funded in the,fitst year budget
because no increase in staffing levels is included in the third year budget.
Librar - The EFS assumes that the new ciry will receive its library services from the
Washington County Cooperative Library Services. The City of Bull Mountain would be the
only city in Washington Counry, including the smaller cities of Banks, Gaston, King City,
Durham, and North Plains, not to have its own Library.
Street Lights - the EFS does not address the existence of numerous street light d.istrlcts
within the area of the proposed city that would be terininated upon incorporation. The
costs for energy and maintenance to continue the existing street light service is not included
in the proposed budgets.
Proposed First (.2008) and Third (2010) Year Budgets
Expenditures - Ovexall staffls assessment of the EFS's first and third year budgets is that
they understate the costs that could be reasonably associated with the operations of a city
that grows from 8,509 to 9,009 in three years. The following are some examples:
Inflation Factor - No inflation factors are applied to the expenditure forecast. As a result, the
expenditure figures are understated and not realistic compared to the corresponding
revenues for the same period.
Startup Costs - It is unclear what the amount of startup costs that will be incurred from
November 7, 2006 through November 2007, when the first tax revenues are available, will
be. The use of tax anticipation notes, to be paid back during the first two fiscal years, to
covex the startup costs may impact the new city's reserve and contingency funds.
Insurance - While the EFS includes insurance in employees benefits, there is no mention of
coverage for Public Entiry Liability, Property and Mobile Equipment, Auto Physical
Damage, and Workers' Compensation. Tigard pays over $500,000 a year for insurance
2
coverage and worker's compensation. Under "Miscellaneous Non-Departmental Services"
the EFS budget includes $75,000 for general liability insurance, the city website and monthly
newsletters. The proposed budget understates the likely cost of this type of insurance.
Employee Retirement Costs - The EFS recommends an employee retirement contribution
of 8%, presumably because this is the amount contributed by Tigard for its employees.
Tigard contributes 10% of salary for represented employees and 11% of salary for
management employees. The EFS recommendation appears low.
Technology- - Other than the annualized cost for computers and a webpage, the EFS does
not include the costs associated with maintaining a network and the acquisition and licensing
of software programs.
Ci Hall - The EFS recognizes the need for a building in which the new city can conduct its
citizens' business. This need is addressed by the assumption that for an annual cost of $10 a
square foot for the city's space needs can be met whether a city hall is built or leased. The
City of Tigard's experience is that it costs $8 a square foot just for maintenance and utilities
in buildings owned by the City.
Debt Service - The EFS states that the new city will have to rely on tax anticipation
borrowing for cash flow purposes. The recommended reserve level is so low that the new
city will likely have to rely on this borrowing for the foreseeable future. The EFS budget
does not provide for debt service costs, stating that this can be absorbed in the
miscellaneous materials and services and contingency expenses. This is not realistic.
Revenues - In contrast to the understatement of costs, the EFS contains cases where the
anticipated revenues are overstated.
Planning Grants - Reliance on grants to fund 50% of the city's upfront comprehensive
planning costs. The major source of the grant funding is assumed to be Metro. The primary
purpose of Metro's planning grants will be for concept planning of areas recendy added to
the Urban Growth Boundary (Areas 63 & 64). To assume that Metro would award a grant to
pay for the $162,000 annual costs of a two person planning department is problematic given
the purpose of the construction excise tax.
Property Tax Revenue - The third yeax budget assumes an increase of $49.6 million in
assessed value from Areas 2 and 3(Areas 63 & 64). This increase in value is attributed to the
construction of 361 new residences between 2007 and 2009. It is unrealistic to assume that
any new development will occur in those areas, given the time required to develop and
approve concept plans, process the actual development proposals and construct the needed
infrastructure prior to the issuance of building permits. Without the assumed 361 new
residents, property tax revenue in the third budget year would be reduced by approximately
$140,864.
3
Revenue Growth - The EFS assumes a 3% growth in the properry tax revenues, but states
costs in 2006 dollars creating an inconsistency in the budgets.
Effects on the Citv,Tof Tigard
Police Services - Tigard has a police staffing ratio of 1.35 officers per thousand population
compared to the proposed new city staffing ratio of .5. Because emergency response times
are a function of proximity and availability and it is Washington County Dispatch policy to
send the nearest available unit when the in-district unit is not available, Tigard will likely be
expected to respond. The extent to which this occurs will amount to a subsidy of the new
city's police services by the citizens of Tigard.
Library - As noted above, the new city has no plans to build or operate a library, but will rely
on the provision of library services from other libraries in the County. Tigard's new library,
which was funded by current and future City taxpayers, is the closest library to the proposed
City of Bull Mountain. The citizens of the new city will be contributing to the operation and
maintenance of the Tigard Library through a county levy, they will be utilizing a$12 million
facility that they will not have had to pay for.
Parks - Until the new city can provide parks, it is assumed that the residents of the City of
Bull Mountain will use nearby parks in Tigard - parks that were purchased and are
maintained by Tigard taxpayers.
Staff will be available to assist the City Council in further review and d.iscussion of the EFS.
4
City • Bull • .
Economic Feasibility
Statement
Pre• . e• •
Friends • Bull • .
25, 2
ECONorthwest '
ECONOMICS • FINANCE • PLANNING
888 SW Fifth Avenue
Suite 1460
Portland, Oregon 97204
503-222-6060
www.econw.com
This page is intentionally left blank.
Table of Contents
Page
Table of contents i
Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................1-1
Background 1-1
Methods 1-2
Organization of this report 1-2
Comparison of Existing and Proposed Tax Consequences 1-3
Chapter 2: Legal requirements and assumptions and limitations...... 2-1
I ntrod uction 2-1
Legal requirements 2-1
Assumptions and limitations 2-3
Chapter 3: Scope of public facilities and services required
(forecasts) 3-1
I ntrod uction 3-1
Land use 3-1
Dwelling units and population 3-7
Assessed value of property 3-8
Forecast summaries 3-9
Chapter 4: Fiscal Evaluation ...................................................................4-1
Introduction 4-1
Potential capital needs 4-1
Service provider agreements 4-2
Expenses associated with city operations (general government services) 4-2
Revenue Sources 4-20
Permanent tax rate and summary budgets: FY 2008, 2010, and 2017 4-24
Appendix A: Services that remain unchanged A-1
Appendix B: Interviews B-1
Appendix C: Study Area 7 C-1
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page i
. This page is intentionally left blank.
Chapter 1 I1trO uCtion
BACKGROUND
The Friends of Bull Mountain (hereafter, "the FOBM" or "the Committee") is
a local group that has taken a lead role in studying future urbanization issues in
the Bull Mountain area. lts members are considering placing the question of
incorporation on the ballot. According to state law', to place an incorporation
proposal on the ballot, the chief petitioners must prepare an economic feasibility
statement that includes:
• A description of the services and functions to be performed or provided by
the proposed city
• An analysis of the relationship between those services and functions and
other existing or needed government services
• Proposed first- and third-year budgets for the new city demonstrating its ,
economic feasibility
• A permanent tax rate limit for operating taxes for the proposed city
The petitioners must plan for residential development in accordance with
Metro's planning for the area. To prepare the economic feasibility statement, the
FOBM contracted with ECONorthwest. Representatives of the FOBM and
ECONorthwest jointly decided that because of the many uncertainfies about the
potential services (e.g., which services, provided by whom, at what level, to how
many people and when) the Committee would be best served by conducting the
analysis in two phases. ECONorthwest delivered an economic analysis to FOBM
on March 31, 2006, which was a precursor to this economic feasibility statement.
This reporl represents the reguired economic feasibility statement. Based on
interviews with a range of local service providers, ECONorthwest deems the
proposed incorporation of the City of Bull Mountain economically feasible.
Through a combination of contracted or direct service provision, the proposed
City could provide the full range of typical municipal functions including public
safety, fire, planning, parks, street maintenance, sewer, water, and general
administration. The reyuired permanent operating tax rate limit for the proposed
City depends, in the large part, on the level of service future citizens would desire.
ECONorthwest estimates that-to deliver the city services as outlined in this
report-the permanent operating tax rate limit should be $2.84 per $1,000 of
assessed value, and believes that rate will be proposed by the petitioners.
' See ORS 22 ].031(2) and 221.035.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 1-1
METHODS
The steps of the analysis follow. The chapters of this report are organized to
parallel these steps:
1. Define the legal reyuirements, study area, and analysis period (Chapter 2).
2. Describe current conditions and likely future conditions in tlie proposed
City (Chapter 3). The focus is on factors that drive the demand for public
facilities and services. Those factors are population and employment
growth, and the development needed to accommodate that growth. There
is almost no employment use in the study area, and very little is forecast,
thus, the analysis focuses primarily on residential uses.
The analysis in Chapter 3 discusses forecasts for four variables that are
key in determining the demand for services, and thus the budget for those
services (the cost and revenue requirements): population, dwelling units,
employment, and assessed value. For each, the discussion has two parts: (1)
existing conditions, and (2) forecasts. The discussion of forecasts is further
divided: (a) a description of a base forecast for the study area (prior work
by the County and Metro; (b) ECONorthwest's evaluation of that forecast;
and (c) a recommended forecast to be used in the rest of this Economic
Feasibility Statement.
3. Describe how the expected growth would be serviced (Chapter 4). The
chapter's work is based primarily on interviews with service providers
(and secondarily on prior studies) and comparisons with similarly sized
cities. It describes many issues that the FOBM will face regarding the
level of service the proposed City will provide as a basis for making
assumptions about future arrangements (and costs and revenues).
4. Describe the fiscal (budget) impacts of having a new city provide services
(Chapter 4). The analysis discusses capital and operation, but per the
requirements of the law and our contract it focuses on operation. As
required by law, the analysis is for years one and three (FY 2008 and
FY 2010, respectively); per our contract, we also show Year 10 (FY 2017).
ORGANIZATION OF THIS REPORT
The analysis and report are organized as follows:
• Chapter 2: Methods and Assumptions describes the legal requirements,
methods, data sources, key assumptions, and limitations for this analysis.
• Chapter 3: Scope of Public Facilities and Services Required
(Forecasts) uses forecasts of growth to estimate the need for different
types and amounts of public facilities and services. The key assumption is
that population and employment growth, and the development that
accommodates that growth, are the drivers of demand for public facilities.
The chapter starts with a description of existing conditions (focusing on
characteristics like population, households, dwelling units, employment,
and taxable assessed value), and then proceeds to discuss (with data and
analysis) the reasonableness of the growth forecasts. It concludes with a
Page 1-2 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
recommendation about the most suitable forecast for each key variable for
this analysis, and uses that recommended scenario in the evaluation in
subsequent chapters.'
• Chapter 4: Fiscal Evaluation builds on the analysis and assumptions in
Chapters 2 and 3, to describe likely capital and operating costs and
revenue sources that would be available for a new city. The analysis
comes primarily from prior studies and interviews with service providers.
The focus of this chapter (because it is the focus of state law relating to an
Economic Feasibility Statement) is the operating budgets for fiscal years
2008, 2010, and 2017. The chapter concludes with a single summary
budget; however, other alternatives are feasible given the wide variety of
service options and alternatives requested by FOBM.
• Appendix A: Services That Remain Unchanged describes the reasons
for assuming that certain service providers will continue to provide
services to Bull Mountain residents whether the area incorporates or not.
For each service, it describes current service arrangements (type of service
and costs) based on our interviews of service providers.
• Appendix B: lnterviews provides information about individuals
contacted for information and when.
• Appendix C: Study Area 7 considers the fiscal effect of adding a small
study area to the proposed City's boundaries.
COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED TAX
CONSEQUENCES
Table 1-1 illustrates comparative total property tax rates for unincorporated
Bull Mountain under the current situation, incorporation, and annexation to
Tigard. Although the new City will impose a tax rate of $2.84 per thousand
, dollars of assessed value, residents will no longer pay $1.13 to the Enhanced
Sheriff's Patrol District, and $0.2456 to the Urban Roads Maintenance District,
meaning that residents' tax rate will only go up a net of $1.46.
Z To allow the creation of a year-] 0 budget, we must forecast (make assumptions about) the development pattems for FY 2017. To the
extent our analysis allows, we want those to be consistent with existing plans as defined by Counry and Metro planners.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 1-3
Table 1-1. Total Property Tax Rates Per $1000 of Assessed
Value For Current Situation, Incorporation, and Annexation
to Tigard
Current Tax Incorporation City of Tigard
Rate Tax Rate Tax Rate (1)
General Government
• Washington County 2.2484 2.2484 2.2484
Metro 0.0966 0.0966 0.0966
Port of Portland 0.0701 0.0701 0.0701
TVFR 1.5252 1.5252 1.5252
Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol 1.1300 0 0
Urban Roads Maintenance 0.2456 0 0
Cit Tax Rate 0 2.8400 2.5131
Total 5.3159 6.7803 6.4534
Source: Washington County Assessors Office, ECONorthwest
(1) City of Tigard residents also pay a street maintenance fee of $2.18 per month.
Page 1-4 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Legal Requirements and
Chapter2 Assumptions and Limitations
INTRODUCTION
Many things will change for residents of the Bull Mountain area as the area
urbanizes. But this study is not focused on the fiscal effects of urbanization: it is
looking at the effects of incorporation. An assumption of this study is that
urbanization will occur whether or not the area is incorporated into a new city.
This chapter describes the assumptions researchers made to describe how
development could happen under an incorporation scenario. It also describes the
legal requirements for incorporating in Oregon and within the Metro region.
This chapter has two sections: .
• Legal requirements describes the state and regional legal requirements
for an Economic Feasibility Statement.
• Assumptions and limitations lists the key assumptions made to forecast
future conditions in an incorporated Bull Mountain.
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
This section discusses the legal requirements with which the Economic
Feasibility Statement (EFS) must comply. The following discussion is
ECONorthwest's interpretation of the requirements; however, we are not lawyers
and the discussion should not be taken as a legal opinion.
The requirements for incorporating a new city are set forth in ORS 221.031
and 221.035. According to ORS 221.035, chief petitioners who wish to place an
incorporation proposal on the ballot must prepare an EFS that includes the
following:
• A description of the services and functions to be performed or provided by
the proposed city
• An analysis of the relationship between those services and functions and
other existing or needed government services
• Proposed first- and third-year budgets for the new city demonstrating its
economic feasibility.
ORS 221.031(2) states the petition for incorporation must include:
• The name of the proposed city
• A map indicating the exterior boundaries of the proposed city
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 2-1
• A proposed permanent rate limit for operating taxes that would generate
operating tax revenues sufficient to support an adequate level of
municipal services
In addition, ORS 221.031(2), states that the tax rate limit shall be expressed in
dollars per thousand dollars of assessed value and the tax rate limit shall be
calculated for the latest tax year for which the assessed value of the proposed city
is available. Assessed value data provided by the Washington County Assessor
for the Bull Mountain incorporation area is current as of March 2006.
To determine an adequate level of urban services, ECONorthwest relied on
interviews with current service providers, prior studies and comparisons with
similarly sized Oregon cities.
in general, other assumptions in the analysis are mid-range regarding costs
and at or below mid-range for level of service. The conclusions in this analysis
are within the requirements of the law by planning for urban services at the
minimum level adequate to meet current needs and projected growth.
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
The proposed City of Bull Mountain must comply with Metro Code
3.07.1120(b), which states that the minimum provision for average residential
density is at least 10 dwelling units per net developable residential acre or lower
densities that conforrn to the 2040 Growth Concept Plan design type designation
for the area. According to Metro planner Ray Valone, the proposed City of Bull
Mountain will be held to the minimum 10 dwelling units per net residential acre.
This EFS has taken into account Titles I and II of Metro's Urban Growth
Management Functional Plan.
ADDITIONAL PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
The proposed city would be required to develop and adopt a public facility
plan and transportation system plan after incorporation.' An urban service
agreement with Clean Water Services must include a provision to develop and
adopt sections of a public facility plan for sewer and storm water, and the
agreements with the Tigard Water District must include a provision to develop the
plan's water-related sections.
' ORS 221.031 was amended in 2005 by House Bi112722. This bill eliminates the authoriry of a city within three miles of the proposed ciry
to veto incorporation. It also gives the County broader authoriry to approve the incorporation of a new city
' ORS 197.712(2)(e) states that a city with a population greater than 2,500 people is required to develop and adopt a public facility plan.
ORS 197.230(4) states that cities with a population of 1,0,000 or higher must complete. transportation system plans.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 2-2
INCORPORATION OF AREAS OUTSIDE OF METRO'S UGB
Metro Code 3.09.130(b)' states that an incorporation boundary may include
land outside of the Metro UGB, but that the area cannot be "urbanized" until the
area is added to the UGB. This analysis assumes that the land outside of the UGB
will not change use during the study period.
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
The findings of this feasibility statement depend on assumptions about data
and forecasting methods (especially about variables that will drive the future
demand far services, and their costs and revenues). We have identified most of
these assumptions in our descriptions of specific statistical data, revenues, and
expenses. There are, however, a few overriding assumptions that apply to all areas
of this study, and are therefare key to understanding the findings.
• Timing of incorporation. According to ORS 221.050(4)(a), if the voters
approve incorporation, the area becomes a city from the date of the
election (November 2006). During the first three to seven months the city
council will adopt a charter and a budget, and will probably not have a
city manager (if they decide to have a city-manager form of government)
and staff until after July 2007. Thus, we created a city budget for the first
complete fiscal year beginning July 1, 2007. We also assume that the
Council will choose a city-manager form of government, as is common
in Oregon, and forecast staffing and costs accordingly.
• Forecast period. State law requires that an EFS describe a budget for the
first and third years of city operation. The Friends of Bull Mountain
recognize that three years may not show much effect in the study area.
During the first three years, forecasts show modest growth on the
assumption that the new city will be engaged in planning for future
urbanization, but will not have the zoning in place to allow UGB areas 63
and 64 to begin developing until approximately calendar year 2008. Year
10 will look much different from Year 3. Thus, our analysis will also
look also at Year 10, by which Areas 2 and 3(i.e. UGB 63 and UGB 64)
will be substantially built out.
• Inherent uncertainty in long-run economic and development
. forecasts. Our analysis is essentially a 10-year forecast from
incorporation date, and 10-year forecasts are rarely perfect matches with
future reality, particularly towards year 10. Our 10-year forecast is
dependent on 10-year forecasts of population and employment, property
' Metro Code 3.09.130(b) states, "A petition to incorporate a ciry that includes territory within Metro's jurisdictional boundary may include
territory that lies outside Metro's UGB. However, incorporation of a city with such territory shall not authorize urbanization of that
territory until the Metro Council includes the territory in the UGB pursuant to Metro Code Chapter 3.01."
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 2-3
value changes, price inflation, and many other variables that are less
reliable the longer the forecast period. Our analysis uses the best
forecasts available, but changes in any of these variables from the
forecasts we have used may impact the results of our analysis.
• Contracting for services. Our analysis assumes that, in some instances,
the proposed City will contract with existing service providers for the
provision of local governmental services. Washington County staff noted
that the information provided for this study does not constitute a policy
decision by the Washington County Commission to contract for services.
Instead, it describes a reasonable scenario for services if the County
Commissioners decide to approve a contracting relationship with the
proposed City and all parties agree to terms that are similar to those in
this study. The County Commission reserves the right to negotiate all
points of a future contract for services with the proposed City.
Based on discussions with the FOBM members and existing service
providers, all services will be contracted services except for general city
administration, planning, and parks. The role of the new City of Bull
Mountain will be limited to establishing intergovernmental agreements
with service providers to allow them to service the City residents.
• Estimating revenues and expenditures. Given a range of possible
revenue and expenditure alternatives, ECONorthwest made assumptions
toward the mid-range. However, we generally favored the low side for
revenues and the high side for expenditures.
• Capital costs. Decisions regarding capital improvements affect operation
and maintenance costs. Legal requirements for the economic feasibility
statement, however, do not require a capital budget.
The capital budget has a direct relationship to the operation and
maintenance budget for many services. First, the possible construction of
a new City Hall, roads, and parks all directly generate higher operation
and maintenance costs. Second, more investment in capital could mean
better quality or more efficient capital, which could mean lower annual
operation and maintenance costs in the future. Third, it can be the case
that if a fixed budget gets allocated more heavily to capital, then there is
less to spend on maintenance, and vice versa. Capital improvement costs
will ultimately be borne by Bull Mountain residents, unless regional,
state, or national funds can successfully be acquired to pay for
improvements.
• Reporting of future expenses and revenues. We report all of our
findings in 2006 dollars (unless otherwise stated). By doing so, we
implicitly assume that the effects of future inflation will be similar on the
expenditure and revenue sides of the operating and maintenance budgets.
in general, municipal wages and materials typically increase with the
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 2-4
Consumer Price Index for Urban consumers (CPl-U), though historically
the number and breadth of services has increased so that total municipal
costs have increased faster than the average rate of inflation. Oregon's
recent problems with PERS suggest that trend could continue. On the
revenue side, we assume that key sources such as property taxes will
, keep pace with inflation. Under Measure 50, property taxes for existing
properties are limited to 3 percent annual growth. Therefore, if inflation
were to average in excess of 3 percent annually, the City's fiscal position
would be worse than we have forecast.
• Limitations of long-run fiscal analysis. This economic feasibility
statement requires projection of ten-year growth patterns dependent upon
policy decisions that have not yet occurred. Under these conditions, all
aspects of the analysis are uncertain-not only are underlying economic
conditions uncertain, but underlying policy conditions are as well. For
example, laws affecting revenue collection and expenditure requirements
can change substantially-one need only look at legislation over the past
20 years to see how changes in laws about things like affirmative action,
treatment of persons with disabilities, building codes, environmental and
land use regulation, and property tax relief have changed the local fiscal
picture.
The charge of this study is to describe the long-run economic feasibility
of Bull Mountain. There are no models in general-and none for Bull
Mountain-that can simultaneously deal with even a handful of the most
significant economic and policy variables that will determine the future
City's fiscal position over the next 10 years. Thus, we are in the position
of having to describe the future using scenarios whose results derive
from some assumptions that we believe are reasonable (understandable,
intuitive, and consistent with the best practices described in the
professional literature).
Hence, our caveat: we do not believe that the results of this report can be
summarized accurately in a few sentences. The results are contingent: if
you accept these assumptions about data and relationships, and future
policy makers agree, then the fiscal implications are these. But there will
always be a legitimate debate about the data and relationships. Our focus
in this report has been to make the data and relationships we are using
clear so that people can evaluate them. If they are judged reasonable,
then there is a presumption that the results they generate are also
reasonable. Ultimately, our goals are (1) to describe the fiscal conditions
of a future City of Bull Mountain in a context that fits with the
understanding and vision of the people who know the area best, and (2)
to be clear about the relationships between the desired level of municipal
services and fiscal impacts.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 2-5
This page is intentionally left blank.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 2-6
Scope of Public Facilities and
Chapter3 Services Required (Forecasts)
INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses the likely future growth in the Bull Mountain study
area under an incorporation scenario. It describes likely future conditions in FY
2008, FY 2010, and FY 2017 in the study area. The focus is on factors that drive
the demand for public facilities and services, and the ability to pay for these
services through property taxes and other sources of funds. Those factors are:
• Land use
• Population
• Employment
• Assessed value
Bull Mountain is nearly entirely residential and no plans exist for a
commercial center. ECONorthwest assumes that, throughout the forecast period,
employment will not play a major role in defining Bull Mountain's fiscal position.
Over some time period, commercial activity may appear on Roy Rogers Road
south of Scholls Ferry Road in UGB Area 64. If commercial activity appears,
ECONorthwest would expect that the proposed City's fiscal position would
strengthen relative to the forecasts described in this report.
Because the forecasts of these variables directly affect the need for and cost of
services, and thus the operating budget of the proposed City, this chapter
evaluates those assumptions in detail. Readers wanting to get quickly to our
conclusions can skip to the last section of this chapter, Forecast Summaries
(page 3-9).
LAND USE
EXISTING LAND USE
The Bull Mountain study area is characterized by a combination of both urban
and rural development patterns. Denser residential neighborhoods are adjacent to
the surrounding cities of Tigard, King City, and Beaverton. Rural residential
development and farmland are located in areas recently added to the Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) or just outside of it. Figure 3-1 shows current land use
designations by tax assessor property code.' The map shows that areas with
' The Washington Counry Assessor's Office assigns a property code to every tax lot that categorizes its current use. The Assessor's data do
not always reflect the actual uses now, but nonetheless provide an approximation of use. The area near SW 133rd Avenue is a case in point
with the Assessor's data indicating a higher concentration of multi-family units than actually exists.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 3-1
existing infrastructure are largely single family residential, while rural and
agricultural land dominates the newly added areas 2 and 3 to the UGB, and areas
outside of the UGB.
Figure 3-1. Current Land Use by Tax Assessor Property Code, Bull
Mountain, 2006
~ r...._; ,
, ; ~ M..~.._;.... }...r.._..
e...:.....____..... , i . ~
. .
~
; , ~ ; ~ ~ \ .._....~•'i~_.~ : ~ i .J
~
: .
.......i . , ~
F
~ ! • •
..M. ' ' F i VtiA4.NUT
SCHO LS FERRY F
.
~--r---
~
- ~ ,
2
~ 1 ,
•
.
, .
~ r.
, ,
LLJ
. ,
Oi "
s..
~ i BULL'MOUN
; _
`f
O
~ j , r..:..~... ,
~ g~~. ~ ` ~ - f J Fi
3
J
LBEBENt} ~ i - ~ i •
Z !z i TT _i ~z'T~;~;
v, . ~
W
, :
-
,
_
,
p .15 63
S~ ~
~ Agricufture Public V . Vacant
~ Industrial Rural Urban Growth Boundary
~ Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Q Study Area Boundary
Source: Metro, RLIS Lite, Washington County Assessor's Office 2006
Table 3-1 shows the number of acres of each type of land use in Bull
Mountain. Study area 1 and other developed areas are dominated by single-family
residential use. Multi-family residential is largely restricted to pockets along Beef
Bend Road. Bull Mountain does not contain a commercial center within the study
area; however, there are several centers close by.
Page 3-2 May 2006 ECONorthwest Bull Mountain EFS
Table 3-1. Total Land Use by Type, Bull Mountain 2006
Single Family Multi-Family
Rurel A riculture Public Residentfal Residential Industrfal Vacant
Study
Area Acres % Acres h Acres °h Acres % Acres % Acres % Acres %
i 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 53.2 5.40/o 784.4 79.9% 24.8 2.5% 3.0 0.3% 116.7 11.9°h
.=0.0°Jo~ :Q.4. O.U°1o-' . 5; , 1>.2%, , 0 0.=- ~t0%.. • O:q. 0:0°fo 788?8 130:$%
3 166.3 76.7% 0.0 0.0% 0.3 0.1% 10.3 4.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 39.9 18.4%
--^s;-~°,~„~-,.~-.._... __-_----,Y_.__..~__......~,._._.. _
"5 ~48:3~`20':3% " 489.9 '79.796 , r 0 0 0.0%
U:0% _ 0.0 _ 0.0°k OA _ 0.4 0
Total 344.2 20.7% 189.1 11.4% 53.5 3.2% 819.7 49.4% 24.8 7.5% 3.0 0.2% 225.4 13.6%
Source: Metro, RLIS Lite, September 2006. Analysis by ECONorthwest.
Column totals may not equal sum of coiumn values due to rounding.
In earlier drafts of this report, ECONorthwest analyzed the land use and service requirements of 16 different
study areas. Only study areas 1, 2, 3, and 5 are the subject of this economic feasibility statement.
In addition to providing current land use information Figure 3-1 also shows
the boundaries of the proposed City of Bull Mountain. The proposed boundary of
the City of Bull Mountain would be defined as follows:
• Area South of Barrows Road between the BPA line and the west boundary
of UGB area 64, south of Scholls Ferry and Barrows Road
• All of UGB area 64 east and west of Roy Rogers and south of Scholls
Ferry
• Area North of Beef Bend Road from Roy Rogers Road to just east of SW
131 st Avenue at the point where the Tigard city limits begin north of Beef
Bend Road, including the Northern half of Beef Bend Road itself
• Area West of Tigard city limits boundary east of SW 133rd Avenue
almost to Bull Mountain Road, to include the Alberta Rider access road
off of SW 133rd Avenue, and the strip to the north running parallel to the
access road to the city boundary at the northern tip of SW 133rd Avenue
• All remaining unincorporated territory south of Bull Mountain Road, west
of SW 133rd Avenue to the north and west back to the BPA line at
Barrows Road
• All of Bull Mountain Road from the Tigard city limits just east of SW
141 st Avenue to Roy Rogers Road
As the name of the proposed City implies, much of the Bull Mountain area is
composed of numerous slopes, as illustrated in Figure 3-2. The western and
south-western areas, in contrast, are slightly sloped.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 3-3
Figure 3-2. Topography of Study Area, Bull Mountain, 2006
%41~~•.~~--`` ~``~~yi''~'° ~ < < i i ~ i ~ l ~i S ~ 5~ l.\l~ ~ `
{ J~ ~ ~ - L/ - '~i, ~
~ i ✓ i t \ ~ r , . i ~ ~~1~ ,4£ " ~ ~ ~ i di ) ; ; iib ~!dI
f`'~~ ~ } ^ \~'~1 t ~ r It~ - Z`•° r'' ` E I ' ''~5;
i~-~ ~ (j-•'-~..,`'~ ~„1 tr ir ( u'i~ +~:~}i} , ~/~r f
~ Z ~r r ~ , _ . ~~i:~~,;, t j ~ ~ _ ~,r } ~ • I r -
.d~~`%
31(~f;~~,%~.=,^•/l"_7 .)r~ J~ ~,,,~~ftf"f 1~ft. 1lr~T ~tl! ~ f ~ ~ ~y ~ , x
j4~~!~> d
j~f`f'{ } ~'JJt ii~ i ~~j}l\•i; ~t~l~r~ E~~ ty~~.""~.Q:. .'`.~li~~~ r~ ~°'d~ g~
r/ 1 j~ ` ~ (I(i r~ 1 i ~Qi \S~t ~`\l1 \ ii S ~ . SC) G,-t~,; i ~'M"•a°..t :i xj7 . .~j;~',i~
4 lr ~
~ -7
M I r~j,
(f'~`~/!tr'.~~~
~~"11 O J~i~~
~A,
5"
: ~ -i ~~~=~-~r l~h~~. ~ . 1..i~~&~~~ /4• ~ lj ~s,• ~ _
`4?9.dG
'
7A 1'• `'7 ~ ~"i,~S~ ~~~j l~j~/
Nl )f i~ ~ - d"'.V" p ro: i . ~ . ~ ~
~ I~ ~?~v ~ ` `'e~ \ u ~ L_' ~ i ~ , t , , , •
i. ~ ~ ~ . ~ . ~'t.....;
'.7(ifT-=-•
1
'1y,~?" - _:;_~...v`~'._~:'~:,;;~---'
` • _
_
~ /~''r ~~~J , _ ..L.__. .
~f~ . ..._v ,
.
11..._.....,....r~
°
R;„zl~
~
' ~~~,"-„s"•'~~ y~- l
~
P,~
~ Contaur = 10 Feet Urban Growth Boundary
Q Study Area Baundary "'''BS
u 0.15 oa os
Source: Metro, RLIS Lite, 2006.
LAND USE FORECAST, FY 2008 AND FY 2010
The UGB dictates the expansion of new urban areas. The UGB runs through
the Bull Mountain Study area, effectively excluding Area S from the possibility of
growth until it is brought into the UGB. Of the study areas within the UGB, the
largely vacant areas 2 and 3 will assume the most growth in the 10-year study
period. However, if the City incorparates, it will take several years for the City to
conduct all ofthe activities necessary to change land use patterns (primarily, (1)
the planning to change the zoning to allow urban levels of development, and (2)
the provision of the infrastructure [mainly roads and sewers] to allow that
development to happen). Thus, we assume that there will be no growth in FY
2008 and only 15 percent of areas 2 and 3 will be built out in. FY 2010. The
remaining areas within the UGB, however, already have the needed infrastructure
available and thus will be built-out immediately. Table 3-2 summarizes our
assumptions for build-out over the study period. However, the timing of build-out
Page 3-4 May 2006 ECONorthwest Bull Mountain EFS
greatly depends on the pace of the City as it works through the writing and
implementation of its Comprehensive Plan (discussed further in Chapter 4), and
the City's ability to provide infrastructure to new areas.
Table 3-2. Percent of Development Build-Out, Buil Mountain FY 2008-
FY 2017
Stud Area FY 2008 FY 2010 FY 2017
1 50% 100% 100%
2
3 0% 15% ~ 100%
~.~0°0~, 4% 0°a'.
Source: ECONorthwest, 2006
In earlier drafts of this report, ECONorthwest analyzed the land use and service requirements of 16 different
study areas. Only study areas 1, 2, 3, and 5 are the subject of this economic feasibility statement.
LAND USE FORECAST, FY 2017
Although most of Bull Mountain will look the same in FY 2017 as in FY
2010, areas 2 and 3 will have the needed infrastructure, such as water,
wastewater, and roads, to allow for full development. In addition, in either Area 2
or 3, two acres will be dedicated to a City Hall, and an additional 25 acres for
schools. Furthermore, 58 acres of parks will be allocated to areas 2, 3 and 5?
With the exception of City Hall, parks, and schools, all future land use in the City
of Bull Mountain is assumed to be residential, and, furthermore, the only
guideline for future land use was to plan for housing to be a mix of 50 percent
single family residential and 50 percent attached or multi-family units as required
by Metro. The forecasted land use designations are shown in Figure 3-3.
' In Study Area 1 the Wesiside Corridor Trail will comprise 3.5 acres of parkland, assuming the section of the 26-mile-long-trail contained
within the proposed City is 1.15 miles long and 25 feet wide. It is not included in the acres above because the trail runs along power lines
owned by the Bonneville Power Administration, which is unbuildable, and not included in our total acres of buildable land. Source: Mel
Huie, Metro
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 3-5
Figure 3-3. Forecasted Land Use, Bull Mountain FY 2017
_ . , ~,.......,1... , I..~
.
_ , ~ _ .
3
: ;
~
r....i_;
;
~ r
~ RRY sM i F
SCHO LS FE ;VC~A4Nt1T I..
`dCE
~ q~`}~L~~* i Pr f °-f 1YJ~i , ..1 i_`_ ~'Y /'S..-7.✓.S-l ~ ~ h
'a ~
~ j w
-
L'
A ~
BUL M~
.
l QUN IN
p . ~ I
~
71~ x q Il y .1~
r' ~ ~ J) c~~• S~ r~ t .
I~j
0
C)
t`IF7.~~~
t-
. . ~ ~ e~ ~ s . S ~S Y;/`` ~ : ~
w
,.k ~~t~~ ~ ' • : ~x : Y~~r"~1~. 'S~~
"BE~F"'BENt7 : ~ fI It t"_'~ .
-W~
vzi
,
w
f
~ ;
~r
MOes _ } ` s
177-7 Agriculture ~ Public Urban Growth Boundary
~ Industrial Rurai Q StudyArea Boundary
Residential (MFR, SFR) Vacant
Source: Metro, RLIS Lite, 2006, analysis ECONorthwest
Additionally, by FY 2017, Metro may expand the UGB, adding Area 5.
According to Ray Valone of Metro, the earliest that new land would be added to ~
the UGB is approximately 2013. Given the amount of time that it takes to plan for
new development in UGB expansion areas, we assume that it will take at least
three years to do the necessary planning in any expansion areas. Thus, we assume
that even if Area 5 were added to the UGB before FY 2017, it would not have the
planning and the infrastructure in place for any development. Thus, the analysis
assumes that no growth will occur in Area 5 by FY 2017.
Table 3-3 shows the number of net buildable acres of land use by study area.
Of the 1,660 total acres in the study area, approximately 759 acres are
agricultural, rural, or vacant. Taking out unbuildable areas (wetlands, riparian
Page 3-6 May 2006 ECONorthwest Bull Mountain EFS
areas, steep slopes), 25 acres for schools, 2 acres for a City Hall, and 58 acres for
parks and roads, leaves approximately 458.3 buildable acres.' However, since
Area 5 is not within the UGB only 295.3 acres are available for residential
development.
Table 3-3. Acres and Percent of Net Buildable Land, Bull Mountain
2006
% of Tot81 % Of Study
Study Area Acres Buildable Area
Within UGB
1 55.0 12.0% 5.6%
_1:06 Z
F ~3 1 °lo
3 134.3 29.3% 62.0%
, o
00
5 56.,. ..,,68.7/0
Total 458.3 100.0% 27.6%
Within UGB 295.3 64.4% 17.89/6
Source: Metro, RLIS Lite, 2006, analysis ECONorthwest
In earlier drafts of this report, ECONorthwest analyzed the land use and service requirements of 16 different
study areas. Only study areas 1, 2, 3, and 5 are the subject of this economic feasibility statement.
DWELLING UNITS AND POPULATION
EXISTING DWELLING UNITS AND POPULATION
The current Bull Mountain study area has a population of 8,018 people and
approximately 3,084 dwelling units. The dwelling unit estimate is based upon tax
lot data from the Washington County Assessor's office, and the population
estimate is then based upon a 2.6 person per dwelling unit average derived from
2000 census data.
DWELLING UNIT AND POPULATION FORECAST, FY 2008 AND
FY 2010
The population and dwelling unit forecasts are largely dependent on land
supply, and the build-out percentage assumptions from Table 3-2. With the urban
infrastructure already in place and ample demand for homes; the analysis
assumes that any remaining buildable land in Area 1 will be built out
immediately. ln contrast, areas 2 and 3, with their need for planning and lack of
urban infrastructure, will begin to be built out by FY 2010. Furtherniore, the
analysis assumes that areas outside of the UGB will experience no growth. The
primary factor driving ECONorthwest's forecast is land supply. The demand for
' Vacant tax lots are assigned a size value after Title 3, slopes, public land and developed land have been removed. Less than 375 acres =
size l; between .375 and I acres = size 2; greater than I acre = size 3. Size 1 lots are assumed to not need roads, Size 2 lots are assumed to
need 10% allocated for roads, and Size 3 lots are assumed to need 18.85% allocated for roads. Source: Carol Hall, GIS Specialist, Metro.
° Given Washington County's population is forecasted to grow by approximately 100,000 people over the next ten yeais, the demand
necessary to support our assumption that growth will be fueled by land supply is demonstrated. Source: Portland State University
Population Research Center.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 3-7
land in Bull Mountain is such that additional dwelling units and people to occupy
them will grow as fast as the necessary infrastructure is in place.
Given Metro requirements for minimum densities of new development within
urban areas, current forecasts for the Bull Mountain area call for relatively dense
development. Metro planning documents anticipate that this development will be
comprised of (1) single-family-detached housing on relatively small lots, (2)
single-family-attached housing, and (3) multi-family housing, with a 50/50 split
of single-family and multi-family with a net density of 10 dwelling units per acre.
Thus, total forecasted dwelling units in years one and three of incorporation is
3,277 and 3,829, respectively. The assumption of 2.6 persons per dwelling unit
implies a population of 8,519 and 9,957 in years FY 2008 and FY 2010,
respectively.
DWELLING UNIT AND POPULATION FORECAST, FY 2017
These methods resulted in a FY 2017 population forecast of 5,872 dwelling
units and 15,268 people (assuming 2.6 people per dwelling unit). Thus the
population of the City of Bull Mountain is forecasted to almost double by
FY 2017.
ASSESSED VALUE OF PROPERTY
EXISTING ASSESSED VALUE
A forecast of the future assessed value of property is essential for forecasting
potential property tax revenues for the future City of Bull Mountain. The value of
taxable property for the base year of 2005 was derived from data from the
Washington County Assessor.
ECONorthwest's analyses of Washington County tax lot data find that the
entire study area has'a combined market value of real property of $959 million.
Of this total market value, the taxable assessed values of real property equals
$685.8 million.
ASSESSED VALUE FORECAST, FY 2008 AND FY 2010
Oregon's tax code has been complicated by several major amendments in the
last 10-plus years. The future value of taxable assessed values (in 2006 dollars) is
governed by four factors: (1) the Measure 50 limit on assessed value growth of 3
percent per year, (2) expected general inflation, (3) the growth in the assessed
market value of new construction or on the associated property that has undergone
a change in land-use categorization, and (4) changes in the County's Change
Property Ratio (CPR) for each category of property, which is used to translate
between the market value of newly introduced value and the taxable assessed
value.
Since much of the housing in the Bull Mountain area is recent development it
is safe to assume that future housing starts in expanding study areas will be
Page 3-8 May 2006 ECONorthwest Bull Mountain EFS
, comprised of similar sized, quality, and priced housing. Hence assessed value
forecasts are based upon an average single-family dwelling unit real market value
of $322,500 and an average multi-family dwelling unit real market value of
$97,500. Given this assumption each acre of developable land will yield a net of
$2.1 million in real market value.
However, ECONorthwest assumes the growth in the unit-value of new
development will keep pace with the growth in market values in Washington
County as a whole. What this means, in practical terms, is that any increase or
decrease in the real unit-value of development will be counteracted by changes in
the CPR for each category of use that the Assessor uses to translate the market
value of additions to the taxable value. According to staff at the Assessor's
Office, in tax-year 2005, these CPRs are 0.697 and 0.754 for single-family and
multi-family uses, respectively. For example, Measure 50 restricts assessed
markets values to increase at only 3 percent per year, and if the real market value
of properiy in Bull Mountain is increasing at 5 percent per year the change ratio
will decrease over time.
Given this study's assumption that areas with urban infrastructure will build-
out immediately and areas 2 and 3 will begin to build-out by FY 2010, our
estimates of taxable assessed value for the years FY 2008 and FY 2010 are
governed by: the 3 percent growth limit introduced by Measure 50, the growth of
assessed market value of new construction, and changes in the County's CPR.
The second factor will, of course, be the driving factor for the growth of the
assessed value tax base. As vacant, rural, and agricultural land is rezoned,
subdivided, and built out, the value of the land will increase rapidly. Additions to
property values that are associated with development of the Bull Mountain area
reflect (1) the value of new improvements (buildings) that are erected within the
City boundaries and (2) changes in the value of the land on which those
improvements are built (which under Oregon statute, are captured as "new"
taxable value at the time the land is developed). Ultimately we forecast assessed
value to grow to $713 million and $789 million (2006 in FY 2008 and FY 2010
respectively.
ASSESSED VALUE FORECAST, FY 2017
The forecast for assessed values for Bull Mountain FY 2017 is based upon the
same assumptions as our FY 2008 and FY 2010 forecasts. However, by FY 2017,
Areas 2 and 3 will be fully built out, which will result in a larger tax base. That
translates to forecasted taxable assessed values of $1.02 billion in FY 2017.
FORECAST SUMMARIES
Table 3-4 summarizes the forecasts for the Bull Mountain study area for FY
2008, FY 2010, and FY 2017. These forecasts illustrate the transformation that
regional and local planners anticipate for the Bull Mountain area. Population is
forecasted to nearly double over the study period. The demands on government
services, and the City's ability to pay for these services, are analyzed in
Chapter 4.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 3-9
Table 34. Summary of Recommended Forecasts for Dwelling Units,
Population, and Assessed Value, Bull Mountain FY 2008-FY 2017
FY 2008 FY 2010 FY 2017
Assessed Assessed Assessed
Study Dwelling Value Dwelling Value Dwelling Value
Area Units Population (millions) Units Population (millions) Units Population (millions)
1 3,273 8,509 $689.2 3,465 9,009 $714.6 3,465 9,009 $707.4
~ i~•3 33.9 1,063 =:~.2,7&437.7
3 1 3 $9.5 203 527 $37.3 1,344 3,496 $170.1
5 U 0,1`: $2.717' U . 0: 2J 0 0 2J
Total 3,277 8 519 713 3,829 9 957 789 5,872 15,268 1 018
Source: Metro RLIS Lite 2006, Washington County Assessors Office 2006, Analysis by ECONorthwest
Coiumn totals may not equal sum of column values due to rounding.
In earlier drafts of this report, ECONorthwest analyzed the land use and service requirements of 16 different
study areas. Only study areas 1, 2, 3, and 5 are the subjects of this economic feasibility statement.
Page 3-10 May 2006 ECONorthwest Bull Mountain EFS
Chapter4 Fiscal Evaluation
INTRODUCTION
Chapter Three concludes with recommended estimates for various aspects of
growth that will drive the demand for future services in Bull Mountain, which in
turn will have fiscal impacts. A number of factors must be considered to
determine the fiscal impacts of incorporation on Bull Mountain residents,
including capital costs, operating and maintenance costs and revenues.
All operations and maintenance costs and revenues in this chapter are reported
for the Bull Mountain incorporation area in aggregate.
This chapter has four sections:
• Potential capital needs
• Expenses associated with city operation
• Revenue sources
• Summary budgets for fiscal years 2008, 2010, and 2017
The focus of this chapter (because it is the focus of state law relating to an
EFS) is the new city's operating budget. The chapter shows budgets for fiscal
years 2008, 2010 and 2017. Revenue sources and forecast amounts provide
information about how the City will pay for services.
POTENTIAL CAPITAL NEEDS
Though not required by state statute, this report includes a brief discussion of
potential capital improvements and the effect of capital improvement decisions on
the City's operating and maintenance budget. Assumptions about the majority of
capital improvements are based on the capital improvement plans of the
individual service providers.
Capital improvement projects are the responsibility of the service provider.
This report assumes that the following services are provided by agencies other
than the City: water, wastewater, surface water, schools, fire services, public
safety, solid waste and transit.
According to staff at Clean Water Services, the District has not completed a
capital improvement program for UGB areas 63 and 64 (study sub areas 2 and 3).
Because much of that area slopes away from the pre-existing urban areas, it is
anticipated that one or more public sewage pump stations will need to be designed
' and constructed to provide public service. As land development planning is
completed, Clean Water Services staff will work with County staff and land
owners to determine the development pattern and schedule. Additionally, District
staff is preparing a Request for Proposals for conveyance system master planning,
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-1
which includes this area. It will be issued shortly (early Summer, 2006), and the
master plan work is tentatively scheduled for completion during the second half of
2007.
SERVICE PROVIDER AGREEMENTS
The area of Bull Mountain is currently served by Washington County, the
City of Tigard through an intergovernmental agreement with Washington County
that will terminate July 2006, and multiple special districts including: Clean
Water Services, Tigard Water District, TriMet, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue,
Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District, and the Urban Roads Maintenance District.
The relationship between the service providers is described in the Tigard Urban
Services Agreement (Nov 26, 2002).
The Tigard Urban Services Agreement (TUSA) provides that Washington
County would be responsible for convening the TUSA service provider
representatives for the purpose of amending the Agreement. The Agreement also
restricts the assignment of any party's rights or obligations under the Agreement.
Because the service providers would continue after incorporation, the same as
before, this analysis assumes there would not be any assignment of rights or
obligations.
The proposal assumes retaining Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, TriMet, the
Clean Water Services, Washington County Sheriff's Department and the Tigard
Water District.
While most service providers were willing to provide information to describe
a service provision scenario under incorporation, the Tualatin Hills Parks and
Recreation District cited issues related to SB 122 that made it impractical to
provide services to the proposed City of Bull Mountain at this time.
Upon incorporation, the formerly unincorporated Bull Mountain area would
be withdrawn from the Urban Roads Maintenance District, which provides
funding for roads maintenance, and the Enhanced Sheriff's Patrol District, which
provides funding for enhanced law enforcement.
EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH CITY OPERATIONS
(GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES)
Upon incorparation, the new City of Bull Mountain would or could assume
responsibility for providing many governmental services. The City could provide
services directly, or through intergovernmental agreements with existing service
providers.
To explore the latter alternative, ECONorthwest asked service providers to
estimate a range of costs for providing services. In the few instances where
detailed information was unattainable from service providers, the data were
created by combining (1) a review of the experiences of comparable Oregon
cities, (2) cost assumptions based on industry standards, and (3) discussions with
Page 4-2 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
current service providers to identify the key characteristics of service provision in
the Bull Mountain study area.
A number of local services would remain essentially unchanged regardless of
incorporation including schools, library services, fire and life safety, water, sewer,
surface water, solid waste and transit. Though not relevant to the creation of an
operating budget for a new city, additional information about these services is
provided in Appendix A.
The balance of this section describes the expenditures associated with each of
the core city services.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES
One of the single largest expenses the City of Bull Mountain would face upon
incorporation is the cost of administering the City. The administration of a city
entails the meeting of myriad needs, none of which comes free: there are salaries
to be paid and benefits provided, along with all of the costs of facilities, supplies,
and equipment.
As with most governmental service, the overall staffing level is a policy
decision that future City Councilors will determine as part of the process of
weighing the tradeoffs between different levels of tax burdens and different mixes
of proposed City service levels. The following estimate of City staffing and costs
is based on staffing levels in Oregon cities that are comparable in size to the
proposed City of Bull Mountain. To devise these estimates, ECONorthwest
reviewed the budgets of the Cities of Damascus, Fairview, Pendleton, Sherwood,
The Dalles, and Troutdale. ECONorthwest additionally considered national
staffing ratios published by the Urban Land Institute (ULl).'
Our review of comparably sized Cities suggests that smaller Oregon cities-
with populations between 9,000 and 15,000 employ between 4 and 14 full time
employees (FTE) to handle general government services, including the City
Manager's function, finance, City Council support, information systems and other
general administration activities. The employment levels in Oregon cities were
generally consistent with the Urban Land Institute's estimate based on small
municipalities across the nation-10.9 "general government" FTE per 10,000
population.
When faced with a reasonable choice in levels of service, ECONorthwest
tended to make estimates on the high side for costs and on the low side for
revenues. For example, we have derived estimates of salaries for specific
positions by estimating the average salary as reported by the Local Government
Personnel Institute Compensation Survey and then rounding the number up to the
nearest $5,000. In some cases, the City may be able to fill a specific position at a
salary lower than our estimate, and in some cases the City may have to pay more.
In aggregate, however, we feel that the figures outlined below are appropriately
' See Burchell, Robert W. et al. 1997. Development Impacl: Assessmen! Handbook. Urban Land Institute. Washington, DC. Page 262
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-3
conservative.
The following subsections describe the several categories of expenses
associated with general city government.
CITY COUNCIL
Oregon law requires that new cities operate under a City Council organization.
Most Oregon cities (with the exception of Portland and Beaverton) have a weak-
mayor form of government.2 In other words, the council provides both legislative
and administrative functions.
According to the League of Oregon Cities (LOC), most cities develop a home
rule charter so that they may do the following:
• Directly elect a mayor
• Delegate authority to the mayor
• Add a primary election
• Increase the number of council members
• Nominate and elect the council by district
• Fill vacancies by special election
. • Change the length of terms
• Establish a City Manager position.
The City Charter can address compensation, or it may leave the question of
compensation up to the City Council. Some Oregon cities provide nominal
compensation for their mayor and City Council members. Most City Councilors
receive mileage or reimbursement for official functions. For the purposes of this
study, ECONorthwest assumed the City would pay the mayor $400 per month and
City Councilors $300 per month. ln addition, the mayor and City Councilors
would be eligible for individual health insurance. ECONorthwest has also
assumed $10,000 annually for other council expenses.
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
ln the Council/City Manager form of government, it is assumed that the City
Council has only one employee: the City Manager. The City Manager, then, is
ultimately responsible for hiring, supervising and the dismissal of all further staff.
In the following tables, we present a baseline staffmg chart and expense
estimate for general government services. Table 4-1 projects staffing levels for
fiscal years 2008 and 2010. These estimates include the City Manager's Office
' This section draws heavily from the League of Oregon Cities' Incorporation Guide: A Guide to City Incorporalion in Oregon, Revised
September 2003.
Page 4-4 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
and Finance Office. Additional staffing levels and costs associated with planning,
road maintenance and parks activities are considered later in this chapter.
As Table 4-1 indicates, the City would employ five general government FTE
during its early years of incorporation. ECONorthwest expects lower staffing
levels in the City's initial years. The newly incorporated City of Damascus, for
example, employs only four staff inembers in the general government area.' We
also anticipate below average headcounts because our analysis assumes the City
of Bull Mountain will be contracting for many of its services during the first three
years, which reduces the need for general administrative activities.
Table 4-1. General Government Staffing and
Expense Forecast for City of Buli Mountain,
(2006 FY 2008 and FY 2010
IPe►sonnei
Number of
Positions Salarv Total Cost
City Manager 1 $80,000 $80,000
Director oi AdminisVation and Finance 1 $65,000 $65,000
AdminisVative Assistant 1 $40,000 $40,000
Information Systems Technician 0 $70,000 $0
Olher General Gov't StaH FTE 2 $45,000 $90,000
Subtotal $275,000
Retirement and taxes (22% of salaries) $60,500
insurance ($14,000 per person) $70,000
PersonnelToWl 5 $405,500
City CounGl l 4 p
Mayor 1 $4,800 $20,240
City Council 4 $3,600 $74,720
Payroll taxes (12% of salaries) $11,395
Insurance ($5,500 per person) $27,500
City Council Expenses $10.000
Ci Council Total 5 $143,855
General Eicperises ~;;z{ t~ ~ ~ , ~ ;,~~.:~e ° ~ .
Faciliry Costs $32,500
Cost per square /oot $10
Squara /eef per FTE 250
Square feef for council chambers , 2,000
Phone Expenses (cost per FTE per year) $1,000 $5,000
Computers (cost per FTE per year) $1,329 $6,645
Fumiture (cost per FTE per year) $732 $3,660
General Supplies (10% of salaries) $40,550
Vehicle Lease $10,732
Number ol vehiGes 2
Cost per vehicle per year $5, 366
Vehicle Operation 8 Maintenace $10,000
Num6er ol vehiGes 2
Vehitle OBM cost per year $5,000
Vehicle Allowance
General Expenses ToWI E109.087
Grand Total $658,442
Source: Salary data from the 2006 Local Government Personnel Institute
Compensation Survey. Malysis by ECONorthwest.
During fiscal years 2010-2017, the City will grow and require more staff. The
budget allows for a total general government staff of 12 FTE in FY 2017. These
general government staffing levels are similar to those in Sherwood, The Dalles,
' See The City ofDamascus Fiscal Year 2005-06 Adopted Budgel. Accessed at http:liwww.ci.damascus.or.u.s.'news.asnx on Apri127, 2006.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-5
and Troutdale. Table 4-2 outlines staffing levels and costs for FY 2017.
Table 4-2. General Government Staffing and
Expense Forecast for City of Bull Mountain,
(2006 FY 2017
lPersonnei...,,;,,.
Number of
Positions Salary Total Cost
City Manager 1 $80,000 $80,000
Director of Administration and Finance 1 $65,000 $65,000
AdminisUative Assistant t $40,000 $40,000
Information Systems Technician 1 $70,000 $70,000
Other General Gov't Staff FTE 8 $45,000 $360,000
Subtotal $615,000
Retirement and taxes (22 % oi salaries) $135,300
Insurance ($14,000 per person) $168,000
Personnel Total 12 $918,300
[City Council"<
Mayor 1 $4,800 $20,240
City Council 4 $3,600 $74,720
Payroll taxes (12% oi salaries) $11,395
Insurance ($5,500 per person) $27,500
City Council Expenses $10,000
City Council Total 5 $143,855
lGeneral Exaenses _ .~r.m _ 1
Facility Costs $50,000
Cost per square /oot $10
Square /eef per FTE 250
Square leef for council chambers 2,000
Phone Expenses (cost per FTE per year) $1,000 $12,000
Computers (cost per FTE per year) $7,329 $15,948
Fumiture (cost per FTE per year) $732 $8,784
General Supplies (10% of salaries) $91,830
Vehicle Lease $10,732
Number o/ vehicles 2
Cost per vehiGe per year $5,366 Vehicle Operation 8 Maintenace $10,000
Number o/ vehicles 2
Vehicle 06M cost per year $5,000
Vehicle Allowance
General Expenses Total $199,294
Grand Total E7,261,449
Source: Salary data from the 2002 Local Government Personnel
Institute Compensation Survey. Analysis by ECONorthwest.
• The justification for our estimates follows.
Salaries and benefits
To arrive at the estimates above, we calculated the average mid-range salary
for each position paid by other cities and counties in Oregon as reported in the
2006 Local Government Personnel Institute Compensation Survey and then
rounded the figure up to the nearest $5,000.
Page 4-6 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Non-retirement benefits and other employer-related costs of
payroll
` Benefits and other employer-related costs include the following:
• Payroll taxes (FICA, Medicare, unemployment insurance) are about 12
percent of wages.
• Workers compensation insurance varies by the level of danger associated
with the position. An administrative assistant in the City Manager's Office
has lower workers compensation insurance than a police officer or
firefighter. ECONorthwest assumes workers compensation would equal 2
percent of wages'
Retirement benefits
The proposed City of Bull Mountain has several options for retirement
packages for employees. In general, the City can contract with the Oregon Public
Employees Retirement System (PERS) or, it could contract with a defined
contribution program that provides a 401(k) service. These two options are
described below:
• Oregon Public Employees Retirement System (PERS). The Oregon
Public Employees Retirement System covers employees of most
public agencies in Oregon. There are three programs that employees
are covered by, depending on their hire date. Tier 1 employees were
hired before 1996 and Tier 2 employees were hired between 1996 and
2003. Employees hired after August 29, 2003 are covered by the
Oregon Public Services Retirement Plan (OPSRP), a more-
conventional defined-benefits program than the PERS program. The
OPSRP program reduced the liabilities of employers, and ultimately
taxpayers, by ending contributions to the match subject to the "money
match" and guaranteed rate provisions and reversing crediting
decisions of the PERS Board related to 1999 earnings.
Employees hired by the proposed City of Bull Mountain will be able to
transfer their status within the PERS program to the new City, if Bull
Mountain chooses to offer the PERS retirement system. The cost to the
City will depend on two factors: (1) the PERS status of the incoming
employee, and (2) future policy and court decisions about the PERS
program. ECONorthwest estimates that the cost to the proposed City
could range between 10 percent and 20 percent between 2008 and
2017.
• lnternational City Managers Association (ICMA) Retirement
Incorporation: Nationally, this association administers retirement
° Estimate drawn from US Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2005, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation.
5 Telephone interview Mark Becker, ICMA, February 27, 2006. mbecker@icmazc.org.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-7
plans for public sector employers. Tigard and Damascus both contract
with ICMA, which offers a voluntary 401(a) plan, the public sector
equivalent of a 401(k) plan. The City of Tigard chose a plan in which
it contributes 8 percent of pay and the employee contributes 6 percent.
One of the advantages of this program to the employer is that the
obligation is known (unlike PERS). Employers contribute based on
gross pay, on average 8 percent to 15 percent of gross pay. Employees
generally contribute approximately 6 percent of their gross pay.
There are no administrative costs to the municipality for providing
ICMA services to employees. Costs for the service are borne by
participants through investment fees. Participants have up to 45
different fund options.
One of the benefits of the ICMA (or other defined contribution program) is
that the City is guaranteed a fixed contribution rate. The PERS system has
fluctuated significantly over the last 15 years and may continue to do so into the
future.
ECONorthwest assumed retirement costs would equal 8 percent of salaries for
the proposed City, which could be on the low side if the proposed City decides to
offer PERS/OPSRP, but a realistic estimate if the City selects a defined
contribution plan.
Insurance
Medical, dental, life and disability insurance is the same for all employees,
regardless of wage. The cost to provide health related insurance for the Ciry
Manager is the same as the administrative assistant (assuming they receive the
same level of benefits). The actual cost per employee depends on the size of the
employee pool.
ECONorthwest examined the average insurance packages for the Cities of:
Coos Bay, Troutdale, St. Helens, North Bend, Astoria, and Baker City. These
comparably sized cities have average monthly insurance packages that vary
widely by city, from a low of approximately $443 for the City of Coos Bay to
approximately $2,220 for the City of St. Helens. ECONorthwest took the average
of these cities and then rounded up to the nearest thousand to arrive at an annual
insurance cost of $14,000 per employee.
Supplies and equipment
For costs associated with phones, office furniture, and computers, we have
derived projected expenses on an annual per-employee basis. For phone expenses,
we have estimated annual costs of $1,000 per FTE. For furniture, we have
assumed an annualized cost of $732 per year. This figure was arrived at, first, by
estimating furniture costs of $3,000 per employee, and second, by assuming that
the useful life of this furniture would be five years. Given these figures, we
annualized the costs by amortizing the $3,000 over five years at a 7 percent
interest rate. For computers, we estimated annual costs per full time employee of
Page 4-8 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
$1,329. This figure assumes computer costs of $4,500 per employee and an
average useful life of computers of four years ($4,500 amortized over 4 years at a
7 percent interest rate). On top of the projected costs of phones, furniture and
computers, we added an expense category for general supplies. We estimated cost
of supplies at 10 percent of the overall cost of full time salaries.
Vehicles
For many of the positions identified in our administration staffing, an integral
part of their job will require at least the part-time use of a vehicle. We have
projected that the City will want to,lease two vehicles, at an annual cost of $5,366
per vehicle. (This figure represents the value of $22,000 amortized over five years
at an interest rate of 7 percent) For operation and maintenance of the vehicles, we
have estimated annual expenses of $5,000 each. The total costs of having a
vehicle at the City's disposal is then slightly more than $10,000 per year.
Facilities
Projections of the costs of City Administration facilities have been directly
tied to our estimates of staffing levels. We have assumed that the City will need
250 square feet of office space for each full time employee. We also assumed that
the City would need a 2,000 square foot space to house City Council hearings and
other public meetings. Due to the lack of rental facilities, the City will probably
have to purchase land and construct a new City Hall.
In the short-term, the proposed City has several options. If legal, City officials
could explore the option of renting facilities in the closest commercial or office
area outside of Bull Mountain. Alternatively, City officials could rent or buy a
house for City offices, and rent a portable trailer (similar to what schools use for
portable classrooms) for City Council rental space. The City of Happy Valley,
which is primarily residential, uses a similar arrangement. Our assumed annual
cost of $10 per square foot can be viewed as either a lease rate or as the
annualized cost of construction of a City-owned City Hall.
CITY ATTORNEY AND PROSECUTION SERVICES
The City of Bull Mountain would probably contract with local firms for City
Attorney services and prosecution services. The City will need to contract for City
Attorney services immediately after incorporation to draw up the inter-
governmental agreements. The City should budget between $70,000 and $125,000
for legal services during the first year. The higher amount would be necessary if
the City is sued. To remain on the conservative side, our budget forecast assumes
$125,000 in legal services for FY 2008.
In the longer term, a City of roughly 15,000 could expect costs of city attorney
and prosecution services of $50,000 and $80,000 annually. Our budget forecasts
assume $100,000 (2006 in FY 2017 (above the high end of the range).
Actual costs will depend on the level of services desired. If the City wishes to
have an attorney present at meetings every night of the week, then the costs of
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-9
these services would be greater than if the attorney's services were only reyuired
a few days a week.
PLANNING SERVICES
The City's Planning Department will develop and implement a
Comprehensive Plan, which will serve as the long-range planning tool for the
City's natural and built environments. The Department's activities will start with
the development of the Comprehensive Plan and concept planning for UGB
Expansion Areas 63 and 64. Once the Comprehensive Plan is developed and
accepted by the State, the City's ongoing planning work will include development
review, permitting, enforcement of the Comprehensive Plan, and updates to the
Plan.
ECONorthwest considered a wide range of possible configurations to provide
planning services including contracting for services from the City of Sherwood,
Washington County, and private consultants, including Winterbrook Planning,
Parsons Brinkerhoff, and Fregonese Calthorpe and Associates. A list of
interviewees is provided in Appendix B. In the short-term, we anticipate private
consultants will play a major role in assisting the new City develop its long-term
planning documents. Over our ten-year horizon, however, ECONorthwest
anticipates the City pulling more of the planning work in house.
Broadly speaking, the City's planning-related work will fall into the following
four categories.
Concept planning for Areas 63 and 64 and creation of the Comprehensive
Plan. State law requires each city to adopt a comprehensive plan and the zoning
and land-division ordinances needed to put the plan into effect. The local
comprehensive plans must be consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals. The
state's Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) reviews local
comprehensive plans for consistency with the Statewide Planning Goals. When
LCDC officially approves a local government's plan, the plan is said to be
"acknowledged." lt then becomes the controlling document for land use in the
area covered by that plan.b
Conversations with other cities suggest the development of the comprehensive
plan, zoning code and other documents for the City of Bull Mountain will range
between $500,000 and $1 million. Cost will depend on the availability of existing
inventories and other data. If the City must collect information and create housing
and employment or natural resource inventories, the costs for the plans will be
higher. ECONorthwest recommends that the City budget at least $750,000 for all
plans and allow up to five years to develop and approve all plans. Planners we
interviewed recommended "frontloading" the comprehensive planning budget; in
other words, the City should expect to spend at least half of the funds in the first
year to conduct many of the data collection and analysis studies upon which the
"This introductory paragraph on comprehensive planning is taken directly from Clatsop County
http://www.co.clatsop.or.us/defau It.asp?pageid=313 &deptid=l2
Page 4-10 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
planning documents will be based. Our budget forecast assumes the City will
spend $300,000 in the first year (FY 2008), approximately $250,000 would be
spent in FY 2009 (which is not reflected in our budgets), and the remaining
$200,000 is spent in FY 2010.
Metro recently adopted a temporary three-year excise tax on construction
permits to fund concept planning in new urban growth areas. Our interviews with
Metro officials indicate the City would be eligible to apply for and receive grants
to fund the long-range planning work associated with Areas 63 and 64.
Determining precisely what share of the City's early comprehensive planning
work would be covered is tricky. The Metro grants are new, so there's no
historical experience to draw on. Mareover, the City's early comprehensive
planning wark that extends beyond Areas 63 and 64 will also address currently
urbanized areas. Given the scope and timing of the Metro funding,
ECONorthwest has assumed Metro would fund 50 percent of the City's upfront
comprehensive planning costs (that is, $375,000 of $750,000 over five years)
Development Review. The "current" planning department is the primary
contact for the public and developers. Its role is to work with constituents
answering their questions, giving direction, and explaining the City's land use
application processes. The City will accept and review applications for all land
use activities including, conditional use permits, short plats, final subdivision
plans, design review, variances and lot line adjustments.
In FY 2008 and FY 2010, development review activities will be overseen and
implemented by the Planning Director. Once the Comprehensive Plan is accepted
and the City continues to grow, the City would need two additional planners. Our
revenue estimates assume the City would set a goal of generating development
fees to recover 50 percent of the costs associated with the development review
staff.1N
Building Permit Services. Within the City's boundaries, government officials
will review, permit, inspect, and enforce building codes. If City officials take no
action, all responsibilities for building plan review, permit issuance, fee
collection, and inspection would remain with Washington County. Some cities
within the county have opted to acquire some or all of the building-permit
responsibilities. Regardless of who operates the building program--city or
county-administrators and inspectors would be interpreting and enforcing the
same state-adopted building codes. Cities that have accepted building permit
responsibilities have cited convenience as a reason for their decision. Under City
control, developers, contractors, and homeowners would not have to travel to
Hillsboro to apply and review permits. For the purposes of this estimate,
ECONorthwest assumes that, in the short-run, Washington County would
maintain control over the building permit process. The County's building program
' This estimate assumes 25 percent of the Planning Director's time is allocated to development review.
" ECONonhwest conservatively assumes the City would recover 50 percent of the cost of the development review staff. As a policy
decision the Ciry could ultimately charge fees to recover 100 percent of the cosis.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-11
would be entirely fee supported and, therefore, would have no fiscal effect-
positive or negative-on the City's budget.
Long-range planning subsequent to adoption of the comprehensive plan.
After development and adoption of a comprehensive plan, the City will continue
to update and refine its Comprehensive Plan, contribute to regional long-range
plans, and comply with Metro Functional Plan requirements. Subsequent to the
adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the City should anticipate one planner
dedicated to these long-term efforts. ECONorthwest assumes the City will offset
25 percent of the cost of this work through outside grants.9
Table 4-3 reports the projected budgets-in 2006 dollars-for the City's
Planning Department in fiscal years 2008, 2010 and 2017. Total expenditures are
higher in FY 2008 than in FY 2010 because of the assumed frontloading of
concept planning for Areas 63 and 64.
Table 4-3. Estimated budgets for planning services, Bull Mountain
Fiscal Years 2008, 2010 and 2017
2008 2010 2017
Total C05t
2006$ (sWNeost Number oi Totat Cost Number o( ToUI Cost Number of ToWI Cost
Category Includes positions 2006f Positions
salaries and ( ~ (2006$) Positions (2006f)
benefits
EXPENDITURES Planning Director 99,400 1 99,400 7 99,400 1 99,400
Development Review Planner(s) 75,000 0 0 0 0 2 150,000
Long•Term Planner 75,000 0 0 0 0 1 75,000
Adm{niSVative Assistanl 62,800 1 62.800 1 62,800 7 62 800
Compensation Total 162,200 162,200 387,200
Overhead 6,200 2 12,400 2 12,400 5 31,000
Supplies 8 Equipment 10,300 10,300 10,300
TravelBTraining 1,700 2 2,200 2 2,200 5 5,500
LegalAdverlisements 3,100 3,100 3,100
Protessional Services 300.000 200,000 150,000
Supplies and Services Total 328.000 228,000 199,900
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 490,200 390,200 587,100
REVENUES
Metro Grants for Areas 63/64 150,000 100,000 0
Development Review Fees 12,425 12,425 87,425
Other Granis fw Long Term Planning 0 0 .2163
TOTAL REVENUES 162,425 112,42 149,888
Revenues as a Share oi Ex nditures 33% 29% 26%
Source: Compensation estimates from the Local Government Personnel Institute. Budget information from
comparable cities. Analysis by ECONorthwest.
Note: Supplies and equipment include additional materials needed to run a planning office, such as GIS
equipment, GIS software, printing for color maps, etc.
In FY 2017, ECONorthwest assumes the City will employ five full-time
equivalent planning staff and spend $587,100. ECONorthwest further assumes
that, in FY 2017, the City will offset about one-quarter of the Department's
expenditures through a combination of development fees and outside grants. The
amount of revenue generated by the Department will depend, in part, on City
policy, but the one-quarter assumption is feasible. For example, in 2003-04, the
City of Sherwood's planning revenues exceeded 50 percent of the Department's
9 This estimate assumes 25 percent of the Planning Director's time is allocated to long-term planning.
Page 4-12 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
expenditures. However, Sherwood assumed a revenue-to-expenditure percentage
closer to 30 percent in its 2005-06 budget.
ROADS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Washington County Land Use and Transportation Department currently
provides road operating and maintenance services for the Bull Mountain area.
This study assumes that, upon incorporation, the City would be responsible for the
maintenance of neighborhood and local roads, while the County would continue
to bear responsibility for collectors and arterials. In this section, ECONorthwest
estimates the cost of road-related maintenance. In the short-term, ECONorthwest
assumes the City would seek to contract with either Washington County or a
private firm to conduct street maintenance. The costs described in this section are
sufficient to maintain roads at their current level of quality.
According to Operations and Maintenance Division Manager David Schamp
at the Washington County Land Use and Transportation Department, the Bull
Mountain incorporation study areas have 28.96 miles of publicly maintained
County roads, as shown in Table 4-4. Mr. Schamp reports that, if the City
incorporates, the County would continue to maintain the arterials (Beef Bend and
Roy Rogers) and collector (Bull Mountain, Roshak, Uplands, and 150`h) roads.
So, assuming incorporation, the City would be responsible for 21.13 road miles in
FY 2008.
Table 4-4. Miles of roads by type, Bull Mountain incorporation study
areas, 2006
Arterial Collector Neighborhood Local Total
Miles 3.95 3.88 4.73 16.40 28.96
Source: Washington County Land Use and Transportation Department, (Dave Schamp), 2006.
These roads require approximately $5,338 per mile per year to maintain. Basic
road maintenance includes road treatment (paving, sealing, and patching), road
shouldering, bridge maintenance, guardrails, traffic operations, and streetlights
(see Table 4-5).
The City of Bull Mountain should augment the basic maintenance services
detailed above with a 30-year program to overlay local streets-in essence
overlaying 1/30`h of the network annually. The overlay program costs $79,780 per
mile.
Assuming adoption of the basic maintenance and 30-year overlay program,
road operations and maintenance cost for the Bull Mountain incorporation area
would total $168,961 in 2008 (see Table 4-5). .
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-13
Table 4-5. Maintenance Cost Breakdown for Local Roads, Bull
Mountain, FY 2008 (2006
Function Cost per Mile Miles Total
Surface Maintenance (1) $4,333 21.13 $91,544
Non-Surface Maintenance(2) $860 21.13 $18,169
Street lights $145 21.13 $3,064
Maintenance Total $5,338 21.13 $112,777
Overlay (3) $79,780 0.70 $56,184
Total $168,961
Source: Dave Schamp, of the Washington County Department of Transportation.
Column totals may not equal sum of column values due to rounding.
(1) Road Treatment includes paving, seal coats (Chip Seal, Slurry Seals), and patching
(2) Non-Surtace Maintenance includes: road shouldering, guardrails, traffic operations
(3) Local roads assume a 30-year overlay pattern
Road maintenance costs would grow in proportion to the development of
single and multi-family dwellings. By FY 2017, we forecast that growth in Bull
Mountain would result in the introduction of an additional 11.99 miles of
neighborhood and local roads. Ultimately, the base maintenance and overlay
programs would cost $264,892 in FY 2017 (see Table 4-6). Road maintenance for
FY 2010-not shown in tabular detail-would total $185,890.
Table 4-6. Maintenance Cost Breakdown for Local Roads, Bull
Mountain, FY 2017 (2006
Function Cost per Mile Miles Total
Surface Maintenance (1) $4,333 33.12 $143,520
Non-Surface Maintenance (2) $860 33.12 $28,485
Street Lights $145 33.12 $4,804
Maintenance Total $5,338 33.12 $176,809
Overlay (3) $79,780 1.10 $88,084
Total $264,892
Source: Dave Schamp, of the Washington County Department of Transportation.
Column totals may not equal sum of column values due to rounding.
(1) Road Treatment includes paving, seat coats (Chip Seal, Slurry Seals), and patching
(2) Non-Surface Maintenance includes: road shouldering, guardrails, and traffic operations
(3) Local roads assume a 30-year overlay pattern
In addition to the direct maintenance costs, the City would require public
works staff to coordinate with contractors to plan and implement road
maintenance projects. Because ECONorthwest assumes a high level of contracted
services, the public works department would consist of only the director and a
technician. Table 4-7 shows the salary, benefits, and supply-related costs are
assumed to remain at $189,542 (2006 in fiscal years 2008, 2010, and 2017.
Page 4-14 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Table 4-7. Staffing and Supply Costs Associated with
the Public Works Department, Bull Mountain, Fiscal
Years 2008, 2010, and 2017 (2006$)
GPersonnel > W
+ Number of
Positions Salary Total Cost
Public Works Director t $70,000 $70,000
Public Works Technician 1 $40,000 $40,000
Subtotal $110,000
Retirement and taxes (22% of salaries) $24,200 insurance ($14,000 per person) $28,000
Personnel Total 2 $162,200
y #
[,Genera(Expenses::, , , . ~
Facility Costs -F $5,000
Cost per square foot $10
Square feet per FTE 250
Phone Expenses (cost per FTE per year) $1,000 $2,000
Computers (cost per FTE per year) $1,329 $2,658
Furniture (cost per FTE per year) $732 $1,464
General Supplies (10% of salaries) $16,220
General Expenses Total $27,342
Grand Total $189,542
Source: Compensation estimates from the Local Government Personnel institute
PUBLIC SAFETY
Public Safety includes three separate functions: (1) provision of police
services; (2) provision of court services (which includes costs of public defense);
and (3) the costs of adult detention. According to the Washington County Sheriff,
Undersheriff David Hepp, the County would provide court services (traffic court
and criminal court) at no additional cost to the City of Bull Mountain. Several
cities in the County have their own municipal court to handle traffic citations and
misdemeanor crimes.
Washington County would provide adult detention services (jail and
community corrections, parole, and probation) through existing taxes. The City
would not be charged for this service. People arrested in Bull Mountain would be
transported and lodged at the jail in Hillsboro.
The proposal assumes that the City would contract with the Washington
County Sheriff's office for police services. Washington County currently
contracts with a number of communities to provide a range of services including
police services for Banks and Gaston, records services for Cornelius and King
City, and evidence storage for North Plains.
The following estimates are based on estimates from Washington County's
Undersheriff Hepp. The recommendation has two parts: (1) a base-year
configuration for service delivery, suitable for the newly incorporated City, and
(2) an expanded configuration that would apply to the maturing City in FY 2017.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-15
INITIAL CONFIGURATION (FY 2008 AND FY 2010)
The recommended base-year configuration provides for four uniformed
officers (one corporal and three deputies) and one civilian crime prevention
specialist. Table 4-8 shows operations and overhead expenses, which under the
base year configuration translates to $13,423 per employee. The uniformed
officers require additional materials and supplies, which are tabulated in Table 4-
9.
Table 4-8. Operations Overhead
for Public Safety, Bull Mountain,
FY 2008 and FY 2010 (2006
Operations Overhead
Board of Commissioners $ 644
County Administrator $ 4,027
County Auditor $ 280
Communications $ 1,480
Finance $ 2,567
Human Resources $ 4,231
Purchasing $ 347
Information Tech $ 14,779
Risk $ 524
Wisard Payroll $ 1,226
Sheriffs Office $ 28,132
Proqram $ 8,878
Total $ 67,116
Source: Washington County Sheriffs office, 2006.
Column totals may not equal sum of column values due to rounding.
Table 4-9. Material and Supply
Cost Per Officer, Bull
Mountain, Fiscal Years 2008,
2010, and 2017 (2006
Materials and Supplies
Supplies $ 460
Radio/Cel $ 276
Uniform $ 330
Body Armor $ 156
Duty Gear/Gun $ 180
Range Fees $ 80
Ammo $ 170
Records $ 310
WCCCA $ 6,963
Total $ 8,925
Source: Washington County Sheriffs Office, 2006
In addition to costs allocated to employees, the base-line configuration also
contains three patrol cars costing $19,008 each per year, a car for the crime
prevention specialist costing $7,514 per year, evidence storage and handling costs
of $890 per year, and $3000 for access to the Portland Police Data System. In
sum, Washington County estimates a total cost for this configuration of $605,113.
In this configuration FTE will not increase in FY 2010, thus we reserve the same
cost estimates. Table 4-10 outlines all costs for fiscal years 2008 and 2010.
Page 4-16 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Table 4-10. Estimated Annual Cost for Public Safety, Bull Mountain,
Fiscal Years 2008 and 2010 (2006
Total Cost per Salary and Total Cost
' Position Position Overhead Benefits FTE 2008 Total Cost FTE 2010 2010
Corporal $ 109,871 $ 22,348 $ 87,523 1 $ 109,871 1 $ 109,871
Deputy $ 109,169 $ 22,348 $ 86,821 3 $ 327,507 3 $ 327,507
Crime Prevention
S ecialist 99,308 13,423 85,885 1 99,308 1 99,308
TotalStaHin Costs 5 $ 536,685 5 $ 536,685
Patrol Cars 3 $ 57,024 3 $ 57,024
CP Specialist Cars 1 $ 7,514 1 $ 7,514
Evidence $ 890 $ 890
Portland Police Data
S s[em 3,000 3,000
Grand Total $ 6505,113 ; 605,113
Source: Washington County Sheriffs office, 2006.
Column totals may not equal sum of column values due to rounding.
FISCAL YEAR 2017 CONFIGURATION
By FY 2017, The City of Bull Mountain would require two additional
deputies and one additional vehicle to accommodate the expected growth in need
for public safety services. Assuming the same costs per deputy and vehicle, total
public safety costs would increase to $842,459, as outlined in Table 4-11.
Table 4-11. Estimated Annual Cost for Public Safety,
Bull Mountain, FY 2017 (2006
Total Cost per Salary and Total Cost
Position Position Overhead Benefits FTE 2017 2017
Corporal $ 109,871 $ 22,348 $ 87,523 1 $ 109,871
Deputy $ 109,169 $ 22,348 g 86,821 5 $ 545,844
Crime Prevention
S ecialist 99,308 13,423 85,885 1 99,308
Total Staffin Costs 7 $ 755 023
Patrol Cars 4 $ 76,032
CP Specialist Cars 1 $ 7,514
Evidence $ 890
Portland Police Data
5 stem 3,000
Grand Total 842,459
Source: Washington County Sheriffs office, 2006.
Column totals may not equal sum of column values due to rounding.
PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES
As with other service areas, ECONorthwest explored the City's options •
associated with providing park and recreation services. This EFS assumes the City
would own and operate parks located within the City's boundaries. Another
alternative is the Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreation District. During the
development of the EFS, ECONorthwest requested that THPRD consider an
expansion of services into all or part of the proposed City of Bull Mountain
boundaries. Ron Willoughby, General Manager of THPRD, took the request to
the Board of Directors and they decided that, due to extenuating circumstances
related to the District's participation in Senate Bill 122, it would not be viable for
the District to consider providing services to the proposed City at this time. While
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-17
THPRD could eventually serve parts of Bull Mountain, this study assumes parks
would become a City responsibility.
Given the limited number of parks facilities within the proposed City, and the
substantial demand for parks and recreation services that anticipated growth will
generate, the capital costs of putting a parks system in place requires a substantial
investment by the City. Moreover, as the proposed City transitions over the years
from a rural area with few public park facilities to an urban area that offers a full
range of parks and recreation services, the day-to-day costs of operating a Parks
and Recreation department will grow to be a substantial part of the City's
operating budget. While THPRD could eventually serve parts of the proposed
City, this analysis assumes city-operated parks.
ln reality, a properly-budgeted City of Bull Mountain would recognize that the
City will need to invest a good deal of money in developing park facilities in the
early years of incorporation. Then, as the parks capital infrastructure begins to
catch up to the requirements of the growing City, expenditures that had originally
been slated for parks development would slowly transition to simply covering the
day-to-day costs of running the Parks and Recreation department of an urban
center.
Once the City puts a Parks plan in place, City policymakers will have the
opportunity to levy parks SDCs to fund facility investments that will be made
necessary by continued City growth. The City will, however, need to fund an
initial increment of parks development. The laws about SDCs are clear on that
point: SDCs (on new development) cannot be used to fund bringing services for
existing development up to some standard.
Parks are a particularly difficult service for the new City because-unlike
police and roads-current residents have no direct service and do not pay
anything. They get their recreation in a variety of ways-by maintaining and
recreating on a large acreage, at school, and at health clubs. Some probably
believe that situation is fine and would like to preserve it. When the area
incorporates, however, it will almost certainly have to provide or contract for
additional recreational services-services that existing residents may not be
willing to pay much for because they do not believe those services will provide
them much value.
In recent years, the National Recreation and Parks Association has tried to
move away from blanket recommendations for target levels of parks acreage
necessary to achieve "reasonable" levels of parks services. That said, however,
many cities have set a goal of providing between 5 and 15 acres of "active" park
land (e.g., with playgrounds, sports fields) per 1,000 residents.
Ultimately, a target level of parks services for Bull Mountain is a policy
decision. This analysis assumes that the City's long-range target would be five
acres of active parks per 1,000 residents. While the acreage falls at the low-end of
the range observed in other cities, ECONorthwest believes the goal is realistic for
two reasons. First, the City has an existing urbanized area with virtually no parks,
which will bring the average down, Second, the City will face a challenge to
Page 4-18 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
acquire and develop park acreage during its early years. Capital costs, which are
not a focus of this report, typically run $300,000 per acre for acquiring parkland
in the study area. .
For the purpose of budget estimates, ECONorthwest assumes the City will be
maintaining 61.5 acres of developed parkland in FY 2017.11 An annual cost of
operating and maintaining active park facilities is estimated to be $5,250 per
acre," so by FY 2017, the City would be looking at annual park operation and
maintenance costs of $322,875. Recreation costs are assumed to be $10 per
resident for a total of $152,680. Finally, the City would need to hire a Parks
Director at a fully loaded cost of $99,400 annually. Therefore, parks operations in
FY 2017 would total $574,955. Our budget estimates assume no park-related
expenditures in FY 2008 or FY 2010.
If City policymakers were to target a higher number of park acres per
thousand residents, or if the City desired to achieve its target in a shorter time
frame, then a higher level of annual investment would be required.
MISCELLANEOUS NON-DEPARTMENTAL SERVICES
There are several miscellaneous costs that have not yet been covered. As a
city in Oregon, The City of Bull Mountain will want to be a full participant in the
League of Oregon Cities (LOC). Non-departmental expenditures can also cover
the cost of general liability insurance, maintaining a City website, and distributing
monthly newsletters.
ln addition, during and just prior to the FY 2008 budget, the City will incur
one-time costs associated with an election, city attorney expenses, which
generally begin prior to the official date of incorporation, and potentially, the
costs of hiring someone to manage the transition. The specifics of these costs will
depend on policy choices made by the elected City Council. (For example, how
aggressive does the council want to be in taking on roads, law enforcement, or
planning services in the first months of incorporation?) Consequently, these costs
will be established in the wake of council deliberations on these decisions.
Property tax receipts are generally transferred to cities in Washington County
several months after the new city is incorporated. Assuming a favorable
incorporation vote in November 2006, the Washington County Tax Assessor
reports the new City would have to conduct public hearings and adopt a budget
resolution prior to July 1, 2007 in order to receive property tax revenue for
FY 2008. With an adopted budget resolution for the 2007-08 fiscal year, property
10 ECONorthwest assumes the City will have reached a parkland standard of only four acres per 1,000 residents by FY 2017, which is
below the long-term goal of five acres per 1,000 residents. ECONorthwest views the four acre per 1,000 resident park level more practical
for FY 2017 given that the City will have no developed parkland upon incorporation. Furthermore, 58 acres will be dispersed throughout
Study Areas 2, 3 and 5 while the Westside Corridor Trail will comprise 3.5 acres of park land in Study Area 1.
" The National Recreation and Park Association recommends 118 hours of maintenance labor (0.057 F"I'E) per acre annually.
ECONorthwest estimates the fully loaded (salary and benefits) labor cost of park maintenance staff would be about $25.50 per hour and
that supplies and equipment would equal 75 percent of labor costs. The estimates are consistent with a cost estimation method prepared by
Northern Arizona University (See http://www.prm.nau.edu/PRM423/cost_analysis_lesson.htm).
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-19
tax revenue would begin to flow in late October 2007 when Washington County
distributes the first tax payments for the 2007-08 tax year. The County would
distribute approximately 85 percent of the property taxes for the 2007-08 fiscal
year by the end of November 2007. In order to hire a City Manager and other staff
and begin operations prior to FY 2008, the proposed City will have to borrow against future revenues.
In order to finance activities prior to the first fiscal year, ORS 288.165 allows
the new City to borrow money by entering into a credit agreement. Obligations
authorized by the law are issued in anticipation of tax revenues (through a tax
anticipation note) prior to the beginning of the fiscal period in which the city
expects to receive the revenues. The law requires the obligation mature no later
than 18 months after the obligation is issued and that the amount does not exceed
80 percent of anticipated tax revenues. ECO assumes that amounts borrowed by
the new City prior to the first fiscal year would be paid back during the first two
fiscal years and would be funded through the miscellaneous departmental and
contingency line items.
CONTINGENCY
No matter how thoroughly a city plans, there will always be unanticipated
events requiring discretionary funds. To meet these unforeseen needs, we have
anticipated an allocation of $100,000 in each of fiscal years 2008, 2010, and twice
that amount in 2017, which the City administration would be free to spend at its
discretion.
RESERVEFUND
It is customary for a city to establish a financial reserve of its General Fund
revenues. Given the potential variation in General Fund expenditures and
revenues, pending policy decisions by the City Council, we have set the reserve
fund at 5 percent during the first three years. In the longer run (FY 2017), the City
should assume a 2 percent ending balance that, if unspent, could be dedicated to
the reserve account.
REVENUE SOURCES
As is true of most Oregon cities, the primary source of revenues will be
property taxes. The following discussion also describes state and federal funds,
fees and charges for service, fines and forfeits, utility franchise fees, system
development charges and revenue bonds.
Three tax measures passed in Oregon in the 1990s affect the permanent tax
rate of Bull Mountain. Measure 5, passed in November 1990, limits property
taxes to $10 per $1000 of assessed market value for general government
operations (cities, counties, and special districts). The measure changed the
definition of property tax to include fees or charges imposed on property owners.
Measure 50 also exempted bonded debt from the $10 rate cap. Measure 47,
passed in 1996, rolled back assessed property values to 90 percent of 1995-96
Page 4-20 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
levels and limited growth of assessed values to 3 percent per year. A double
majority is required to pass voter approved funding requests. Similar to Measure
5, bonded debts were exempt from limitations. Measure 50 was a"fix" of
Measure 47 forwarded from the legislature to Oregon voters. It reyuired a 17
percent reduction in property taxes, establishment of a permanent tax rate limit,
and limited assessed growth of properties to 3 percent.
The proposed City's general fund is composed of two major categories of
revenue. First, the City receives what we call discretionary revenue from local
property taxes, intergovernmental transfers, and potentially from utility franchise
fees (not included in this analysis). The City has some degree of flexibility in
determining how to spend these resources. Typically, revenues that accrue to the
General Fund finance general services such as long-term planning, some public
works, legal services, elections, and other core city functions.
In addition to discretionary revenues, the City may also receive user fees: e.g.,
construction fees and development fees. The City has the discretion to set the
various fee schedules to cover the public cost of construction plan review,
application, and processing/recording.
The analysis of fiscal impacts related to user fees is necessarily distinct. The
revenues and expenditures associated with user fees should be roughly in balance
if one is trying to fund operations from fees: the users create the costs their fees
pay for those costs. User fees should be small in the first three to four years,
depending on how long it takes the City to approve a comprehensive plan, capital
improvement plan, development code, and other documents necessary for the
urban level development to take place.
PROPERTY TAX
The properiy tax rate limit will be determined by the petitioners for
incorporation and voted upon by residents in the incorporation area. The rate
established will be applied uniformly across the City. Many taxing jurisdictions,
like school and fire districts, have boundaries that cut through the proposed
incorporation area, and as a result, different areas of the City will have different
total tax rates. However, the City of Bull Mountain tax rate will be identical for
all.
As outlined in the discussion of assessed property values in Chapter 3, we
estimate that the Bull Mountain incorporation study areas will have taxable
assessed value of property of $713 million in FY 2008, $789 million in FY 2010,
and $1.02 billion in FY 2017 (2006
STATE REVENUE SHARING
The State of Oregon distributes revenue from liquor and cigarette taxes based
on a local jurisdiction's population and other criteria. Gas taxes are also a state-
shared revenue-they are addressed in the next section. Liquor and cigarette tax
disbursements are difficult to forecast, as available revenue is dependent on total
sales of liquor and cigarettes sales within Oregon. According to the League of
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-21
Oregon Cities, liquor tax receipts are trending up while cigarette tax receipts are
trending down.
The future City can use these funds for general operations and services.
ECONorthwest estimated revenues for the 14 percent liquor receipt disbursement
and the 6 percent cigarette tax disbursement on a per capita basis. The 14 percent
liquor receipt disbursement is based on a formula in ORS 221.770. In order to get
a rough estimate of receipts, it was assumed that the City of Bull Mountain would
receive revenues similar to those received by cities with similar populations.
Table 4-12 shows the forecast revenues for Bull Mountain in 2008 ($94,487),
2010 ($173,097), and 2017 ($265,434).
Revenue from state shared revenues is not anticipated for the first year of
incorporation (2008). State law requires that an approved City Charter allows the
City to provide at least four major municipal services, and, that the City must
have levied property taxes in the previous year. Neither of these two requirements
can be met in the first year of incorporation.
Table 4-12. State shared revenue forecasts, Bull Mountain, Fiscal
Years 2008, 2010, and 2017 (2006
Source 2008 2010 2017
Bull Mountain Population 8,519 9,957 15,268
Liquor Disbursement $80,112 $93,633 $143,581
Cigarette Disbursement $14,375 $16,801 $25,764
Shared Revenue Disbursement 0 $62,662 $96,089
Total $94,487 $173,097 $265,434
Source: ECONorthwest estimated using Oregon Department of Revenue data and population data from the
Portland State University Population Research Center
GAS TAX REVENUE
Funding for maintenance of road and bikeway infrastructure in Oregon relies
primarily on state gasoline tax levies, the truck weight-mile tax (for vehicles
weighing in excess of 26,000 pounds), and vehicle registration fees. The revenues
collected by these mechanisms are distributed by formulae to state, county, and
local authorities to maintain roads.
According to Michele Deister at the League of Oregon Cities, the state
revenue funds vary from year to year, depending on a number of factors,
including the number of vehicles purchased and the amount of gasoline
consumed. The total gas tax distribution was calculated on a per capita basis using
2005 population data and fiscal year 2004-05 Department of Transportation gas
tax distributions, and applied to the forecast population of Bull Mountain in fiscal
years 2008, 2010, and 2017.
Table 4-13 shows the forecast gas tax revenues for the City of Bull Mountain
in fiscal years 2008, 2010, and 2017. Oregon law restricts gas tax funds to
transportation projects (primarily operations and maintenance). The City may
choose to carry these funds over to the next year or they may accelerate the
maintenance schedule until the funds are exhausted.
Page 4-22 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Table 4-13. Forecast State Gas Tax Revenues, Bull
Mountain, Fiscal Years 2008, 2010 and 2017 (2006
2008 2010 2017
Forecast Population 8,519 9,957 15,268
. . .
Estimate Per Capita $ 48.10 $ 43.10 $ 34.77
State Gas Tax Revenues $ 409,764 $ 429,147 $ 530,868
Source: Oregon Department of Transportation Fund Apportionments Receipt Distribution for Fiscal Year 2004-
. 2005, population data from Portland State University Population Research Center
In addition to the State gas tax, Washington County imposes its own gas tax at
one cent per gallon. According to Rich Hobernick at Washington County,
58 percent of the revenues are distributed back to the cities based upon their
populations. Table 4-14 shows the forecasted Washington County Gas Tax
Revenues distributed to the City of Bull Mountain for fiscal years 2008, 2010, and
2017.
Table 4-14 Forecast Washington County Gas Tax Revenues, Bull
Mountain, Fiscai Years 2008, 2010, 2017 (2006
2008 2010 2017
Forecast Population 8,519 9,957: 15,268
Estimate Per Capita $ 3.73 $ 3.58 $ 3.12
WA County Gas Tax Revenues $ 31,776 $ 35,646 $ 47,636
Source: Rich Hobernick, Office of Economic Analysis, Analysis by ECONorthwest, population data from
Portland State University Population Research Center
PLANNING PERMIT FEES AND GRANTS
We discussed revenue related to planning activities earlier in this chapter.
Generally, we show the Planning Department offsetting 25 percent of its
expenditures in the long run through a combination of development fees and
grants. The ZS percent assumption is a conservative amount based on current
practices of Oregon jurisdictions.
FRANCHISE FEES
Franchise fee revenues are difficult to forecast, in large part because some of
the biggest sources of those revenues come from taxes levied on sales of
electricity and natural gas--commodities whose value of sales can vary widely
depending on the makeup of a city's customer base. Having noted these
challenges, we provide a breakdown of the level of revenues the City of Bull
Mountain might see if it were to levy franchise fees at a rate of 4 percent on all
utility services provided in the area. ECONorthwest assumes the City will phase
in franchise fees after FY 2010 to accommodate expanded City services,
including the parks deparhnent. The estimates presented in Table 4-15 are based
on assessments of the historical experiences of other cities in Oregon and direct
estimates of expenditures per resident.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-23
Table 4-15 Franchise Fee
Revenues, Bull Mountain, FY 2017
(2006
Annual
Consumption
Utilit Per Capita FY 2017
Electricity $ 300 $ 183,217
Telephone 115 70,233
Gas 150 91,608
Cable N 160 97,716
Solid Waste 80 48,858
Sewer 100 61,072
Surface Water 35 21,375
Total $ 940 $ 574,079
Source: ECONorthwest analysis of receipts in comparable
cities and direct estimates of expenditures per resident
and per employee.
PROPOSED OPERATING TAX RATE LIMIT AND
SUMMARY BUDGETS: FY 2008, 2010, AND 2017
The following tables summarize the general- and street-fund budgets for the
City of Bull Mountain for fiscal years 2008, 2010, and 2017. Based on the
analyses presented in this chapter, ECONorthwest estimates that an operating
property tax rate limit of $2.84 per $1,000 assessed value-the amount required to
balance the FY 2008 and FY 2017 general fund budgets-would be required to
cover the City of Bull Mountain's operating expenses assuming the City provided
services at the levels described within this report. Fiscal year 2010 would require
a lower operating tax rate to balance the budget, so ECONorthwest assumes the
City could contribute more to the reserve fund, pay back the tax anticipation loan
from the interim period, or temporarily operate at a higher level of service. The
estimated operating tax rate limit assumes a reduction in property tax payments
associated with delinquency and prompt-payment credits.
Looking across the general fund tables (See Tables 4-16, 4-18, and 4-20),
ECONorthwest estimates the highest required tax rates in FY 2008 and FY 2017.
The higher FY 2008 property tax requirements are driven by our assumptions that
the City would be engaged in intensive planning work during its first year of
incorporation and only part of the related costs would be offset by outside grants.
ln FY 2010, the planning activities are winding down and state shared revenues
are fully available. In FY 2017, planning expenses have hit a steady state level,
but we have introduced the costs of the Parks Department, which ECONorthwest
assumed would not exist during the first three years. A tax rate of $2.84 per
$1,000 of assessed value would fall within the range of rates charged by nearby
Page 4-24 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
cities (e.g., Beaverton $3.73; Sherwood $3.30; Tigard $2.51; Tualatin $2.27;
Wilsonville $2.52)."
For each of the years, ECONorthwest has separately estimated expenditures
and revenues for the street fund (see Tables 4-17, 4-19, and 4-21). We have
included all the expenses associated with the public works department in the street
fund, as all their activities as described herein would be related to road
maintenance.
The estimates suggest the City would have sufficient funds to maintain its
neighborhood and local roads at a service level that is comparable to or, given the
surpluses, better than currently provided by Washington County. Estimated
surpluses are driven, in part, by the assumption that Washington County would
maintain responsibility for the arterials and collectors within the City's
boundaries.
Table 4-16. Summary General Fund Budget for City of
Bull Mountain Operations, FY 2008 (2006
General Fund Expenses 2006S
Expenses
General Government $ 658,442
Public Safety $ 605,113
City Attorney $ 125,000
Planning $ 490,200
Parks $ -
Miscellaneous Non-Departmental $ 75,000
Contingency $ 100,000
Reserve $ 108,092
Total General Fund Expenses $ 2,161,848
General Fund Revenues
General Fund Revenues
Property tax $ 1,904,936
City Operating Tax Rate 2.84
State Shared Revenues $ 94,487
Planning $ 162,425
Total General Fund Revenues $ 2,161,848
Revenuesless Expenses $ -
Source: ECONorthwest.
'Z The rates stated for other nearby cities are the basic tax rates. They do not necessarily reflect the total taxes charged. For example, Tigard
collects an additional tax of 846/$1000 assessed value to pay for it's library. In addition, Tigard residents pay $2.18 per month to cover
street maintenance.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-25
Table 4-17. Street Fund Budget for City of Bull Mountain,
FY 2008 (2006
Street Fund Expenses
Public Works Department $ 189,542
Contracted Road Maintenance $ 168,961
, Total Street Fund Expenses $ 358,503
Street Fund Revenues
State Gas.Tax Revenue $ 409,764
Wa. County Gas Tax Revenue $ 31,776
Total Street Fund Revenues $ 441,540
Street Fund Revenues Less Expenses $ 83,037
Source: ECONorthwest.
Table 4-18. Summary General Fund Budget for City of
Bull Mountain Operations, FY 2010 (2006
General Fund Expenses ZoosS
Expenses
• General Govemment $ 658,442
Public Safety $ 605,113
City Attorney $ 100,000
Planning $ 390,200
Parks $ -
Miscellaneous Non-Departmental $ 75,000
Contingency $ 100,000
Reserve $ 101,513
Total Expenses $ 2,030,269
General Fund Revenues
Revenues
Property tax $ 1,744,747
City Operating Tax Rate 2.28
State Shared Revenues $ 173,097
Planning $ 112,425
Total General Fund Revenues $ 2,030,269
Revenuesless Expenses $ -
Source: ECONorthwest.
Table 4-19. Street Fund Budget for City of Bull Mountain,
FY 2010 (2006
Street Fund Expenses
Public Works Department $ 189,542
Contracted Road Maintenance $ 185,890
Total Street Fund Expenses $ 375,432
Street Fund Revenues
State Gas Tax Revenue $ 429,147
Wa. County Gas Tax Revenue $ 35,646
Total Street Fund Revenues 464,793
Street Fund Revenues Less Expenses $ 89,361
Source: ECONorthwest.
Page 4-26 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Table 4-20. Summary General Fund Budget for City of
Bull Mountain Operations, FY 2017 (2006
General Fund Expenses 2006$
Expenses
General Govemment $ 1,261,449
Public Safety $ 842,459
City Attorney $ 100,000
Planning $ 587,100
Parks $ 574,955
Miscelianeous Non-Departmental $ 150,000
Contingency $ 200,000
Reserve $ 75,836
Total Expenses $ 3,791,799
General Fund Revenues
Revenues
Property tax $ 2,802,398
City Operating Tax Rate 2.84
State Shared Revenues $ 265,434
Franchise Fees $ 574,079
Planning $ 149,888
Total Revenues $ 3,791,799
General Revenues Less Expenses $
Source: ECONorthwest
Table 4-21. Street Fund Budget for City of Bull Mountain,
FY 2017 (2006
Street Fund Expenses
Public Works Department $ 189,542
Contracted Roads Maintenance $ 264,892
Total Street Fund Expenses $ 454,434
Street Fund Revenues
State Gas Tax Revenue $ 530,868
Wa. Counry Gas Tax Revenue $ 47,636
Total Street Fund Revenues $ 578,504
Street Fund Revenues Less Expenses $ 124,070
Source: ECONorthwest.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page 4-27
This page is intentionally left blank.
Page 4-28 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Appendix AServices that remain unchanged
If the residents of Bull Mountain vote in favor of incorporation, they would
create a new layer of local government that will work with existing service
providers to provide local services within the enacted City boundaries. Across
Oregon, different cities provide different mixes of local services. Smaller cities, in
general, provide only a handful of services. Other cities provide a wide range of
local services. This appendix identifies current service providers that are
unaffected (at least in regard to issues of revenue) and their relationship to the
proposed City of Bull Mountain.
Many local services would remain unchanged regardless of incorporation:
schools, fire and life safety, water, sewer, surface water, solid waste, and transit.
At least one service-schools-is entirely independent of changes in local
governance. One of the services listed below, with the exception of schools, may
change after incorporation only if the state delivers legal advice suggesting that to
meet the standard of "providing a service" to qualify for state shared revenues, the
City must add one of these services.
SCHOOLS
The Bull Mountain incorporation study area is served by two school districts:
Tigard-Tualatin School District and the Beaverton School District. School district
services and boundaries will not change with incorporation.
FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY
Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue covers the entire area proposed for
incorporation, and it provides fire suppression, emergency medical first response,
code enforcement, plan review, etc. Incorporation of Bull Mountain would have
little impact on the district's operations. They would have one additional customer
city that they would interact with at the administrative level, but no impact on
service delivery.
The permanent tax rate for the Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue is $1.52 per
$1,000 assessed value and will remain unchanged with incorporation.
WATER
The Tigard Water District (TWD) currently provides water to the
unincorporated Bull Mountain area. If the City of Bull Mountain incorporated
over the remaining area of the Tigard Water District, a key question is whether
the new City could become a member of the Intergovernmental Water Board.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page A-1
Counsel to the Tigard Water Board addressed the issue in April 21, 2006
memorandum and concluded thav:
"If the City of Bull Mountain is formed over the entire remnant
territory of the District, the provisions of ORS 522.510 would
apply: whenever the entire area of a water district becomes
incorporated in or annexed to a City in accordance with the law,
the District shall be extinguished and the City shall, upon the
effective date of such incorporation or annexation, succeed to all
the assets and become charged with all the liabilities, obligations
and functions of the District. If this occurs, then the new Ciry
would succeed to all the rights, obligations and properties of the
District. "
So if the proposed boundaries of the new City were identical to those of the
Water District's, state law would require the new City to take control of the assets
(and liabilities) and operate its own water system.
However, TWD's boundaries and the proposed City's do not perfectly
overlap. Roughly 10 percent of the district's area falls outside the proposed City
of Bull Mountain. Under such circumstances, ORS 222.540 suggests the new City
would have the discretion to keep the TWD intact and contract with it for water
services.
Under ORS 222.540, when part of a district becomes included in a City, the
City may exercise its powers of withdrawal by resolution. If it so chooses, in its
discretion, all water system assets within the City shall be withdrawn except those
facilities necessary for the district to retain in order to serve its remaining
customers. Disputes over the assets are resolved by the Board of County
Commissioners. Subsection (5) specifically provides for a Joint Operation
Agreement, presumably to avoid these conflicts from coming to the Board of
County Commissioners. If the City chooses not to withdraw, the Water District
and City boundaries will overlap and the District will continue to provide service
to the entire District boundaries, which also include the City boundaries.
If a City withdraws the major portion of the District, then ORS 222.550
allows the District Board to dissolve on its own, and according to the District
dissolution statutes. If so, the City may agree to assume all the assets and provide
service within the City and outside to the District boundaries, notwithstanding any
Charter or statutory limitation.
In Years 1 and 3, those specifically required by this economic feasibility
statement, ECO has assumed the proposed City would keep the TWD intact.
Under this assumption, ECO further assumes ratepayers would receive the same
service and pay the same rates as they would if the area remained unincorporated.
Additional questions have arisen about the proposed City of Bull Mountain's
ability to control water-related assets and service without first receiving consent
' Memorandum from Clark Balfour (Cable Huston Benedict Haagensen & Lloyd LLP) to George Rhine, President of the
Tigard Water District, April 21, 2006.
Page A-2 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
from the City of Tigard to withdrawn from the 1994 Intergovernmental Water
Agreement (IGWA). Counsel for the TWD has also commented on the topic:
"Once again, we come back to [IGWA] paragraph SH, where it
indicates that neither the benefits received by the District or the
obligations incurred under the terms of this Agreement are
assignable or in any manner transferable by the District without
the written consent of the City. l do not believe this clause would
stand up in the face of the statutory directive of ORS 222.510,
which compels the transfer. However, that would be an issue for
the new City of Bull Mountain to take up with the other Cities as
part of the Intergovernmental Water Agreenzent or at the
courthouse. l believe the state statute would prevail in this
instance. "
The passage suggests the state statute would essentially give the proposed City of
Bull Mountain the authority to determine the future of water delivery within its
boundaries without the consent of the other parties of the 1994 IGWA if it took
over all of the District and withdrew the infrastructure.
SEWER, STORMWATER, SURFACE WATER
Clean Water Services (CWS) provides both sewer and storm water service to
most properties in the Bull Mountain study area within the UGB. ECO assumed,
for several reasons, that the proposed City will allow CWS to provide services to
proposed City residents. CWS can leverage significant economies of scale in
sewer systems. Hooking into existing pipes should be relatively easy, and CWS
has the infrastructure in place that Bull Mountain can connect to.
The Clean Water Services Board sets all of the District's rates. Those rates
include:
• Sewer Service Charges
o Base Charge -$17.81 per equivalent dwelling unit per month
o Use Charge -$1.23 per 100 cubic feet (CCF) per month for
individual customer winter average; system-wide average water
consumption is 8.0 CCF per dwelling unit per month
• Storm and Surface Water -$4.00 per equivalent service unit per month
• Commercial and Industrial rates are generally based on equivalent
dwelling units and equivalent service units, each representing a single-
family dwelling unit.
The larger cities receive a portion of the sewer service charges, based on a
30%/70% split with aIlowances for revenue bond payments. The smaller cities
receive 5% of the service charges within individual corporate boundaries with
allowances for revenue bond payments. As the percentage of revenue bond
requirements increases, the relative operating share for the cities and Clean Water
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page A-3
Services decreases. Currently, Clean Water Services receives 40.88%; the larger
cities receive 17.52%; the smaller cities receive 2.92% of the sewer service
charges. The balance of the charges is applied to outstanding revenue bond
requirements. Larger cities receive 75% of the storm and surface water charges,
and smaller cities receive 5%.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Solid waste disposal is provided by Pride Disposal, and in some areas Waste
Management. Solid waste disposal is expected to be unaffected by incorporation.
LIBRARY SERVICES
Residents of unincorporated Bull Mountain are currently served by
Washington County Cooperative Library Services. The proposal for incorporation
does not envision City-provided library services within the timeframe of this
analysis.
TRANSIT
TriMet (Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon), the
public transit authority in the Portland metropolitan region, does not currently
serve Bull Mountain.
Page A-4 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Appendix B Interviews
ECONorthwest interviewed service providers in Washington County that may
provide service to the proposed City of Bull Mountain. These service providers
were asked to provide operating and maintenance information from which to
devise a budget for the proposed City in fiscal years 2008, 2010, and 2017.
Service providers were asked a number of questions, many of them unique
depending upon the service to be provided. Service providers that are expected to
provide contracted services to the City were asked to provide information for two
to three levels of service (baseline and enhanced) and the associated costs.
ECONorthwest also interviewed Oregon city officials, representatives of
organizations and businesses that provide services to cities in our efforts to collect
information about typical costs for the proposed City of Bull Mountain.
Interviews conducted for this study are listed below.
Balfour, Clark, Cable Huston Benedict Haagensen & Lloyd LLP, Counsel to
the Tigard Water District. Telephone lnterview May 2, 2006.
Becker, Mark, International City Managers Association. Telephone interview
February 27, 2006.
Bingham, John, former City Manager for the City of Damascus. Telephone
interview on February 22, 2006.
Davis, Bob, Interim Washington County Administrator. Multiple interviews
February and March, 2006.
Bolen, Glen, Fregonese Calthorpe Associates. Telephone interview on
February 24, 2006.
Burling, Roy, Chief Financial Officer, Tigard-Tualatin School District.
Telephone interview February 22, 2006.
Cronin, Kevin, City of Sherwood Planning Director. Multiple telephone
interviews March and Apri12006.
Cruz, Bob, Clean Water Services. Telephone interview on February 26, 2006.
Curtis, Brent, Washington County Planning Department. Multiple interviews
February and March 2006.
Eakins, Eileen, Jordan Schrader. Telephone interview March 16, 2006.
Foley, Stephanie, Research Assistant, League of Oregon Cities. Multiple
telephone interviews April and May 2006.
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page B-1
Hall, Carol. Metro Data Resource Center. Telephone interview March 15,
2006.
Hanson, Jerry, Washington County Tax Assessor. Via Email May 2, 2006.
Hepp, David, Washington County Undersheriff. Multiple telephone interviews
March, April, May, 2006.
Hergert, James, TriMet. Telephone interview on February 27, 2006.
Hobernick, Rich, Washington County. Telephone interview Apri125, 2006.
Huie, Mel, Regional Trail Coordinator, Metro. Multiple phone interviews
Apri12006.
Jensen, Alec, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue. Telephone interview on March
1,2006.
Koellermeier, Dennis, Public Works Director, City of Tigard. Telephone
interview on March 1, 2006.
Liden, Keith, Parsons Brinkerhoff. Telephone interview on March 13, 2006.
MacAllister, John, Building Official, Washington County. Telephone
interview, May 2, 2006.
Richey, Mike, Washington County Assessor's Office. Via Email March 31,
2006.
Schamp, David, Washington County Roads Department. Multiple interviews
February, March, May 2006.
Scheiderich, Bill, Chair, Intergovernmental Water Board. February 26, 2006.
Shields, Barbara, City of Tigard Planning. Telephone interview on March 15,
2006.
Valone, Ray, Planner, Metro. Multiple interviews in February, March and
April 2006.
Winterowd, Greg, Winterbrook Consulting. Telephone interview on February
28, 2006.
Youngquist, Jan, Beaverton School District. Telephone interview on February
22, 2006.
Page B-2 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
Appendix C Study Area 7
FOBM requested that ECO consider the possible addition of Study Area 7 to
the City of Bull Mountain. The area is located East of the proposed City (see
Figure C-1), and the legal feasibility of including the area is still in question.
From a fiscal perspective, the effect of adding Area 7 to the City would be
minimal. The Area, which is fully built-out, contains 52 dwelling units, 135
people, and an assessed property value of $18.3 million (see Table C-1). Adding
the area to the City would have a small effect on both revenues and expenditures
but would not impact our general conclusions on the permanent tax rate required
for economic feasibility.
Figure C-1. Current land use by Tax Lot Property Code, Bull
Mountain, 2006
- . - -
, - - -
vj
;
.
;
:
: x ~
\ f .
t '
! , (E .
~
_a
wra4riur r ~
SGHO l.S FERRY
- . ~
~ ~3 ~ ~ j ~ • `1
-';j~<r}t
. `2 . ( ~ • ~ ; ' ' },W;_.
.
, . ..i ~ ? . . ~ ~
i
. . : ~ ` ' C9 _.1
~ ~ • ;
W ~
-1:~-
.
.
~ ` n _ _ ' , i~` ~ - •
C l
0 BULL~AOUN rfN`'_,~--"~'i
r r
~
~
;
8E F {
-
BENQ
~ w 1 ; .
~ ~ t._L.. ; f -
i.
~ Z ~i~ ~R~
~ . ~
fi ~
. .
W
. , ~
.
.
s ...0.3
~ Agriculture Pubtic Vacant
L_..~.._..__... I
lndustrial Rural Urban Growth Boundary
Multi-Family Residential Single Family Residential Q StudyArea Boundary
Source: Metro, RLIS Lite, Washington County Assessor's Office 2006 I
Bull Mountain EFS ECONorthwest May 2006 Page C-1
Table C-1. Summary of recommended forecasts for dwelling units,
population, and assessed value, Bull Mountain FY 2008 - FY 2017
Flr zoos Fr zoio Fr iov
Assessed Assessed Assessed
Study Dwelling Value Dwelling Value Dwelling Value
Area Units Population (millions) Units Population (millions) Units Population (millions)
1 3,273 8,509 $689.2 3,465 9,009 $714.6 3,465 9,009 $707.4
2' $i2.1 -~%262 ~L37.7
3 1 3 $9.5 203 527 $37.3 1,344 3,496 $170.1
• Q 0 $2.7 Q ps 2~7 r~~~' 0 . 0 ~ $2~7
7 52 135 18,3 52 135 18.3 52 135 18.3
Total 3,329 8,654 732 3,881 10,092 807 5,924 15,403 1 036
Source: MeVo RLIS Lite 2006, Washington County Assessors Office 2006, Analysis by ECONorthwest
Page C-2 ECONorthwest May 2006 Bull Mountain EFS
council mail councilmail Re Fw: EFS Page 1j
From: Craig Prosser
To: Lisa Hamilton-Treick
Date: Tue, May 30, 2006 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: EFS
Hi, Lisa,
Thank you for sending this report on. We appreciate it. We are currently looking at it so that we can be
prepared to have a meaningful discussion with you and the other representatives of BMRI.
In his letter of May 18, Mayor Dirksen suggested two dates to get together with you and representatives of
• BMRI to discuss your proposal and its impacts on Tigard and the provision of urban services. Those
dates are Tuesday, June 20 (the Council workshop meeting) or Tuesday June 28 (the Council business
meeting.) We have heard back from your lawyer, Larry Derr, and now yourself reiterating your offer to
meet with us, but neither of you have responded to the suitabiliry of these dates. Please let me know how
these dates work for you. If they do not work, please suggest alternative dates which would work for you
and our Council. They are most anxious to meet with your group.
Thanks again.
"Lisa Hamilton-Treick" <Lisa@HamiltonRealtyGroup.com> 5/30/2006 7:38 AM
Hi Craig,
I think I had the wrong email for you and this bounced back. Would you please confirm receipt.
Thanks,
Lisa
Original Message From: Lisa Hamilton-Treick
To: craigd@tigard-or.gov ; nickw@tigard-or.gov ; sydney@tigard-or.gov ; tomw@tigard-or.gov ;
sallyh@tigard-or.gov ; craigp@tigard-or.gov
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 7:27 AM
Subject: EFS
' Mayor and Council Members:
Attached is the City of Bull Mountain Economic Feasibiliry Statement, per your request. Please contact me
to set a time for an informal meeting should you have questions or concerns.
Regards,
Lisa Hamilton-Treick
503-579-1203
CC: Bob Davis; council mail councilmail; hosticka@metro.dst.or.us; jpr@jprlaw.com;
roy_rogers@co.washington.or.us; Timothy (Tim) Ramis; tom_brian@co.washington.or.us
_
council mail_ . councilmail Fwd EFS
From: council mail councilmail
To: Woodruff Tom O
Date: Wed, May 31, 2006 11:17 AM
Subject: Fwd: EFS
Hello, here's the "EFS" sent by Lisa Hamilton-Treick
(Computers have been offline this morning...so behind schedule in checking e-mails.)
Hope the boxes are emptying out quickly and your new place is beginning to feel like home!
Catliy
Forwarding your email received here at City Hall.
Thank you,
Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder
503-718-2410
cathy@tigard-or.gov
i
i
BULL MOUNTAIN
BEAVERTON ~
~
Proposed City Boundary
AFZO . ~
RY i:l r•~•.,
S6H-~~ FER~,,,~ BARROWS ~ r
i'
Bull Mountain (Proposed City)
~ .
DK31X Proposed City Boundary
116'ARD
UGB Expansion Areas (2002)
f
eCurrent Urban Growth Boundary
l~'. ~ - , •
3
ncorporatetl Urban Areas
. osy i-~ ••-.._.._°1 i.._.._i Existing Cities
Unincorporated Areas
Land Use Designations
AF5-Agriculture and Forestry
. su~~MOUNrniN ~ ` . ~ AF10-Agri
~ ~ - n • ~ ' ~ I,,~~~;~'S culture and Forest
AF20-Agriculture and Forest
a~"~' ~ ~ .~a ~ w.,e'~ ~ ,
EFU- Exclusive Farm Use
~ r_. f
INST• Institutional
IFZ R6- Residential
o . r., ~ ~ : ~ , i i~• RR5- Rural Residential
~ i
EFU area~63
~ • • a W ~5 ~S ~ ^ ~ f"
KIN;G CjTY
s ~ ~a Y ~p ~ °GaN~ x a~ ~ ~•"EmXg
~
N
• ~ i l
~.D I s
. . ^ _
INST i {;eographic ~
Srstems
~ BEEF BE ~ R6 I nAkcor
AF10 i
AF5
EFU RR5 •
;-----------I. 0 0.25 0. Miles
i
` GTpN O WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
C~ C PLANNING DIVISION - ROOM 350-14
p,~2 155 NORTH FIRST AVENUE
HILLSBORO, OREGON 97124
(503) 846-3519 Fax: (503) 846-4412
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
MAJOR BOUNDARY CHANGE PROPOSAL WA-3106:
On May 30, 2006, the Bull Mountain Residents for Incorporation filed a petition concerning the formation of the
new city of Bull 1Vlountain (see map below). The petition requests that the County place the incorporation on the
November 7, 2006 General Election ballot.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: PUBLIC HEARING LOCATION:
The Washington County Board of Commissioners will review Shirley Huffman Auditorium
the petition for incorporation (WA-3106) at the following Washington County Public Services Building
public hearings: July 25, 2006 at 6:30 PM 155 North First Avenue
August 1, 2006 at 10:00 AM Hillsboro, Oregon
On August 1 st, the Board may issue a decision or continue its review to August 8, 2006 at 10:00 AM for a decision
and, if necessary, to August 9, 2006 at 10:00 AM.
Approval of the boui:dary clzunge would allow the incorporation to be p/aced on tlie Novemher 7th ballot.
A copy of the staff report will be available no later than July 17, 2006.
For more information please visit the County's web page at: www.co.washiny4ton.or.us/deptmts/lut/planning
or contact the Planning Division by e-mail: lutplan@co.washington.or.us or by phone: (503) 846-3519.
!
'
E3LAVEh BULL MOUNTAIN
l"0 N -
AF20 11 i `_j Proposed City Boundary
`
5 NOl55ERRV - - BARRQWS' ' _ 1 1 Ln I'l n
ry ~ .
d
I
~
3'f f ~ ~ "iI Bull Mountaln (Proposed City)
309X Proposed Ciry Boundary
TiIG'Af2[T UGB ExpansionAreas (2002)
Area 64 '
Curtent Urban Gmwih Boundary
Incorporated Urban Areas
~i ET' ~
~ q• ' ' . 1.. E~sting Cities
Unincorporated Areas
Land Use Designafions
~ i
AFS Agricutture and Foresiry
~M rvr r- y AF10.AgdculWreandForest
AF20-AgricNture and Forest
~ F'✓ ~ ~LEFU- Exclusive Fartn Use
INST- InstitWonal
I ~ RE Residentlel
o ~ IA RRS Rural Residmtial
g o ~ i
eFU
?
KING c;rrv
FU ~ Y.; ~k ~ • : END .N. • I ~ Cf I S N
INST i u,.•T,,. c fne,i. ~
eEECeeao ' AF10 R6
AFS ' RRS ~ 0 0.25 0.5
EFU _ Miles
Agenda Item # 3
Meeting Date Tune 20, 2006
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Ciry Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Title Community Attitudes Survey Results - Riley Research Associates
Prepared By: Beth St. Amand Dept Head Okay ~ Ciry Mgr Okay
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND KEY FACTS
Receive a report from Riley Research on the Communiry Attitudes Survey conducted from May 22 June 2.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Receive the survey results from Riley Research and discuss/comment.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
This worksession provides Council the opportunity to discuss and comment on the survey results. The information will
be presented formally at the televised June 27 Council meeting.
• At the Apri14, 2006, Special Council meeting, the Council discussed the survey content with Riley Research.
• The survey was conducted via telephone from May 22 June 2.
• The survey establishes a baseline for future surveys to be conducted every two years. The surveys will have two
parts: The first section measures residents' sarisfacrion with current City services, and the second section will
provide communiry opinions on a current topic or project. This survey focused on community planning for the
Comprehensive Plan Update.
. The Comprehensive Plan Update will be based upon community values identified through this survey, along
with recent Ciry surveys and Tigard Beyond Tomorrow.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Not applicable. .
COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT
Council Goals
• Improve Communicarion and Relationship with Citizens: Conduct a ciry-wide scienrific survey/report card on Ciry
services
• Revise City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan
Tigard Beyond Tomorrow: Communication
#1: The City will maximize accessibility in a variery of formats, providing opportunities for input on communiry issues
and effective two-way communication.
ATTACHMENT LIST
None. The final report is being prepared; it will be distributed at the June 20 meeting.
FISCAL NOTES
The survey already has been funded.
FISCAL NOTES
The survey already has been funded.
' RILEY RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
~ Research for Marketing, Public Relations, and Planning
CITY OF TIGARD
Community Baseline Survey 2006
Verbatim Appendix
J u ne 2006
www.rileyresearch.com
9900 S.W. Wilshire, Suite 250, Portland, OR 97225
phone [503] 222-4179 fax [503] 222-4313
Q2. Miscellaneous reasons for likin Tigard
Amenities
Businesses
City sports programs for all the kids
In Washington County
It's not Beaverton
Less traffic than Portland
Nice blend of commercial and residential
Not too busy except for traffic
Quiet neighborhood I live in
Shopping
Tigard Senior Center
Police
Outstanding police force
Police Department
Miscellaneous
Cheaper taxes
Cleanliness
Climate
Everything
Friends and family are here
Like Portland annex
Lived here for the last 30 years
Don't know / Nothinq
Nothing (3)
Just moved here
M RILEY RESEARCH
AssocIATE.s 1
s
Q3. Miscellaneous: Like least about Tigard.
Aesthetics
Amount of run tiown apartments and areas
Lack of unique neighborhoods
Old buildings
Too many hills
Trees have been ripped down
Amenities
Lack of good grocery stores / Not enough grocery stores (2)
Lack of restaurant choices / good restaurants (2)
Library
Not a lot of locaf or small businesses.
Community
Doesn't have a strong sense of community like Lake Oswego.
Everybody in your business
Lack of sense of community
Miss the city that is Portland.
Development/Land Use
Being built out.
Building codes
Developments
Getting permits
Houses being built so close together.
Need to plan
Property rights
Smaller lots now with more apartments
Total lack of planning
Location
Distance from the airport
How far away I am from family.
Location
Not very many places I can walk to.
Proximity to strip malls.
Shopping areas are so strung out. You have to go either one-way in/out of Tigard to do it.
Too close to Portland
Traffic
Speeding cars on my street
Traffic
0 RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATFS Z
ti
Q3. Miscellaneous: Like least about Tigard. (Continued)
Transportation
Buses
Difficulty being a pedestrian or bicyclist
Lack of public transportation
Roads
Old 99w
Quality of the streets / Road maintenance (3)
Speed bumps
Town is kind of shameful; focus seems to be solely putting roads through.
Water
Fluoride they are trying to acid to the water in Tigard.
Quality of the water
Sewer fee
Water doesn't have fluoride.
Miscellaneous
Growth fact
Cost of the services
Out of state contractors.
Politics
Pollution is bad off I-5, Hwy 217 and Hwy 99
Rules and regulations of Summerfield
School district is not open to change
• RILEY RESEARCH
~ASSOCIATES 3
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20
years?
Businesses / Emplovment
Making it attractive for better business.
More business environment
More jobs
City planninq
Annexation (2) ,
Creating an identity. (2)
Density (2)
Creating a core city area where citizens feel a part of the community
Decide where the streets and sewers should be.
Getting businesses in town that are attractive instead of strip mall look.
Improving infrastructure.
Infrastructure - making sure there are enough roads to meet the growing population.
Infrastructure growth.
Make provisions for all the building they allow.
More stop signs in residential areas
Not to reduce anymore of the city lots in size.
Parking
South of Downtown Tigard needs to become a part of it.
Spend their money appropriately. CA spends their money on other things like parks; they don't
have enough for their police.
Community
Helping people who don't have money, insurance or medical healthcare
I promote a sense of community and right now I don't feel it here.
Keeping Wal-Mart out is No1
Neighborhood
Recreate the small town
Developments
Development (2)
Quit building (2)
Building too many buildings; hundreds of condos without enough streets, taking down all the
trees
City development
Construction growth
Development of property
Don't build so much.
Less growth. IYs out of hand, the building around here.
Too much development
Updating commercial districts
Upgrade little urban core, mix residential, commercial, and the core,
Working on development.
M RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATES 4
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
(Continued)
Downtown Tigard
Revitalize downtown. (8)
Accessibility of downtown / Making downtown more viable (2)
Downtown maintenance / Fix downtown (2)
Upgrade downtown (2)
Don't waste city money on the downtown plan.
Downtown area
Downtown Main Street becoming upscale.
Downtown to become a friendly area, like coffee.
Growth to downtown
Modernize downtown area. Make it seem like more of a city.
More variety, don't think there's a single grocery store.
Providing better downtown, more user friendly. Where people can gather, and hang out.
Education
Schools (14)
Education (4)
School funding (4)
Don't cut back on schools.
Education program for kids, like art, sports, etc.
Focus more on education.
Future growth of the school systems
Improve schools and locations
More budget room for education; more fair treatment for teachers, and better administration.
More open to pubtic of whaYs going on in schools.
Overcrowded schools ' .
Public education
School quality high
Schools are going down hill
Work on the schools
Growth
Growth (8)
Limit / Control / Manage growth (7)
Expand urban growth
Grown a lot.
Proper growth
Quit growing
Room to grow; Tigard's limits are very small.
Stop growth
Urban sprawl
• RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCinTE.s 5
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
(Continued)
Housin
Housing density (5)
Affordable housing (2)
Housing (2)
About packing the homes to close
Densities, for housing, a lot of good farms are being turned into town houses.
Do not put in too many houses; would be overcrowded.
Fair housing for people
Housing over-crowding
Housing prices ridiculous
Limit density of housing; increases traffic
Services to support new housing.
Stop building so many houses.
Stop putting in row houses.
Land use
Land use (5)
All land used as housing
All the new developments .
Close the building department. Durham Rd they are putting up another subdivision where
beautiful open space was. Tiny shacks in cutsie colors; if one-guy coughs entire place shakes
each house, for a house to live and breathe in a healthy environment, it should have at least
10,000 square feet of land. Tigard doesn't need to have any more people.
Stop crowding people into postage size lots.
Urban sprawl-small lots
Livabilitv / Aesthetics
Livability (7)
Keep up the livability (2)
Ability to attract and attain vital businesses, and residences
Comfortable livability
Improving overall look
Keep it like it is
Keep neighborhoods livable
Maintaining what it has, and improving on it
Maintaining what people have now.
Staying as swell as they are now.
Take care of what they have.
B RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATES G
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
(Continued)
Open-qreen spaces / Environmental quality
Green spaces (5)
Preservation of green spaces (3)
Create / Leave more open spaces. (2)
Interaction of man and nature
Jump on more open space, and grab it before the developers grab it.
More trees
Obtain open and natural spaces; keep trees when develo.pments are approved.
Parks and Recreation
Parks (4)
Recreation (3)
Something for the kids/people to do (3)
Bike trails
Get a park and rec service like Beaverton and Portland do. We pay out of district.
Making more recreational uses for the kids.
More parks
More recreation for the youngsters
No recreation
Public swimming pool would be great. Right now we have to go to the Sherwood YMCA or
Beaverton so we have to pay the out of district fees to swim.
Shopping to be more appealing. Plazas are dirty.
Skate Park
Skate Park, which is supposed to be at the police station.
Population / Overcrowdinq
Population growth (8)
Population (6)
Overcrowding (3)
Over population (2)
Immigration (2)
Balancing growth and population.
Get rid of all the Mexicans
Growing population.
Handling the added population.
Hopefully the population will stop growing so much, and will try getting quality rather than
quantity.
Over development
Population density
Population increase.
M RILEY 7
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
(Continued)
Public safety
Keeping crime rate down. (3)
Safety (3)
Speed control/limits (2)
Adequate police and fire people
Fight crime better.
Fire
Funding police department
Gangs
Graffiti gang activity
If I really live in the City of Tigard, there should be a streetlight at Multnomah Blvd. Garden
Home Rd. and 69th. They are just waiting for a bloody accident.
Improve the police
Keep the crack out.
Police
Police force needs to grow.
Public protection
Public safety
Red light runners
Safety for the kids to do activities
When police come it should be Tigard Police not Washington County.
Streets / Roads
StreeURoad - improvements/maintenance (12)
Highway 99 (9)
Roads (4)
Pacific Hwy (2)
72nd is really bad
Be more efficient with roadwork, they've done and re-done Walnut I don't know how many
times. '
Do something about Main Street and 99.
Enlarge Hall Street
Fix Oleson Road; it's dark, and the road is narrow with ditches on both sides. You can't even
walk on it.
More roads - better upkeep of them
Need to expand the roads.
Put in speed bumps on our street don't widen it.
Road structure
Widen the roads.
~RASSOCIATES CH $
.
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
(Continued)
Taxes
Lower taxes (2)
Home taxes
Lower property tax
Taxation
Traffic / Congestion
Traffic (100)
Congestion (5)
Traffic management (6)
Traffic problems (6)
Traffic flow (4)
Traffic congestion. (2)
Traffic on 99 (7)
Ability to handle all traffic
Commute in traffic congestion
Hwy 99 traffic problem
Keep traffic moving
Making traffic easier to go through the city.
Minimize traffic
Plan better traffic patterns for when they put in new developments.
Reasonable traffic.
Road congestion
Slow traffic
Traffic areas
Traffic improved
Traffic light operation, the one on McDonald and 99 W. and Greenburg and 99 W need to equip
it better.
Traffic lights are needed in lots of locations. Streets need to be widened.
Traffic on Pacific Hwy and Hall Blvd •
Traffic pattern
: Transportation
Transportation (8)
Expand MAX service / Light rail (6)
Public transportation (2)
Better transportation
More buses
Transportation issues Hwy 99
Transportation planning
M RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATFS 9
,
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
(Continued)
Wafer
Water (5)
Do not fluoridate the water some people have allergies to fluoride.
Funding water and sewer; adequate supply to meet the needs of the residents, at a reasonable
cost
Quality of the water
Resolving the water issue
Utilities
Water should be better.
Zonin
Zoning
Zoning housing / property (2)
Miscellaneous
Children / Kids (3)
Accommodating to small businesses
Elderly people
Family •
Getting voter approval and getting the plan moving accomplishing in everything they have lined
up
I won't be here.
Poorly designed survey because of the wording; people who take this survey cannot choose an
honest answer because the definition behind the words are different for the surveyor and the
people who make the decisions from the answers they get.)
Provide facilities for Tigard area
Providing overall services to the Bull Mountain Area.
Resources
Don't know / Nothinq
Don't know / Not sure (25)
Na / Nothing (9)
No comments/opinion (4)
M RILEY CH 10
Q36. Miscellaneous information sources
Community
Being involved
Community meetings
CPO (Neighborhood club that meets to discuss land use in Tigard and petitions) Meetings
Mail
Junk mail
Pamphlet they send out
Media
KXL 750 AM
Regat Paper The Courier
Tribune Voter's pamphlet
Z-100
Newslefters
Land development news
Summeffield something newsletter
Miscellaneous
No interest in knowing about these people at all.
School
M ARILEY SSOCIATFSEARCH 11
' RILEY RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
~ Research for Marketing, Public Relations, and Planning
June 16, 2006
TO: Tom Coffee, Beth St. Amand
CITY OF TIGARD
FROM: John L. Campbell / Michael J. Riley
RILEY RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
RE: COMMUNITY BASELINE SURVEY 2006
www.rileyresearch.com
9900 S.W. Wilshire, Suite 250, Portland, OR 97225
phone [503] 222-4179 fax [503] 222-4313
TABLE.OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW ........:.......................................................................................1
I NTRODUCTION 3
M ETH O DO LO GY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
RESULTS 4
APPENDIX: Questionnaire
M RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATES
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
Satisfaction
13 Satisfaction with Tigard as a place to live is relatively high with a vast majority of the
residents (79%) giving a rating of 7 or higher. The overall mean rating given was 7.8 on a
ten-point scale. (Q1)
~ With ratings of 5 or 6 considered neutral, most of the City's services were rated on the
positive side.
~ The library received the highest mean satisfaction ratings of the different topics listed (8.9
for both the overall perception of the library and personal experience with the library). (Q6-
17)
~ The overall perception of City Police (7.9), personal experience with City parks (7.9),
personal experience with City Police (7.8), and overall perception of City parks (7.8) all
followed the library by about one point. (Q6-17)
Satisfaction Ratin s Mean No interaction
Overall erce tion of the libra 8.9 17%
Personal ex erience with the libra 8.9 22
Overall erce tion of Cit Police 7.9 14
Personal ex erience with Cit arks 7.9 16
Personal ex erience with Cit Police 7.8 41
Overall erce tion of Cit arks 7.8 13
Interaction with Cit staff 7.6 48
Cit water and sewer services 7.5 13
The Permit Center 6.6 71
Recreation and leisure activities 6.6 29
Street maintenance 6.4 2
In re ards to traffic, the abilit to et around the Cit 5.3 1
~ In regards to planning, a majority of residents (60%) gave a rating of between 5 and 8 on a
ten-point scale with a mean rating of 6.1. (Q18)
Perceptions
~ A majority of residents mentioned location (61 as what they like most about living in
Tigard, consisting of 49% mentioning the location or accessibility and 18% mentioning the
small or rural feel of the area. (Q2)
~ Roughly one in two of the residents (45%) mentioned traffic as what they like least about
living in Tigard. (Q3)
~ The area's traffic and congestion problems were mentioned as the most important issues as .
Tigard plans for the next 20 years. (Q19)
~ About one in two residents (46%) believe the City of Tigard has stayed about the same over
the past few years; another one in four (23%) think. Tigard has gotten better, while another
one in four (23%) think iYs gotten worse. (Q4)
M RILEY RESEARCH ~
ASSOCIAT'ES
EXECUT/VE OVERVIEW (CONTINUED)
E3 Roughly one in three residents (33%) believe Tigard will become a better place to live in the
future, but nearly an equal percentage (34%) believe it will become worse. Just over one in
four (27%) think Tigard will remain the same. (Q5)
Preferences
IM Protection of trees and natural resource areas (8.4) as well as the level of neighborhood
traffic (8.2) are viewed as the most important of the livability characteristics listed. (Q20-29)
Livability Characteristics Mean Importance
Score
Protection of trees and natural resource areas. 8.4
The level of neighborhood traffic. 8.2
Maintainin existin lot sizes within established nei hborhoods. 7.8
Pedestrian and bike aths. 7.7
Com atibilit between existin and new develo ment. 7.6
Bus service. 7.4
Strengthenin re ulations to improve the a earance of the communit . 7.4
Nei hborhood arks within a half-mile of home. 7.2
Variet of housin es like sin le-famil , townhouses, and a artments . 7.0
Nei hborhood commercial services within a 5-minute walk from our house. • 6.1
~ Residents are divided, with equal percentages of residents thinking growth should be
accommodated (43%) or fimited (43%). Only a small percentage thinks growth should be
promoted (10%). (Q30)
~ The most frequently mentioned sources for local government information were the
Oregonian (44%), the Tigard Times (29%), the Cityscape Newsletter (29%), and television
news (22%). (Q36)
~RILEY RESEARCH 2
' ASSOCIATFS
INTRODUCTION
The city of Tigard asked Riley Research Associates to conduct a baseline survey
among residents. This survey will set the foundation on current perceptions and a
template for subsequent benchmark studies on a two to three year basis. The key
subjects of the study included insights into:
• Satisfaction with City services
• Importance of various City characteristics
• Perceptions of the City's livability
• Residents preferred information sources
METHODOLOGY
Riley Research Associates worked in association with the city of Tigard to create the
questionnaire. The scientific telephone survey was conducted among residents of the
city of Tigard. If residents were unsure if they live inside the city limits, cross streets
were asked for and checked to ensure they lived inside the city limits.
A total of 400 questionnaires were completed. This size sample yields a margin of error
of +/-4.9% at a 95% confidence level. Fielding began on May 22"d with pretests, then
officially commenced on May 23~d, and concluded on June 5th, 2006. The calls were
made between the hours of 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. using a RDD (random digit dial) call list
provided by an independent broker that was specified by zip code.
The results are displayed in a question-by-question format. A copy of the questionnaire
can be found in the Appendix. Cross tabulations with demographic breakouts and
verbatim responses are included as separate documents. .
~RILEY RESEARCH 3
' ASSOCIATES
RESULTS
Q1. How satisfied are you with the City of Tigard as a place to live, on a ten-point scale
where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied"?
Satisfaction with Tigard as a place to live is relatively high with a majority of the residents (79%)
giving a rating of 7 or higher. The overall mean rating given was 7.8 on a ten-point scale.
The following groups gave significantly higher mean ratings than their counterparts:
✓ Those without children at home (7.9 vs. 7.5 those with children at home)
✓ Residents who have not attended city meetings (7.8 vs. 7.3 those who have attended)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 1 %
2 0
3 0
4 2
5 8
6 8
7 14
8 30
9 18
10 - Very satisfied 17
Don't know 1
Mean 7.8
M RILEY RESEARCH 4
ASSOCIATFS
Q2. What do you like most about living in Tigard? ,
A majority of residents mentioned location (61 as what they like most about living in Tigard,
which consisted of 49% mentioning the location or accessibility and 18% mentioning the small
or rural feel.
Just over one-quarter (29%) mentioned Tigard's atmosphere, which included 20% mentioning
the nice or quiet community, 6% mentioning the safety or low crime rate, and 6% mentioning the
trees and green spaces.
Three groups are more likely than their counterparts to mention "location" as what they like most
about Tigard:
✓ Residents age 40 to 49 (70% vs. 53% to 64% other age ranges)
✓ Residents who have not attended meetings (62% vs. 53% those who have)
✓ Newcomers to Tigard (69% residents of 3 years or less vs. 57% to 62% other lengths of
residency)
Total
Total Participants 400
Location 61 %
Location/Accessibility 49
Small/Rural feel 18 Atmosphere 29
Nice/quiet community 20
Safety/Low Crime 6
Trees/Green space 6
Amenities 10
Schools 7
Parks 3
Library 3
Don't know / Other 15
Miscellaneous 5
Don't know / Na 9
I RILEY RESEARCH 5
' ASSOCIATES
Q3. What do you like least about living in Tigard?
Slightly less than half of the residents (45%) mentioned traffic as what they tike least about fiving
in Tigard. Other various topics were mentioned in small percentages, they include: growth (7%),
the City Council or City Government (4%), the crime rate (3%), and the lack of parks (3%).
A number of residents mentioned there is nothing they like least about living in Tigard (12%)
The following groups are more likely than their counterparts to mention traffic:
✓ Those who have voted in at least one of the last two elections (47% vs. 40% those who
haven't)
✓ Homeowners (47% vs. 41 % renters)
✓ Residents who live closest to Templeton Elementary (59% vs. 30% to 53°/a other
schools) ,
Total
Total Participants 400
Traffic 45%
Nothing I like least 12
Growth 7
City Council / Gov't 4
Crime rate 3
Lack of parks 3
The Police 2
Taxes 2
Run down areas of town 2
Downtown area 2
High home prices 1
The rain 1
Lack of rec services 1
Miscellaneous 12
Don't know / Na 10
~RILEY RESEARCH 6
' ASSOCIATES
Q4. As a place to live, would you say that in the past few years, the City of Tigard has
become better, worse, or has stayed about the same?
Just under half of the residents (46%) believe the City of Tigard has stated the same as a place
to live over the past few years. Another quarter (23%) think Tigard has gotten better and
another quarter (23%) thinks iYs gotten worse.
An interesting results was found when look across the demographic groups. Those age 18 to 29
and those 60 years or older appear to be more optimistic about the current status of Tigard as a
place to live (31 % and 32% respectively report Tigard has become "better" as a place to live vs.
16% to 27%' of the other age groups).
Total
Total Participants 400
Better 23%
Worse 23
Stayed the same 46
Don't know 8
Q5. Looking 5 years into the future, do you believe the livability of Tigard will become
better, worse, or will it stay about the same?
Roughly one-third of the residents (33%) believe Tigard will become better as a place to live in
the future. A nearly equal percentage (34°/a) believes it will become worse as a place to live.
Just over one-quarter (27%) thinks Tigard will remain the same.
Similar to the previous question, those age 18 to 29 and 60 years or older appear to be more
optimistic about Tigard's future as a place to live (43% and 41 % respectively think Tigard will
become a better place to live vs. 25% to 35% of other age ranges).
Total
Total Participants 400
Better 33%
Worse 34
Stayed the same 27
Don't know 7
' While there is not a statistically significant difference in the groups the finding in telling, nonetheless.
M RILEY RESEARCH 7
ASSaCIATFS
Q6-17. Moving on, i'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City
services on a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very
satisfied." If you've never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know.
The library received the highest mean ratings of the different topics listed (8.9 for both the
overall perception of the library and personal experience with the library). The overall perception
of City Police (7.9), personal experience with City parks (7.9); personal experience with City
Police (7.8), and overall perception of City parks (7.8) all followed the library by about one point.
The ability to get around the city, in regards to traffic, received the lowest score of the bunch
with a 5.3 out of 10.
Mean
Satisfaction No
Score interaction
Overall erce tion of the librar 8.9 17°/a
Personal ex erience with the librar 8.9 22
Overall erce tion of Cit Police 7.9 14
Personal ex erience with Cit arks 7.9 16
Personal ex erience with Cit Police 7.8 41
Overall erce tion of Cit arks 7.8 13
Interaction with Cit staff 7.6 48
Cit water and sewer services 7.5 13
The Permit Center 6.6 71
Recreation and leisure activities 6.6 29
Street maintenance 6.4 2
In re ards to traffic, the abilit to et around the Cit 5.3 1
RILEY RESEARCH $
' ASSOCIATFS
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
The Permit Center that provides building permits and zoning information
While a majority of residents (71 °/a) have had no interaction with the Permit Center, of those
who have, the following groups gave significantly higher mean ratings than their counterparts:
✓ Females (7.0 vs. 6.2. Males)
✓ Those who haven't attended city meeting (7.0 vs. 5.5 those who have attended)
✓ Non-voters (7.4 vs. 6.5 voters)
✓ Home renters (7.6 vs. 6.5 homeowners)
✓ Newcomers to Tigard (7.9 3 years or less residency vs. 6.2 to 6.7 other lengths)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 3%
2 1
3 1
4 1
5 5
6 2
7 4
8 4
9 3
10 - Very satisfied 5
No interaction 71
Don't know 2
Mean 6.6
M RILEY RESEARCH 9
ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Your overall perception of the City Police.
A majority of residents (59%) gave the overall perception of the City Police a rating of 8 or
higher on a 10-point scale. The mean rating given was 7.9.
While on the whole the ratings were relatively consistent across the demographic groups, a few
groups gave significantly higher mean scores than their counterparts:
✓ Voters (8.0 vs. 7.6 non-voters)
✓ Home renters (8.3 vs. 7.7 homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 2%
2 1
3 2
4 1
5 5
6 7
7 9
8 23
9 12
10 - Very satisfied 24
No interaction 14
Don't know 1
Mean 7.9
M RILEY RESEARCH 10
ASSOCIATFS
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Your personal experience with the City Police.
Roughly one in five residents (41 have not had personal experience with City Police. Of those
that have had interaction, a mean rating of 7.8 out of 10 was given.
Two demographic groups gave significantly higher mean ratings than their counterparts, they
were:
✓ Voters (8.0 vs. 7.4 Non-voters)
✓ Home renters (8.2 vs. 7.7 homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 2%
2 1
3 3
4 2
5 1
6 3
7 5
8 15
9 10
10 - Very satisfied 17
No interaction 41
Don't know 1
Mean 7.8
M RILEY RESEARCH 11
ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Your overall perception of the library.
Just over two in five residents (43%) rated their perception of the library a ten out of ten. The
mean rating given by residents was an 8.9.
The following groups are more likely than their counterparts to give a rating of ten:
✓ Females (48% vs. 37% Males)
✓ Residents age 60 or older (61 % vs. 35% to 48% other age groups)
✓ City meeting attendees (51 % vs. 42% non-attendees)
✓ Renters (48% vs. 41 °/a homeowners)
Total •
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 0%
2 0
4 1
5 3
6 1
7 4
8 13
9 15
10 - Very satisfied 43
No interaction 17
Don't know 2
Mean 8.9
RILEY RESEARCH 12
' ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the senrice, just let me know. (Continued)
Your personal experience with the library.
Roughly one-fifth (39%) rated their personal experience with the library a"ten." The overall mean
rating of 8.9 was given.
The following groups were more likely to rate their personal experience a ten compared to their
counterparts:
✓ Females (43% vs. 34°/a Males)
✓ Residents age 18 to 29 (52%) and 60 plus (52°/a vs. 26% to 40% other age groups)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 0%
2 0
3 1
4 1
5 4
6 1
7 4 8 12
9 15
10 - Very satisfied 39
No interaction 22
Don't know 2
Mean 8.9
I RILEY RESEARCH 13
' ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Your overall perception of City parks.
A majority of residents gave a rating of eight or better for their overall perception of City parks.
Residents gave an overall mean rating of 7.8 out of 10.
The following groups gave significantly higher mean ratings than others in their groups:
✓ City meeting non-attendees (7.9 vs. 7.3 attendees)
✓ Non-voters (8.2 vs. 7.7 voters)
✓ Renters (8.4 vs. 7.7 homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
. 1 - Very dissatisfied 1 %
2 1
3 2
4 2
5 6
6 7
7 11
8 23
9 12
10 - Very satisfied 22
No interaction 13
Don't know 2
Mean 7.8
M RILEY RESEARCH 14
ASSOCIATFS
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Your personal experience with City parks.
Just over half the residents (55%) rated their personal experience with City parks an eight or
higher on a ten point scale. The mean rating given as a whole was 7.9.
The following groups gave significantly higher mean ratings:
✓ Residents age 18 to 29 (8.3) and 60 plus (8.4 vs. 7.8 to 7.8 other ages groups)
✓ Renters (8.5 vs. 7.8 homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 1 %
2 1 3 1
4 3
5 7
6 6
7 10
8 20
9 13
10 - Very satisfied 22
No interaction 16
Don't know 1
Mean 7.9
' ~RILEY RESEARCH 15
ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Recreation and leisure activities.
tnterestingly, just over one-quarter of the residents say they have had no interaction with
recreation or leisure activities in Tigard.
Multiple groups gave significantly higher mean ratings for recreation and leisure activities, they
are:
✓ Those without children at home (6.9 vs. 6.2 with children)
✓ City meeting non-attendees (6.9 vs. 5.3 attendees)
✓ Non-voters (7.0 vs. 6.6 voters)
✓ Renters (7.3 vs. 6.5% homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 3% •
2 3
3 2
4 6
5 12 6 4
7 8
8 11
9 5
10 - Very satisfied 13
No interaction 29
Don't know 6
Mean 6.6
M RILEY RESEARCH 16
A3SOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Street maintenance.
A majority of residents (63%) gave street maintenance a rating of between five and eight out of
ten. The overall mean rating given was a 6.4.
The ratings were relatively consistent across the demographic groups. Only City meeting non-
attendees gave a significantly higher score than attendees (6.6 vs. 5.7, respectively).
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 5%
2 1
3 6
4 6
5 15
6 12
7 17
8 19
9 8
10 - Very satisfied 9
No interaction 2
Don't know 1
Mean 6.4
RILEY RESEARCH 17
' ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten=point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
Your interaction with City staff.
Slightly less than half the resident have had no interaction with City staff. Of those who have a
mean rating of 7.6 out of 10 was given.
Two groups gave significantly higher mean ratings than their counterparts:
✓ City meeting non-attendees (7.7 vs. 7.1 attendees)
✓ Voters (7.6 vs. 7.2 Non-voters)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 1%
2 1
3 1
4 1
5 5
6 2
7 10
8 14
9 8
10 - Very satisfied 9
No interaction 48
Don't know 2
Mean 7.6
RILEY RESEARCH 1$
' ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
, City water and sewer services.
Roughly half of the residents (51 gave City water and sewer services a rating of eight or
better. The mean rating given was a 7.5 out of 10.
Only females gave a significantly higher rating across the demographics groups (7.7 vs. 7.3
Males).
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 3%
2 1
3 1
4 2
5 8
6 4
7 15
8 21
9 11
10 - Very satisfied 19
No interaction 13
Don't know 2
Mean 7.5
m RILEY RESEARCH 1 9
ASSOCIATES
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on
a ten-point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've
never visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know. (Continued)
In regards to traffic, your ability to get around the City.
A majority of residents (57°/a) gave a rating between four and seven for their ability to get around
the City. The overall mean rating given was a 5.3 out of 10.
Residents age 40 to 49 (5.0) and 50 to 59 (4.8) gave significantly lower ratings compared to
other age groups (5.6 to 5.8 other ages).
Two groups gave significantly higher scores than their counterparts; they are:
✓ Males (5.4 vs. 5.1 Females)
✓ Renters (5.6 vs. 5.2 homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 8%
2 7
3 9
4 12
5 17
6 11
7 17
8 9
9 4
10 - Very satisfied 5
No interaction 1
Don't know 1
Mean 5.3
3 RILEY RESEARCH 20
ASSOCIATES
Q18. Please rate how the City is doing in regards to planninq the communitv, on a ten-
point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied".
A majority of residents (60%) gave a rating of between five and eight on a ten-point scale. The
overall mean rating given was a 6.1.
The following groups gave significantly higher mean scores than their counterparts:
✓ Females (6.3 vs. 5.9 Males)
✓ Residents age 18 to 29 (7.1 vs. 5.6 to 6.3 other age ranges)
✓ City meeting non-attendees (6.2 vs. 5.7 attendees)
✓ Non-voters (6.7 vs. 6.0 voters)
✓ Renters (6.9 vs. 5.9 homeowners)
Total
Total Participants 400
1 - Very dissatisfied 4%
2 2
3 4
4 5
5 16
6 13
7 14
8 17
9 4
10 - Very satisfied 5
Don't know 18
Mean 6.1
RILEY RESEARCH 2~
' ASSOCIATES
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20
years? (Open-ended question)
Roughly two in five residents (37%) mentioned the traffic and congestion problems in the Tigard
area as important issues to consider while planning for the next 20 years.
Small percentages mentioned the following as important issues for consideration:
✓ Street and road improvement / maintenance (9%)
✓ Schools and school funding (9%)
✓ Poputation / overcrowding (7%)
✓ Public safety (6%)
Many more individual issues were mentioned; please see the Verbatim Appendix page 4.
• RILEY RESEARCH 22
~ASSOCIATES
Q20-29. How important are the following characteristics to the livabili of Tigard's
residential neighborhoods, on a ten-point scale, where one means "not at all important"
and ten means "extremely important?"
Protection of trees and natural resource areas (8.4) as well as the level of neighborhood traffic
(8.2) are viewed as the most important of the characteristics listed. The characteristic viewed as
least important is having neighborhood commercial services within a 5-minute walk from home
with a rating of 6.1 out of 10.
Mean
Livability
Score
Protection of trees and natural resource areas. 8.4
The level of nei hborhood traffic. 8.2
Maintainin existin lot sizes within established nei hborhoods. 7.8
Pedestrian and bike aths. 7.7
Com atibilit between existin and new develo ment. 7.6
Bus service. 7.4
Stren thenin re ulations to im rove the a earance of the communit . 7.4
Nei hborhood arks within a half-mile of home. 7.2
Variet of housin t es like sin le-famil , townhouses, and a artments . 7.0
Nei hborhood commercial services within a 5-minute walk from our house. 6.1
M RILEY RESEARCH 23
ASSOCIATES
Q30. As more people move to the reqion, do you believe the City should promote growth,
accommodate growth, or attempt to limit growth?
Equal percentages of residents think growth should be accommodated (43%) or limited (43%),
while only a small percentage thinks growth should be promoted (10%).
The following groups are more likely than their counterparts to prefer accommodatinq growth:
✓ City meeting attendees (51 % vs. 42% non-attendees)
✓ Homeowners (45% vs. 39% renters)
The following groups are more likely than their counterparts to prefer limitinq growth:
✓ Females (47% vs. 39% Men)
✓ City meeting non-attendees (45% vs. 35% attendees)
✓ Voters (46% vs. 36% non-voters)
✓ Residents who have lived in Tigard more than 20 years (54% vs. 33% to 47% other
lengths)
The following groups are more likely than their counterparts to prefer promotinq growth:
✓ Males (14% vs. 7% Females)
✓ Residents ages 18 to 29 (24% vs. 5% to 14% other ages)
✓ Non-voters (21 % vs. 6% Voters)
Total
Total Participants 400
Promote 10%
Accommodate 43
Limit 43
Don't know 4
RILEY RESEARCH 24
' ASSOCIATFS
Q31. How many years have you lived in the City of Tigard?
Total
Total Participants 400
3 years or less 20°/a
. 4 to 9 years 26
10 to 20 years 32
More than 20 years 22
Refused 1
Q32. Which of the following elementary schools is nearest to your home, and if you don't
know please say so? (Aided)
Total
Total Participants 400
C.F. Tigard 19%
Durham 17
Woodward 15
Templeton 12
Alberta Rider 10
Metzger 9
Don't know 20
M RILEY RESEARCH 25
ASSOCIATFS
Q34. Do you rent or own your home?
Total
Total Participants 400
Own 75%
Rent 23
Refused 1
Q35. Have you voted in any of the last two elections?
Total
Total Participants 400
Yes 74%
No 25
Refused 2
S RILEY RESEARCH 26
ASSOCIATFS
Q36. How do you generally learn about whaYs going on in local government? (Unaided /
Multiple Responses)
The most frequently mentioned information sources were the Oregonian (44%), the Tigard Times
(29%), the Cityscape Newsletter (29%), and the TV News (22%).
Multiple groups are more likely than their counterparts to use the Oregonian as an information
source for local government; they include:
✓ Females (47% vs. 41 % Males)
✓ Residents age 60 and over (64% vs. 30% to 46% other ages)
✓ Residents with children at home (50% vs. 36% no children)
✓ Homeowners (47% vs. 38% renters)
✓ Tigard residents of more than 20 years (56% vs. 36°/a to 45°/a other lengths)
The following groups are more likely to read the Tigard Times for the local government
information:
✓ Residents age 50 to 59 (39% vs. 14% to 39% other age ranges)
✓ Those without children at home (32% vs. 24% those with children)
✓ City meeting attendees (37% vs. 28% non-attendees)
✓ Voters (33% vs. 16% Non-voters)
✓ Homeowners (32% vs. 18% renters)
The next list of groups are those who are more likely to use the Cityscape Newsletter for local
government information:
✓ Females (32% vs. 25% Males)
✓ City meeting attendees (39% vs. 27% non-attendees)
✓ Voters (34% vs. 15% non-voters)
✓ Homeowners (34% vs. 14%
✓ Tigard residents of more than 20 years (43% vs. 24% to 26% other lengths)
Total
Total Participants 400
Oregonian 44%
Tigard Times 29
Cityscape Newsletter 29
TV News 22
Word-of-mouth 9
Internet/Web 7
County newsletters 6
Public Access TV 2
KUIK Radio 1
KKCW / K103 1
Miscellaneous 4
Don't know 4
Refused 1
M RILEY RESEARCH 27
ASSOCIATES
Q37. Have you attended any City of Tigard meetings in the last year?
Total
Total Participants 400
No 86°/a
Yes 13
Refused 1 .
Q38. Do you currently have children under the age of 18 living with you?
Total
Total Participants 400
No 63%
Yes 36
Refused 1
Q39. And finally, which of the following categories includes your age? (Aided)
Total
Total Participants 400
18-29 10%
30-39 17
40-49 25
50-59 30
60-69 7
70+ 10
Refused 1
Gender
Total
Total Participants 400
Female 53%
Male 47
M RILEY RESEARCH 28
ASSOCIATFS
APPENDIX: Questionnaire
Hello, my name is of Riley Research calling on behalf of the City of Tigard. We are
calling to hear your opinions and satisfaction with City services and priorities. Your feedback will aid
the City in providing services and long-term community planning. (IF NECESSARY) All of your
responses will be completely anonymous and combined with hundreds of others.
S1. To start off, do you live inside or outside the city limits of Tigard? (IF OUTSIDE, POLITELY
DISCONTINUE.)
Inside -1 Don't know -2
S2. (IF DON'T KNOW TO S1) What are the cross streets nearest to your home?
Community Services
Q1. How satisfied are you with the City of Tigard as a place to live, on a ten-point scale where one
means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied"?
1- Very dissatisfied 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - Very satisfied 99-Don't know
02. What do you like most about living in Tigard?
Q3. What do you like least about living in Tigard?
04. As a place to live, would you say that in the past few years, the City of Tigard has become better,
worse, or has stayed about the same?
Better -1
Worse -2
Sta ed the same -3
Don't know -4 Q5. Looking 5 years into the future, do you believe the livability of Tigard will become better, worse, or
will it stay about the same?
Better -1
Worse -2
Sta ed the same -3
Don't know -4
B RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATFS
Q6-17. Moving on, I'd like to ask you to rate your satisfaction with the following City services on a ten-
point scale, where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied." If you've never
visited or had interaction with the service, just let me know.
1- Very dissatisfied 10-Very satisfied
The Permit Center that provides building 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
ermits and zonin information interaction DK
Your overall perception of the City police 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Your personal experience with the City police 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98"No 99-
interaction DK
Your overall perception of the library 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Your personal experience with the library 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Your overall perception of City parks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Your personal experience with City parks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Recreation and leisure activities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Street maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
Your interaction with City staff 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
City water and sewer services 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
interaction DK
In regards to traffic, your ability to get around 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 98-No 99-
the Cit interaction DK
Tigard is currently updating its Comprehensive Plan. This 20-year plan guides City decisions
regarding land use, the provision of public facilities and services, and community
livability. Your feedback on the next series of questions will help shape the plan.
Community Planning
Q18. Please rate how the City is doing in regards to planninq the communitv, on a ten-point scale,
where one means "very dissatisfied" and ten means "very satisfied".
1- Very dissatisfied 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - Very satisfied 99-Don't know ,
Q19. What is the most important issue for the City of Tigard as it plans for the next 20 years?
a RILEY RESEARCH
ASSOCIATFS
Q20-29. How important are the following characteristics to the livabili of Tigard's residential
neighborhoods, on a ten-point scale, where one means "not at all important" and ten means
"extremely important"?
1- Not at all important 10-Extremely important
Nei hborhood arks within a half-mile of home 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
Variety of housing types (single family, townhouses, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
a artments
Pedestrian and bike aths 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
The level of nei hborhood traffic 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
Com atibilit between existin and new development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
Neighborhood commercial services within 5 minute 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
walk from our house
Maintaining existing lot sizes within established 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
nei hborhoods
Protection of trees and natural resource areas 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
Bus service 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
Strengthening regulations to improve the appearance 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99-DK
of the communit
Q30. As more people move to the re ion, do you believe the City should aromote growth,
accommodate growth, or attempt to limit growth?
Promote -1
Accommodate -2
Limit -3
Don't know -4
Now we'll finish up with some demographic questions.
Q31. How many years have you lived in the City of Tigard?
Q32. Which of the following elementary schools is nearest to your home, and if you don't know please
say so? (READ LIST)
Alberta Rider -1
C.F. Ti ard -2
Durham -3
Metz er -4
Tem leton -5
Woodward -6
Don't know -7
Q33. (IF DON'T KNOW TO Q32) What are the cross streets nearest your home?
Q34. Do you rent or own your home? .
Rent -1
Own -2
Refused -3
~RILEY RFSEARCH
' ASSOCIATES
Q35. Have you voted in any of the last two elections?
Yes -1
No -2
Refused -3
Q36. How do you generally learn about what's going on in local government? (UNAIDED, MULTIPLE
RESPONSES)
Ti ard Times -01 Word-of-mouth -06 KKCW/K103 -11
Noticias en Es anol -02 Internet/Web -07 NPR/OPB -12
Ore onian -03 KUIK Radio -08 Cit sca e Newsletter -13
EI His anic -04 Public access N -09 Don't know -18
Count newsletters -05 N News -10 Refused -19
Other list : -20
Q37. Have you attended any City of Tigard meetings in the past year?
Yes -1
No -2
Refused -3
Q38. Do you currently have children under the age of 18 living with you?
Yes -1
No -2
Refused -3
Q39. And finally, which of the following categories includes your age? (READ LIST)
18-29 -1 60-69 -5
30-39 -2 70+ -6
40-49 -3 Refuse -9
50-59 -4
Those are all the questions I have, the City of Tigard would like to thank you for your valuable
opinions. Have a great evening.
Record Gender
Male -1 Female -2
RILEY RESEARCH
' ASSOCIATES
Introducti
City of Tigard The goal of the research wa o gain insight
into what residents think abo
• Important issues for the com sive
Communit rvey Results plan update
J u ne 2006 ' Satisfaction with City services
• Importance of varfous City characteristics
~ • Perceptions of the City's livability
/ • Preferred information sources
Satisfactiara ~
,
Methodology • Satisfaction with Tigard as a pla live, 1-10 scale
• Satisfaction with community planning, scale
. Scientific telephone survey
. Sample of 400 residents of Tiga 10
- Margin of error -+1-4.9% at a 95% I e
confidence s
. Fielding took place on May 22"d - Ju a
5t'', 2006; 5:00 - 9:00 p.m. Z
0
As a place to Ilve Communlty planning
Satisfac 'nn Ratings Satisfac ion Ratings
•City service satisfaction, 1-10 le (Continued)
io •City service satisfaction, 1-10 sca
to
8:9 a
e
'q. 7.8 6
a
~
s
z
~ o .
4 Inbnetlan CIN~r P-mltGnbt Roorufbn Btr-t Adtltybp~t
vnmciyar.n v..r .nerbun ~ne.nane. .rouneary
Library City Poliee City parks
..rv~w. mnvie..
XT
1
✓
Tiigard's ~ositives Tigard's Ne tives
What residents like most ab living in Tigard:
Location - 61 % What residents like least about ' in Tigard:
•Location / accessibility - 49% •TraffiC - 45%
•Small / rural feel - 18% •Grovuth - 7%
Atmosphere - 29%
•Nice / quiet community - 20%
The area's traffic and congestion problems
•Safery / low crime - 6% were mentioned as the most important issue
•Trees / Green space - 6% as Tigard plans for the next 20 years.
/
Tigard, as -Place to Live Livability racteristics
Importance ratings on a 1-10 s e
60%
ao %
30%
20%
10%
0%
Better Worse Stayed the same
13 Past few years 0 5 years in the future
~
Growth iti-Tigard Local Gov nment •
Information So-drces '
As more people move to the reg should
growth be promoted, limited, or acco odated? 50%
so / ao /
ao i> so i
30%111
2o^io
so<i
1o^io
11o%
o°io ~ . .
o% it][,~.
The Tigard Times Cityscape N News
Accommodate Llmit Promote Oregonian Newslatter
2
1
.
Conclusion
- Traffic and congestion manage t are the top
concerns of residents.
- Most of Tigard's services were rated in ,
terms.
- Few think of Tigard's livability in negative ter '
most think Tigard will get better (or at least stay
same) into the future. ,
- Overall, residents appear to be proud of their cit '
and cautiously optimistic for the future.
3
Agenda Item # ~
Meeting Date June 20, 2006
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Ciry Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda Tide Downtown Implementation Strategy
Prepared By: Phil Nachbar Dept Head Okay ~ Ciry Mgr Okay
ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL AND KEY.FACTS
Review the proposed Downtown Implementation Strategy, 3-Year Action Plan and Work Program for powntown.
The Downtown Implementarion Strategy is provided to the City Council for eventual adoprion as the guiding
document which organizes and prioritizes policies and acrions for the Downtown.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Review and modify as appropriate the Downtown Implementarion Strategy for adoprion at a later time.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The need for a"Strategic Action Plan" for powntown which could be tracked and updated annually was a
recommendation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (see page 36). Adoption of the Downtown
Implementation Strategy provides specific direcrion to Staff and the CCAC with regard to a Work Program over
upcoming fiscal year (FY 06-07), and an overall strategy for powntown.
The following are key facts regarding the development of the Strategy:
1) The Strategy incorporates the policy objectives of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, adopted by City
Council on September 25, 2005, into a Strategy and set of "near-terni" and "long-term" actions the City should take to
implement the Plan.
2) The Strategy includes three (3) key strategies with twenty-eight (28) supporting actions, a 3-Year Action Plan, and a 1-
Year Work Program.
3) The Strategy was developed by researching the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, the Tigard Urban Renewal
Plan, and determining the key policies and projects within those documents that could be used to organize a strategy.
There were also many discussions with the City Center Advisory Comtnission (CCAC), former powntown Taskforce
members, and Staff before devising the Strategy.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
None.
COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT
Central Business District (CBD) #1) Provide opportuniries to work proacrively with Tigard Central Business
District Association (TCBDA) businesses and property owners and citizens of Tigard to set the course for the future of
the central business district.
Strategy #3) Develop strategies for public improvements in Tigard's central business district area (this area
includes Main Street) and adjacent areas.
ATTACHMENT LIST
Downtown Implementation Strategy.
FISCAL NOTES
No direct impact. Subsequent adoption of the Strategy does not obligate the City to the expenditure of funds for
any parricular project. Funding of projects identified within the Strategy will come from tax increment funds, other
funding sources normally available for Capital Improvement Projects (CIP), and grants.
. ; _ ~ 7 L~ ~ 7'Lr3 ,~,c hf . r'nti~ ~ , ' t ; . _ ~ . - ry' c~ z ~ ~ ~.-i
~ r ,3: ] '~.i~r= t~' , ~ ' y~ f ~ 4~ ~ ~ i c . ~ ~ i o 'N ^ ~ ~ - ~ t ~bg . : iy . ~ , . ~ .
~J~ f^~1 ~ i ~ . . a _ u ~ Y !f ~.J~• ~D~` C ~f. S ~ . c,71~/ C~ .A
f . ~ . _.L, - ti ' 1 ~ ii~ ~ 1 . r,r ~ - ~ . ' - , . ~ . .z f' ~ ,r~
3. J ~ r [~•`M, .~s J + ~ s.. r l~v , t ~ ~ SK - , , r t K~, ~ . ' ~ ~ , , ~3
S •--:_~,t}..:Cf y ~ U ' y ~sr~ ~tr r > r ~ f ~n'~ .'a1, c~' i
r ~i • ~ ``iry~ t'1 ~--1 a`4 ~"j • ~ ~ t ~ r ti, r ' < ~ c 0 , f
~ 4 - ' ~~r ~ s~ o,-, . c41 nr~~~ , , ,s s
' r ~ ~ ' c~ - `s i ~ ; n , S a , ~ .
. . ~_A~.`. . ~,-f ~.li< `.~t "L~ ys r ' . a a ~ c. ~ .
• A . o s. 1 ~ i{:
( .o t F' ~ .t i~ F y r
~ p) ~ 41 ~ U'~~~ , _ ° a . » . r. ' ; n ~ _ . ` _ :
~ t
^ ~ ~ r~: y :a ~,1 ..t 6 , CL r `a, ' Y sf` ? s ~ c r . , - ' ' '
) ~~P) ss~ jf i < < .zN~ F ~r! ~.nf xe y~ ~ u.`~` • ' `S~ _ ~c
~ 4 y~ . t~.. _ M q~,~ . ~G ^ _ z. c L Q - , s (
~ ~ l: , . a } : ~f ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ti c ~ ' ' S , ~ ~ pt. .
~ ~ • ~ 4 . ~ " Y • r ; ~ g ~ ~ ~ ( `
~l . ( . . ~ ~ ~ S ~ tS y ' ~ < ~ ~ ~ . o ~ ' } c ' ~ ~ ~`'~'a. „ . yr
" O ~ ~ •J L r5~'~~•'~i ~r~r'~ ~'f r'~ ~>,y t. : ~c`-~ A r~ ~2nF ' t ' f~.,
~E~~ l t~ ~ ~ .-+~'o ` ` (%4 , 2...~ .d ~~7 it b ~ ~ s.,+ ~ ~ a ,'4 i i
` 4 1 , . . . . :
, ' ~ ~"J . ~ ; ` ; t ,
, 4F`iA Gd' ~ , ~ / T .~i yy .
,1 ° J._•.~_'''a ° t e ~ ~j_ 'f~t - i t ~
~ b } ~ ~ 1. E - r tc 4 . F t ~ „Ky. , ",C ct ~ s,."~.- ~ ; .
.t r. . jlh~`, "n~ y~ ~ ~T i 'FO G ,,.~~{tY 't~ ~l f.f. . t:"' " ~'i~, C.~ `a
( x ~
. 'ti, • i / 9 ~ . ' ~ -
~ r`~ ` V . . ,
Qr ~r.~ ~i r ~ ~ y ,~.~1 ~ Hd ~ ~ n 1 -
q . 'r; Q f k y~ 3 T~ .tn 7 r-. y, tl s .
- ` ~r~ .a~ ~i
L /1 '~f3 4/,7~ 1~ 4~ (l f qt.Y .
~ ~ ~r 1 . E ~M ~+L ~ r.T,~. !F~ . - .a ~ . `i~.. . ~ ~f
V ` r• "~~1-•~ ~~.~X'sl~ t ``t~i' '~~3 ` rtd ~i ` 3 ~ ti ~ . t~ _
~ E ~ ~ t s s~~h ~ ~ ~ °'t ~Y},~ . . : , ~ -
Z ~ v ~ i'~-~~i ~ t~ ,y v"'' e~l~ '~i ✓ ~~Y` o .4 ~ , . • r
~ i~ yY ~ ~ ~ ` ~ 7h .y ~ -a~ 'Z - .
F~ . = ~ r~~r~~ ? - - y, . ~ C_l ~c ` ^ , ,
; ~ ~.~L ' ~ t ~ J ' i ^ ' ~i S , ~ r
~ t ~r . .~~g ,
_.r~Tr .,~~~r~ '"t ~~¢(M ~ ~ ` t. -
. fri~ ~ . ~ ' ~ ` ~ j1~ x,~L . e,'` ` - ' _
_
c~ ~ ~ ' • ' ~ _ ~p~^%~~~' i ` _ 'T
,i... ~ ~ f ` G~ " i f3. '
~ C y ~ rf~V . ~ *s. i~ ~ Y~ ~
a~ < i ~ ~ ~ az ~ y{~.71, ~n +
~ ~'q r Y~. ~ ; S. t ' , ~.3~J 1T ` 1 ~ ,r' ' , . ' , ti. . fi
~ l~ .g S1 j :~j ' ~r~ , ~ ' .
> ~<.1 r N % 5 . ;~5,~ .,yti. ~ r ~ 4; < . ~ :-r ) ~ ; , ~ ~
' J sQ ~ ~ ' . f , ♦ . ' ~7~ ~ !r , o _
~ ir ~ ~;r4 ~ f~~~_, . •~1 ~1~°' , ~1 ~ ~ ~ o. ' . ~
~ ~ ° , i' i~ c t ~ ?
~ ~ - ~ - ~~F - ~1 ~ ~ ~ -
~ • n < G' ~~t~►. ` ~ . ~ ' ,
n ~ ~ . ~ u . <
r - - : ~ ~y
Zl~`~ay :+r . 'w ' C P~~ , } ! ~ ~ i
f~ ~ [ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r_ 6 -
~y g , L f ~1,i ~f ~ ~ . '~i ~ '
~ J~~~~ ,J x ` S . , ~ ~ . ~ _ . > ~
\ ~ .
~ ~ ~ c c ` c~ . : - ~ < ~ _!~'l''~ R ! °
7 ~F' ~y`.' ~ y~ f' % L ~ G%
' ~ T i'3_ ' ~y . ' ~ . ! _ ~ ~l ~~~'J ~ ; 1
A n~ .'1 ' i. 1 r' L ~ - . . ~ ~ Lr. ~ , .
t , , f .~J ~ i ~ ~i~ _
~ : ` : ~ ~I` ~j~_ ` . . .l , ~ '
~-f ` - ~ ,
- ~r a. * v... _ c ~ , ~ : 1 ~ f ,.n ' . \ - '1 ,-l - ~ ' . . ` -
rl ~ ~ ; f . ~ ~c~, x ~3 ~`e. ' ~ t, f ~ ~ , . -Vl .
3 fr ~~d ) ~ ;o, ~ 1~ i~ } ~rn~ ~ ~ . ~ L, - "q*, ~4
~ ~ lL, ~ ( .i _ -
. ~ . ~ ~ r~ - -~to.- :I~, e ent~tr o n ~ - ~ -
~ ~ ~ . ~
,~,w - ^r' ,,?v' y~[a,.~ t,..~, ~,:p - ,1 ~ .
cF F. ~ ~ ~r4 ~.C >r° . 4 ~ ~ i . ~.p_ •w n 4 T~, J~~ie 20.OG~ ` ~
' ~ `ardr ~ `L ~ ~ " t "a x F c S ~ ~ . .
~ 1 ~.0. . ~ ~ YiT' ~ ~t„'~J 'f 1 ~ _
yr. i .
What is the Downtown
1••, a
Implementation Strategy? t'The Downtown Implementation Strategy is a
, , xr •
~ '4
document to guide the City's acrions to translate ~
the "vision" for downtown into a"reality". It
incorporates the policy objectives of the Tigard -
Downtown Improvement Plan, adopted by City
_
Council on September 25, 2005, into a strategy and
" set of "near-term" and "long-term" actrons the Ciry ;s;`•.
should take to implement the Plan. The Strategy
includes three (3) key strategies with twenty-eight
(28) supporting actions, a 3-Year Acrion Plan , and :l 3
a 1-Year Work Program. -
k>
How was the Downtown
Implementation Strategy ~ "~i
4;
~
developed? ~ ~ ` - -
The Strategy was developed by researching the Waterfront, Portland, OR - Example of sidewalk space
Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, the Tigard
How is the Downtown Implementation Strategy intended
Urban Renewal Plan, and determining the key
policies and projects within those documents that to be used?
could be used to organi2e a strategy. There were
also many discussions with the City Center The Strategy is intended to provide general recommended that the 3-Year Action Plan and 1-
$uidance to develop specific actions necessary to Year Work Program be updated annually so that
Ad
visory Commission (CCAC), former powntown
Taskforce Members, and Staff before devising the implement the Tigard Downtown Improvement progress can be monitored, and new Plans/
Strategies. Plan. The 3-Year Action Plan and 1-Year Work Programs revised to reflect progress or timeframe
Program accompanying the Strategy are intended adjustments. The 3-Year Action Plan should be
to provide direction as to priorities and actions to tied to the City's Capital Budget to reflect priorities
be taken. As projects and actions are completed and Eunding requirements for each project.
and more experience obtained, the Strategy should
be revisited and revised accordingly. It is
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 / PAGE 2
Executive Summary .
The primary strategies in the Downtown Improving Fanno Creek Park and developing Design Project, improving streets in areas with
Implementation Strategy are to: an Open Space System in Downtown u a tenet high potential for redevelopment, refining the
of the Downtown Improvement Plan, and takes circulation system for powntown, developing a
1) Encor:rage and Facilitate Redevelopment advantage of Tigard,s uruque proximity to a park as "GatewaY" at Hall Blvd./99W, and installing ~
Projects in Downtown an amenity. The "Green" Heart as an identiry for "Brand Tigard" improvements on Main Street.
2) Improve Fanno Creek Park and Develop Downtown, and the Fanno Creek Public Area, Long-term actions include achieving consensus on
an Open Space System in Downtown which will be programmed as a public gathering alternative access to Downtoum, obtaining an At-
space for outdoor events, are integral parts of the Grade Rail Cross;ng at Ash. Ave., develoPing
3) Develop Comprehensive Street and Plan. Key near-term actions include: developing a gateways, a bike route plan, and a Parking
Circ:dation Improvements in Downtown. Master Plan for Fanno Creek Park, determining the Management Plan.
feasibility of the Urban Creek Corridor, and
The 3-Year Action Plan provides a summary of the
Under Urban Renewal Law, taxes generated from developing the Fanno Creek Trail west of
priorities and actions for powntown, and the 1-
appreciation of property in the Downtown may be Downtown. Long-term ackon.r include: construcring
Year Work Program identifies more specific staff
used to finance projects in the Urban Renewal the Fanno Creek Public Area and complete Open
actions for the first year of the 3-Year Action Plan.
Plan. It is important to stimulate new development Space System in Downtown, determining the type
Both will be updated annually to reflect progress
and property appreciation in order to generate of public spaces in the Urban Creek Corridor, and
and timekame adjustrnents.
additional tax revenues for use on identified developing the "Rail to Trail" system
projects. along Tigard Street into Downtown. -
.,To facilitate redevelopment projects in Developzng Compreliensive Street _
Downtown, the City will have to carry out and Circulacion Improvements in
important, near-term actions to: iniriate and manage Downtown is the third Srrategy and
high-priority, "Catalyst" projects, identify is a"Catalyst" project referenced in
redevelopment opportunities, assist in land the Downtown Improvement Plan. f.A~`
assembly, refine future land uses, and develop Land Under the Plan, providing well ~
Use and Design Guidelines. More long-term actions designed Streets that are "well
to encourage redevelopment include: developing connected" and "promote walking,
projects that incorporate public open space, and biking and use of transit will attract
assisting businesses to relocate in order to provide development" to the Downtown.
parcels f o r redevelopment. N e a r- t e r m a c t i o n s i n c 1 u d e:
implementing the recommendations of the Comprehensive Streetscape Tigard Urban Renewal District-approximate
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 3
1. ENCOURAGE AND FACILITATE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS IN DOWNTOWN
"Our vision of Downtown Tigard is an... active urban village at the heart of our '
community... pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation,...
recognizes natural resources as an asset, and enables people to live, work, play and shop
in an environment that is uniquely Tigard."-Tigarrl Doumtoun Impmvement Plan
Overview: Downtown Tigard-Circa 1940s
Stimulating redevelopment in the Downtown is critical to developing a long-term funding source under
Urban Renewal. Under Urban Renewal Law, taxes generated from the appreciation of properry in the
Downtown may be used to finance approved projects. As a result, any new development will result in an r
increase in tax revenues to support projects within the Plan. Since all new development will generate needed
tax revenues, it is important to facilitate redevelopment projects wherever they might occur in Downtoum .
without preference. The City will assist in bringing about redevelopment by executing projects in the Urban
Renewal Plan and coordinating opportunities with developers in Downtown. Some of the key public projects '
in the Urban Renewal Plan include: streets, parks, plazas, a public market, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, a
performing arts center, or other assistance to facilitate redevelopment.
There are inherent challenges to facilitating redevelopment in Downtown Tigard in particular. Land
assembly faces the challenge of the relocation of long-standing businesses, and the difficulty of assembling
land for redevelopment without the power of condemnation. Assembly of land will requue a"willing seller"
process which is untested in Tigard. One of the goals for the first few years will be to identify redevelopment Downtown Tigard-2006
opportuniries and develop a program for land assembly.
The City's role in facilitating redevelopment projects in Downtown will develop over time, but will initially
include prioritizing public improvements, developing a program for land assembly, working with developers
to identify opportunities and ways in which the City can participate, developing Land Use and Design
Guidelines and managing key projects necessary to implement the Urban Renewal Plan.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 4
Z"k3COJ: n~'.rE ts,F.3rE4'c1.C,}i'htLW
PVecs€-fer~ ~cthions J.? Idezatijy {~pporcimFt)'
13 Arcdrs 16rRerlez>rlopatzene
.
DiJ2U31tffZ✓BZ
i hi: i;.^,A!'d :ir..1:S?-..t0.. !:Ai ,r{,1iC:,. ;';3n _
-4 pa"#1
i?1" 32aY .s. l~"i.L:r SLi:
1~.2tf)~tttSt',-Sf}t~`.{'•';) .t':t{L"R ~5i:~~:.;<~il.ii:2:t3: ` (.rytC ~4'a.'i [{iti~r 4,
UCt- -?t
' `x m s i
, „ ,
1.I•i. ~F-c li if~Y: ii:'r.~•34. . .kitY w,.
;i~l )-i~ii'i4 :~x~i ~i"S'C:iCi ijYtti iitii'.:t'~:t,,• ,.n ` - . + -
h...:"ChIt
~ Hinllr't i<: .4-t'i:liii' i't.:1"t'Cta,4 .f
. - ; ,..w°.. ..~Wi
i•. 3£l'.i.lr[?:S?i£ fl:t"+;. i:Y~yA'C:~. tart ,ite,C- elfei'v# it fi.
t : -i9if'r.Ii11:t ntJ{• ,id t;'tit'1'~bt3N;5iH; :ti : ',~~+a"' y.~,av b~o
t?in.r,;nucd aci rv"l,< `,A ris;il:;s:cn::;s,n MFsasi
."ttt tv ~i si~,`~<tz ~i,..t .~=~r . x~~l:i~x t t.
a.~k'
' .:i!,.Sf334- :tkiin "W.i.{lM, 1311w
u. vap, h i (}!'4>SIR ht4C iYt{ifli#' •.L4'iC4.:£im
:Di x=k.'.4;V..i
i}CSi{I :Si.U' i:.`2{i.~ iC~... f"'fYi[if'ti' i1 ..}1._{ ' ' ~'eti,-~x~r. .:t::l ;t}C t;"Ei ?
L .'?£iCf>t`dfsq, l.C`t~~:i CilitC~!l ._9iS tfi F:t. ;i
' n~ ri~kl#R?_vi:tlk" ~3Ci`.315 . ~ ~':Rt?.3iC
:.31:'3}ii'E:Ya?iC, d3:,{ ii'~FSg{2'ttC(It.FJ t~f ±7-£~`i!". J ±..1.n , . AV
.Ic,t. 1'.E;'t..~;;c§ ,,tin ti~.t:~ i~~ tl;~: .
. .
- f ~ `ri'ei}i•,trl, f:.lp t}t" t.'(tt iii-if„r.e ,
i):'Ul'4jC .tU .5':Bi c :2:':t? ''.il. . . .
` .;}Ax #ie': ('.it:i._fi+.n=i' 1t:
}ma•: P,{.TS: 5+1,}rl.3f i_'1tuv ji.i} . , ,
A ?t'tl:'ili•'.{:1i.{lf..
i„c`n Mtic:N<j s. . :nic:,az;..tz
i
. i .,.....w
, 1,3 .~fattrttxta€ :r Dazrlt~gw wIflz
-
a.
z.fll,.t;h_utWr,L'..w:.,it'.t.rru.t.w':cl;,or,lxcri.i'siN „ . .
: ~ .
, .
; ~ . t. t{: _ , ._c
;:;ntECt.sin. in.°:.iq•..rSQ i.xh.Stn. _}.~.}:t2~rdn} "
, 1d~ ~Tr~~esra~ L&eseqn A€ferna8ive
, : ~ . t..tt . ptii,..~t t ~t..
i:+~tYAl2 : .ftY•:f;i'aCFit. tniiI. ~ ii:,",i ~~•ii"~..:.Iflf:ti... ,f!3ft i..t~ i"..~.. T:ULS.C+~`~1Wt:f*?N'~ti:i~',rvy'Y<t":L't?t:i:ES:
..„i3}t l_'(C1r P-i....i.
j ' Itf.,.. ~ltft ❑v~_t<~....,
~'cfi r {.is<2q '',ti. .:itcl iie'.:r.C.U, i{~..: s?t~.. • ~t
. . q't'" _('fli};rti. . ,<?1:: ..{:II, a... : N'i.._ :tb. ...r:l .?'q'11 i ~c
f:)'' . tli. r.., ti?'f:•i(*_ m'};li ai:)t: is..._i..".\,t,.,..
Jtil'ii.,;u;~ ' . r u. ' 'i ~ ;
. z;5tiix'f. L{•.E'':~n.:t{Yit
FitCi» {+it,a::2i:c:
~ . :'r , . , . . ...':t .
fti:.~'::a.GF w. Fct;,iTATE pcDc~VztO:s4it4?
ttear Terr" Actaacts I.G Refrrrg Larartl U.es
14 DeYr1lrsp <r 1'rv;s;rrrrra frsr L.rcrtd ira Dcrz=rtt=rz:;rt '
?i•~~~>>lcltRA?i t~:8::::i*:!:j'.iY'ii - ~ ~
. 4w A Clw ki £~ail;. siry:vt.,,~r~.- Y::r r ~.lit-ii<,,,).;5;.-
.:..{:eiC t+
r~ i3tE .
ti :i~ i.is:t''_ f!t x.ra~t 3':. i^
, . , ' 1{iL"*.C3~~~,>:i. „x:i:,.~;•.efV. . ~
:Z~,.•i:+~eil3: ~.c:.F`r.t, ^.'z<fi:;i;t'.~as('1i):.l'i'i.d._1=.t~;~ : ' ' . I
• r. . . irh i::1Y1. .r4.; tl'..; tilCd ' ' .
'..!{_t dl`~ ~"i~ `IiPF'
c~~ c.i. -ifx, :v3 i••. Ytt';Bii. F'Cf;IP't ~'.tid% +
. ' _ ~ 2. J.
~~~ri~ I,SEb. r"
i;:.tt: ~ b;
lt l..~v,
. t ~ iti~ :
k:li4(x"N qfcdt; SEtilk 'fPi2.iS z~ s .fi*' '•}Pt.. .,s,.!£P.i=RM A . ,
i ;;I ~
it+.:,.
-..r... , . .ii . I
3titi!iK!~ ..m.EL'm:iB',tSf:- .7„yfl
3ii~.iti.1 ;•c .
~L,cF itc.t uWl;.,I. 0:nc,criM::Ui".; 11 .i
#Y:'.i+.n:.i - .A.., ~ :~:.si~xr,:>;'~ ~ 1('.::k~n~' a~ .a '~,~~I: .)7~•. Q"}1Y- ';{S:F53.)tiui i]Fts
{.ta+..; n
1C7(tii` .611i~ Ct:1l:":Jtili3i?!P'.o: ;jii ' J;4 ~
~pn;~^xi.tf~:. 't., ~s~;;; :~1.,,, t,z
. iacl ;~<,t~,rti~?t~
~ u= .;il.'e.4sicts;
~
L5 f z%ct~ttrrtc~ ~ zty-t"7w~z€~tT 7'trs~r€rrt~° ~rs~ _ !
~
IZ~clrxvnlca~rr~rc•lct
.I~~ .iti ..t „ :i,;i;. ~i+,Y•:tn~,.tr~,l: i:i:rtF~.-,} ; ,
t.i11 t 1r._... ;u;=,; itt I{S ?u_::\ti,.',.,.. .i} .iis1 4 . . - i
. . , i
,i,~rc•> ~t: `~i:*; -.n? t~i ..tr: tt:~~tutmi .t,;p;
i Sf1L ~ .tt'
'.:KP.::Y: i'.9, d31.(L` CCWi:u4k(:):t?; a:;4.-'. t!L _S:_
, pu,<.=; ;Iir' .tt ,:i i ~,.i:,!`> (•j.r:t T. ! fatr..i;: !.1C.h'n
#t34#%35FiT3E$8fiaP3€3YPOWTi53dY'P!ES $~3.':,°,',wu.'yn»~
,
. .,rb ,~t_'.~ , . - ~ _ , . . . . _ _ . . . _
- .._.}ft r,,,_ _ . . ,
raO,, ru. 'nas;.:. ~ :-rtt<, :,I~>;;fs ~
. .,i5ta;tr:.ti[;- a . ~ ,i'.fU F>F'~i:r ~rti i:(~t~r,.i:t.~ i('v. t°4 Sc• :,,(.bu,} DnaJi:
. .
....,rv.t 1 . ,t.,..,p"aii-C:' Jir.,iF . .
ENCOURAGE & FACILITATE REDEVELOPMENT
1.7 Develop Land Use/Design Long-Term Actions EP ~
Guidelines for powntown 1.8 Pursue Redevelopment Projects that
Before the Downtown Improvement Plan can be Incorporate Public Open Space
implemented, the City must insure that Land Use Having a City park close to the Downtown is a
regulations and Design Guidelines are in place to unique feature which ties into the "sustainabiliry ~
guide development proposals towards the type and -
theme" and can garner public support for the
quality envisioned in the Plan. While the City has revitalization effort Experience from other Cities,
an exisring Land Use ordinance for the Downtoum mcluding Lake Oswego, has shown that pursuing
in place, it was not developed for the new Main Street-R. Stasny drawing
redevelopment projects that have a public space,
Downtown Improvement Plan, and will have to be park or plaza, as a major part of a project, is a good
revised or replaced to meet the intent of the Plan. way to develop public support. Interviews with Design Guidelines are used to review specific site developers conducted in February 2005 also
and building proposals to insure a level of design indicate that developers view park or plaza space in 1P"►nA R KgT
quality and will be developed for the Downtown commercial districts as an added amenity and good
Plan. In order to reserve or protect land for public _
for business.
space, such as the "Urban Creek Corridor" or
Fanno Creek Park, a land use "overlay" zone could
1.9 Facilitate Business Relocation on Key
be developed to insure that development proposals $2tCS
or other acrions would not conflict with future use
of open space. One of the challenges to land assembly is working Farmer's Market-R. Stasny drawing
with existing businesses on key sites to facilitate
their relocation. Many of the businesses have been
in the Downtown for a long time, but may have
interest in relocating. Others may not be interested ~ '~~~Ct~~A OMO " v
in moving. Once opportunity site have been
identified and redevelopment interest is L~
established, the City will work with business
.
owners on a range of options comparible with their o
long-term needs. ~
R. Stasny drawing
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 7
II. DEVELOP FANNO CREEK PARK AND THE
OPEN SPACE SYSTEM IN DOWNTOWN
~ .
preserves what is desirable in the area, and promotes a public `green' and
open space character... consistent with the vision for the community and its
Downtown"-Tigard Do2vntosvn Improvement Plan
.
Overview: ~ . ,
Fanno Ct'eek Park as the southern edge of Downtown presents a unique situation for Tigard. It
provides an opportunity to restore the native habitat and ecology, provide important civic
gathering spaces, and bring the "green theme" into the heart of Downtown. The "Green Heart"
of Downtown and Fanno Creek Public Area are an integral part of the Tigard Downtown
Improvement Plan, and the expansion of Fanno Creek Park is essenrial to realizing this goal.
Other key design elements include an expanded open space system, and the "Urban Creek" ~
Corridor, connecring Fanno Creek Park with the future Regional Commercial District on the north
end of Downtown.
Urban Creek Corridor: Making a spatial connecrion from Fanno Creek Park to a future `Grzen
~
Corizdor" that would run north to South in the Downtown is an essential feature of the open space
plan. This would, in effect, bring the park into downtown, creating a unique mix of the urban and
natural environment. The Urban Creek Corridor would have an organizing impact on the Downtown Existing & Future Open Space
Downtown, defuung a clear pedestrian link and providing an amenity that
Qb~:Y 4
future development can capitalize upon. Future projects bordering the
green conidor would be encouraged to orient activities to take advantage of
the public space value of this amenity. This project serves the dual role of
stimularing development while connecting Downtown areas.
.
-
Fanno Creek Park
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 8
- - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - -
DEVELOP FANNO CREEK PARK & OPEN SPACE
Near-Term Actions and "ecological" go together and will be applied to
the restoration of Fanno Creek Park and landscape
2.1 Develop a new Master Plan fOf design and planting palettes for powntown II `
Fanno Creek Park. including all of its open space.
A new Master Plan for Fanno Creek Park is the
first step to assigning value to the mission of co- 2,3 Determine the Feasibility of the '
developing Fanno Creek Park and Tigard's Urban Creek Corridor in Downtown.
Downtown. The Master plan would address
Fanno Creek Park itself from Hall Blvd. to Main Determiing the design concept, form and
Street, including a public area with connections at "footprint" of the Urban Creek will require a Urban Creek Corridor drawing
Main Street and Bumham Street and Ash Avenue, detailed feasibility study to ascertain public
and the alignment of a potential "Urban Creek preference, preliminary design, constructability and
Corridor". cost. Once it is determined that an Urban Creek is
feasible, it will be important to protect the potential
footprint of this amenity. One option would be an
2.2 Incor orate "Sustainable" and
p "overlay" zone to ensure the review and
"Ecological"Design of Fanno Creek Park
coordination of development proposals that might '
and Downtown's Open Spaces. have the ability to limit or preclude options for its
One of the "Great Ideas" generated during the location.
formation of the Downtown Plan was establishing
"Green Connections" as a theme. It was thought 2,4 Expand the Fanno Creek Trail West
of as a blending of nature with the built of Downtown.
environment with emphasis on wide sidewalks,
The Fanno Creek Trail west of Main Street
linear parks, plazas, trees, native landscaping, and Fanno Creek-existing conditions
water features. Because Fanno Creek Park Provides an important link to Woodard Park, the
contains sensitive wedands and has a creek running Fowler School Campus, and surrounding
through it, it does not lend itself to active uses, but neighborhoods. It is a critical link in developing
rather more passive ones and restoration. the full regional trail network through Tigard, and
Developing this "natural green" theme further u'ould provide a continuous connection through
incorporates the ideas of "sustainability" and Fanno Creek Park to its southern desrination,
ecological restorarion. The two ideas "Sustainable" Tualatin Community Park
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY 1UNE 2006 PAGE 9
D:VEiOP L4tanr:,} w'ac=r FaRK .3 OPch. 5!'A::;.
L£ffiPDg°tE!€Y$TAC'tY8714S im:;.:,, nuCh 1f1; ,..ws_: .t`.c. . ",:.ui n; s':,... p>t.'i::Iii, .i! "AJ U. it'.ici ~ c..:,.o.r A. to;
0:f,"4W "-=Y1i ?I.fi1 {siai. f~ . _.n-ltiJU ttW+.{ }li dw i lis,i3i
2 9 a"°+iYlDp ktd#ZZZ%11"P#UCA3'd':1{1ja #tr.,te& ,t ;tt;v.n=.:ti E,:;S=cxt ; . t;v.: :t:od swt.ts+.
CePICY;tl Gr7£bi'1'272g 11hla. .,>s.=,t.,:f=,n: < rl;~- i"asna., I- ',:.i: tt;;a"n::, :.._.d
{'w drt-i,-E.qx_ `ttl5 ,i ti591;_. ;%'Aj:titUY l•iwC .•HM ii2U' khtf1 .`?>{q't d: ?tIC ..):1 .t.e:. ..Idl'.
.itei!'"£i' . k._.,_ .tt?''. .r...t _..'h:!!: tlf•t<, fTh :l._ .,rC.fiiu:t`n.ok P:kd.,la:j;< 'flq3'f'3(i i,,t}
i'iti;s:t',il i3 ti:t ii.t•.ili(t=\t3l {12;;' .iiet,;.Fyt Pt:,:t.
l ltt .~~3.V,: M:u,:1 <<t W;::i ;,:t,,'..,. :.s Ow :1._ita
`T[ic!liiirt5sk:iin Si;tt":cno .iti.}#?:".tiyCS;tiT 4'i:aiy
~
h.,h 0IC f>':-=.+ tiii3 '<::.t• SttPp•,gtHi,, ;f C':it{'r~, .:i ~ .
j5_ay4it%: Mti :1aw! tl{ltfjfj:::lV ii.`:tn ;'1L' w}id
£
2.l;3i'O:t.: Pi;si;: .!utif i.,4o?:.1C: .-nii '.'.;i' tlti '
~ . itl Qi':;2tf- ~v{iiE"b9. tt >'.Y'tU?F'i. . ?.fic's•. ' ~ ~
,i;ilr:l <a;::'_'#.t.i,fl:i;ii :.3it:7~tj . ' ~ ~
..r,
yF}~$•1~ifteL..°f"C' c, T 2'A)t[:; i.:.~Ii f'::: .itkl t;FiCt ;:VL'E+i .
41
2.6 De=vcJnp ti ri f .tpasaclecl C?pr°rr Suace
§}=stem tLxror4glr Z3c,w=rrtow°n.
{ oi.;<,PEn0 t:. r: Pi:fM : ;w:, y.t<: :.•~r+ ~y ' . ~~~,r.
['7r.;.h .,:.ns..a~!;ii..:t,3x,,oxtza;! 4 ?jr;
„i.Cj, iii;t }k:it3 .fym~T,3 d3n:ct {mnf . 4 .f'.':.}. .:_trf
C••t£{ii':..sii. V~ dt: ti _ a
tj
l
SJD,vfttK.wii=lC::i~Y-.:C)'K F'iGf;~
. _ . . . _ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . . . . _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ _
-
- -
DEVELOP FANNO CREEK PARK & OPEN SPACE
Long-term Actions 2.8 Pursue Development of a"Rail to
Trail" corridor along Tigard Street into
2.7 Determine the Design Themes and Downtown.
Progression of Public Spaces for the The railroad right-of-way on the north side of
Urban Creek Corridor. Tigard Street from Main Street to Tiedeman will be
Connecting the two anchor "Catalyst" projects in abandoned in conjunction with the Commuter Rail
Downtown, Fanno Creek Park and the future Project, providing a 35 foot ROW for a potential
Regional Retail Area at Hall Boulevard/99W, the trail corridor. The trail conidor would provide an
"Urban Creek" was conceived as an open space additional pedestrian/bicycle path into Downtown,
with landscaping, water features, and public plazas. and as a looped connection with the regional West Commercial Street Gateway
It has the potential to become a series of different Fanno Creek Trail.
public spaces with park space, native plant gardens,
public art, or other amenities.
Since one of the key themes for downtown is
"sustainability", the Urban Creek corridor could be idesigned to reflect this message with native
landscaping and ecological design, and natural ~ ~
,~~t~"
methods of conveying and infiltraring storm water.
The corridor could become a model demonstrating rEI~ i ~
j-
the ecological process. The Urban Creek would be Commercial St.
' ~ ~ s~ ~ ; F ' _ _ : • _iintegrated with new and existing development,
- 7
providing an alternative "front door" to ~ _ "^~•m„~, -
redeveloPed ProPerties along its len i i
gth.
- _ - I -i
West Commercial Street Gateway
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 1 1
II. DEVELOP COMPREHENSIVE STREET AND
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS IN DOWNTOWN
"A vibrant and compact core,
accessible by all modes of
transPortation"-Ti gard Doumtomm • ~y~ _ . . - • -
. ~~`•d~. _ ~ 1~ = _ , ` .
Improvement Plan
Overview:
Public Streets form the first impression ° ; , , ~ • ~ '
i .
PeoPle have of a Cit3' and are Part of the ~ " . ,
"public realm." Important initial
"streetscape" concepts developed from , , ' ~ ` ~ , '
the Downtown Improvement Plan
include the area's historic "Main Street"/ - - - • ~ ' . ~ . - .
mixed-use village character and scale, the _ ~ . } , • % ~ : ~ ` , ~ -
use of "street" as a central place with a
pedesuian emphasis, and the notion of j
ecologically sustainable "green streets". • , ~ ~ - _
bn ( ..e..... ..e.T.o...u.. ..a
t~ °The sones" ~
The City has undertaken a
Comprehensive Design of Doumtown
, N Existing Sireet Network
streets in order to develop different Coneeptual Frome
types of streets for different functions.
For example, Main Street will be Concept Framework Downtown ImprovemenT Plan
developed with historic references,
having entry gateways, wide sidewalks, varied parking arrangements, and landscaping. While Main Street will
be designed to move traffic more slowly to accommodate the pedestrian, other streets will be designed to
provide for traffic capacity, though not lose sight of pedestrian safety. Burnham Street, as a"grand street", is
a key entryway into the downtown, and will be designed to both serve future capacity needs, and function for
the pedestrian as it approaches Main Street Circulation and Street standards will be evaluated to bring the
Downtown street system up to a level to serve the future needs of the Downtown.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 ' PAGE 12
DEVELOP STREET & CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
identified include natural infltrarion and cleanin
Near Term Actions g
of storm water run-off from impervious areas
3.1 Implement Comprehensive (streets, sidewalks) through the use of native
Streetscape Design in Downtown. planting beds, pervious paving materials, swales, - ~Comprehensive Streetscape design has been and other devices. Developing visible sustainable
developed for key downtown streets. These design elements in the downtown builds upon the ~
conceptual designs will be used to prepare open space system and makes a public statement of
/
preliminary engineering drawings for Burnham the community's values for nature. For every . '
Street, Commercial Street at Main Street, and Main street reconstructed in the downtown, inclusion of •
Y
Street. The design process included the Streetscape sustainable design should be evaluated as part of r • ~
Design Working Group, City Staff and a engineeringdesign. r
consultant, and represents a coordinated effort to
bring together initial ideas from the Downtown
Improvement Plan with professional expertise. Streetscape concept
Key ideas which may be transferred to other streets
in the Downtown include an understanding of - ; ~i-; , ~ _ _ ; i_~
~ •
'-A• cM
' ystreet hierarchy, use and function, pedestrian
L
oriented design, and "green street" design. -ASIJAMM
Bvrnliam-St.
-
_o.
3.2 Incorporate "Green Street" Design
~
Where Possible. ~ - - -3i - - - , ~ ~ ,
~ - %
.h o
"Green Streets" are being evaluated for the ° ~ ; - ~ '
. `
Downtoum in order to expand the "sustainability" AT
theme as part of the Downtown Plan. The
~oaooc ,x ` ! , ' :
Downtown Improvement Plan calls for integrating a, "ir,~--„~
„ ruwc~m °v
Fanno Creek Park and open space into the `~~,c
Downtown. Developing "Green Sueets" is an ` • N ~
extension of "Green Connections" by applying
sfTF.P.I' PANVO:'AFL[ 1 _ , ~ ~ ~
sustainability to streets. Specific treatments F.TLUL
Burnham Sireet Concept Design
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 13
DEVELOP STREET & CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
"The Downtown's trrcnsportation system Improvement Plan recognized the need to create a 2) More prominent landscaping such as street
should be multi-modal, connecting "Brand Tigard" identity by implementing both trees.
temporary and permanent projects in the 3) Intersection improvements that include public
people, places and activities safely and Downtown unique to Tigard. These projects are space or "gateways."
conveniently." - Tigarrl Douwo)am intended to help focus attention on Downtown
4) A Commuter Rail «Gateway„ at Main Street.
Improvemetlt Plan and generate and maintain momentum.
5) A Fanno Creek Park "Gateway" at the bridge
Near Term Actions Improving the perception of Main Street can be on Main Street
partly accomplished by showing small but visible 6) Art works.
3.3 Improve Streets in Areas with High physical improvements along the street. This ment Potential. ~ Building fa~ade improvements such as
Redevelop
presents a design challenge to develop a"Brand aumings, Painttng, or exterior modifications.
The development of attractive streets that serve a Tigard" identity that can be recognized as a theme
specific design function will contribute to the unique to the community. Examples of possible Events such as a Farmer's market, sidewalk sales,
perception of Downtown and the potential for Brand Tigard projects could include: parades can also become part of an evolving Main
redevelopment The redesign and construction of Street and Downtown and represent small changes
downtown streets in areas with 1) Inclusion of "Green Street" design on Main towards creating the public gathering place that the
high
redevelopment potenrial will encourage investrnent Street. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan envisions.
and provide assurance of the City's commitment to
; •s• ~ ~ .r-. . , ,
DOWriYOWil. 3 ~ .
rNteua~• . , _ 1 ; _ --7 ~_r7 -~1 ~ , ' k M0111 St. cnIvree
3.4 Assist Main St. Transition/Install
Temporary "Brand Tigard" U,~°"
Improvements on Main Street ST.Aur
Main Street will go through a transition both
FAh1~Ut4F:FII SISUINhBR/T' • -
physically and economically as it becomes a more ;
c Y(YNIISRF7':
attracrive, pedestrian oriented, commercial district -
StreetscaPe desi~ is a keY P element that will hel
transform Main Street. The overall design for i kx _ `
Main Street places an emphasis on the pedestrian
with wide sidewalks, street trees, varied parking,
with connections to the Commuter Rail Station
and Fanno Creek Park. The Downtown Main Street Concept Design
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 14
. DEVELOP STREET & CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
„
Near Term Actions and encourage pedestrian use, it will be necessary
3.5 Re to evaluate block size and street standards to meet ` I
fine the Circulation Plan for .
DoQVntown. the guiding principles for powntown ~
, r
transportation. ~
Vehicular circulation addresses access to and from
•'.pr~ .
the Downtown, movement throughout the central
3
-
business district, block size, parking, and plans for .6 Pursue a Pedestrian-Oriented Design
future capaciry needs. Sueet circularion lays the and "Gateway" at Hall Boulevard/ - =
foundation for vibrant, active streets that Highzvay 99T~Intersection. -
accommodate anticipated uses, are friendly and The Downtown Improvement Plan called for a
.o
walkable for pedestrians, and allow traffic to move Gateway at this intersection in order to make a
appropriately within each district. Movement strong "entry statement". Hall Boulevard provides
within pedestrian oriented areas should be more a natural gateway into Downtown Tigard, given its Main St./Hwy 99W-Gateway (CAD)
deliberate and slow, and faster in areas where ' intersection with Highway 99W. This key gateway
pedestrian use is less. with its prominent visibility from Hwy 99W is
proposed to be developed with regional mid-sized
The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan retail with parking and a public plaza space. The
identifies a conceptual street pattern for Purpose will be to pull people into Downtown and
Downtown. This circulation plan needs to be start to draw them further into the Downtown and
refined and reality tested based on future uses and
catalyze new development.
transportation engineering analysis. As part of the
Streetscape Design process, an evaluation of Washington County is currently managing the
vehicular capacity for powntown Streets will be redesign and construction of the intersection at -
done to identify the parameters for Street Hall Blvd. and Highway 99W. The County has
Standards. agreed to allow the City to provide design input to ~
consider more pedestrian oriented treatments, s~
Block size in Downtown Tigard is relatively large. landscaping, and the inclusion of a"gateway" to
The span between Main Street and Ash Avenue is Downtown.
over $00 feet without a street. To provide for Burnham St/Hall Blvd.-GaTeway (CAD)
adequate vehicular circulation, allow for parking,
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 15
DEVELOP STREET & CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
Long Term Actions new at-grade crossing of the railroad tracks be 3.11 Develop a Parking Management
developed along the Ash Avenue aligiunent Ciry Plan.
3.7 Achieve Consensus on Alternative of Tigard Staff should continue to work with
Downtown Access Im rovements. Develop and implement a parking management
p Pordand & Western Railroad and the ODOT Rail
plan that ensures adequate short-term and long-
The Street system in Downtown Tigard has both Division to identify options for achieving this
term parking supply for residents, employees and
assets and challenges. Access from 99W on the crossing.
patrons of Downtown. This plan is not necessary
west side is limited by traffic congestion on 99W at •
until Downtown begins to grow and parking
peak times. It is a recommendation of the 3.9 Develop Gateways at Key utilization increases, but the study should be
Downtown Improvement Plan that the City Intersections. conducted prior to construcring any structured
conduct an examination of potenrial alternatives kin
Gateways are key intersections that serve to define Parg'
or improving access to downtown. The Ash
f
Avenue/Downtown Acce,ss study will address entry into the Downtown, and begin to create an
short and long-term transportation acrions that will identity. The gateways are part of streetscape
improve access to and from the Downtown. design, and will be incorporated into street
reconstruction as that takes place over time. There
are several gateway locations that present this /
3.8 Obtain a Railroad Crossing at Ash opportuniry: Burnham Street at Hall Blvd., North ~
Avenue. and South Main Street at 99W, Tigard Street at
The Portland & Western Railroad bisects Main Street, Commercial Street at Main Street. ~ -
downtown Tigard with only one crossing on Main Commercial Street at Main Sueet, Scofhns Street at
Street, resulting in a lack of internal circulation. Hall Blvd, and Hall Blvd at 99W. -
This pattern limits access between the north and
south parts of the central business district, and 3.10 Develop a PedestrianBicycle Route
requires drivers to use either Hall Blvd. or Main Plan. -
Street at either ends of the District The resulting Main St. Bridge-GaTeway to Fanno Creek (CAD)
perception is a downtown that is not a single urban The City should review and modify current City ace but two separate areas unconnected. The pedestrian and bicycle planning efforts to ensure
pl
Downtown Improvement Plan recommends that a that these support simple and feasible access to,
from and within doumtown Tigard.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY 1UNE 2006 PAGE 16
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Glossary of Terms Long-term actions. Actions occumng beyond a three Tax-Incrzment Financing. The method of financing
(3) year timeframe. authorized under Urban Renewal. Tax revenues
Brand Trgard. The Downtown Improvement Plan generated from the appreciation of property
referred to spec Near-ternr actions. Actions occurring within a three-y ~thin the Urban Renewal District are used to
ific improvements in the
Downtown that could create a unique identiry or ear (3) timeframe. P ~
finance ro ects within the Plan.
"brand Tigard". The use of Green Streets (see Open Space. Area designed for use by pedestrians,
Tigard Urban Renewal Plan. A Plan developed in
below) is one way of creating a unique identity in public space. It may be built with hard surfaces
accordance with State Law to qualify for use of
Downtown Tigard such as concrete for sidewalks, or landscaped with tax increment financing to fund projects in the
Catafyst Prnject. Refers to one of eight (8) projects plantings. Downtoum.
in the Downtown Improvement Plan thought to Overlay Zone. A zone with specific site, land use or -
Urban Creek Corridor. A senes of park-like blocks
attract or stimulate new development building design requirements. Usually created for a
running north to south in the Downtown
Ecological. Refers to the restoration of landscape specific area to address envuonmental of building connecring the north end to Fanno Creek Park on
using narive plants that are adapted to the specific concerns unique to that area. the south. .
soil and climatic conditions of the area. Streetscape Design. Refers to the design of street,
Urban Design. Refers to layout and funcrion of
Gateway. Refers to the design of the intersection of Parking, sidewalk, street furniture, and landscaping streets, pedestrian circulation, open space, and
two streets as an entr for a particular street. land uses (residential> office> mixed use
yway to the Downtown. The >
intersection might includes landscaping, walls, or SustainaGle. Refers to the use of natural methods of commercial).
monuments that would be visible by drivers by, addressing environmental concerns such as storm
IYlilling Seller enurnnment. The Urban Renewal Plan
and recognized as a"gateway" to Doumtown. water runoff, habitat restoration or buildin .
' ' g' does not permit the use of condemnation for land
Includes the use of water infiltrarion through use
Grzen Heart. Term used in developing the Tigard _ assembly. In order to assemble land for
Downtown Improvement Plan meaning the center of porous surfaces mstead of paving or concrete, redevelopment, it will occur in a"willing seller"
of the community containing natural and native plants, and recycled building materials.
environment
landscaped open space. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The Plan for the
Green Street. Refers to the use of sustainable Downtown developed by citizens with assistance
methods of handling storm water runoff, such as and guidance from Staff and consultants, adopted
ouncil September 2005.
natural infiltration, native planting beds, peroious by C
paving materials and swales.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 17
Tigard Downtown Action Plan - 3 Year
TIGARD DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN - 3 YEAR
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 future
Project / Action
FY 06-01 FY 07•08 FY 08-09
faci/itation of /Pedeve%pment Projetts
Downtown Development Opportunify Sites-Program
Development Program for Land Assembly / Marketing X _
Refine Land Uses / RedevelopmenT Feasibility X ~ X G X C~
Land Use-Regulations / Design Guidelines F'
Land Use / Building Types Refinement X
Design Guidelines X o X r
Land Use Regulations X X ,
n ~ D
Commuter Rail
Commuter Rail Station X o X [n
Commuter Rail Block / Joint Development X L X X
Shelter Upgrade o X
Downtown Housing Development O O 7
Housing Study X u
Housing Program Estimate G X
Implementation X X
i~
Performing Arts / Recreation Cemer
Performing Aris Use / Feasibility Study X
Land Disposition / Acquisition X X X
Post Office Relocation
Initiate discussions with USPS X
Follow-Up Adions (Relocation Study / Facilitation) X X
Comprehensive Plan Policy / Modifications X X
/mprovement of fanno Creek Park & Open Space System
Fanno Creek Park / Publie Area
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan X
Funding Program / Parks System Master Plan X J _
Public Area Use Design X _ _
Public Use Area Redevelo ment Feasibilit X '
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 18
Tigard Downtown Action Plan - 3 Year
TIGARD DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN - 3 YEAR
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 future
Project / Action
FY 06•07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09
/mprovement of fanno Creek Park & Open Space System (continueol
Land Acquisition (floodplain properties) X
Land Acquisition (Pubiic Area) X ~ Li
Wetland Mitigation Projecis X
Park Restoration x o x x o x
Public Area Improvemenis X X X X
, J
Farmer's Market
Inierim Location X
Final Home X _
Urban Creek / Green Corridor
Impiementation Options X
FeasibilityStudy X
Inclusion in Parks Master Plan / Overlay Zone X
Preliminary Design X
Land Disposition X
• Final Design & Engineering X
Construction X
„
Ash Ave. Sfreet / Open Space Design X
-
Rail to Trail (Hall to Tiedeman St.)
Planning / Design X ~ X X
Construction X
Deve%pment of Comprehensive Street & Circu/ation System
Downtown Circulation Plan
Engineering Study for Circulation and future Capacity X -
Refine Circulation Plan X
Streetscape EnhancemeM Program
Bumham Street (final design / ROW)
Final design / ROW X
Construction X _ X
Commercial Sireet (Main to Lincoln--Construction) X
Commercial Si. ( Hall to Main St.) X X
Scoffins St. X X
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 19
Tigard Downtown Action Plan - 3 Year
TIGARD DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN - 3 YEAR
Project / Attion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 Future
Deve%pment of Comprehensive Street & Circu/ation System (confinuea) J v `
Streefscape EnhancemeM Program
Main Street - O O
Main Street Safety Improvements X
Main Street °Brand Tigard" Improvemenis X X x x
Storefront Fa4ade Improvemeni Program X X X
Comprehensive Streetuape Improvements X
Ash Avenue Improvements u o 0
Ash Ave. (Bumham St. to Rail ) V
Enaineerina / ROW x
Construction X
Ash Ave. North Feasibility Study X L,
Ash Avenue (Fanno Creek to Burnham St.) X
RR At-Grade Crossing ~ ~ • ~
Initiate Vehicular Crossing Negotiations X
Pedestrian Crossing 0 X - ~
Vehicle Crossing v X
Open Space Design X u
Bumham St. to Fanno Overlook X
Ped / Bicycle Bridge X
Terminus to RR Tracis X
Hall Blvd. / 99W DowMown Gateway
Gateway Conceptual Design
Intersection Design Input / Washington County X
ROW Acquisition X - '
intersection Consinidion X
Final Design (GaTeway) X r~
Gateway Consirudion X
Downtown Alternative Access Study X
Pedestrian / Bike Plans
Update Plan ' X ,
Parking Management Plan
Monitor Parking in Downtown X X X X
Determine Catalyst Projeci Impad X
Pre are Parkin Stud Plan X
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 20
Tigard Downtown Work Program - 1 Year
TIGARD D• • • ' P' • AM 1 --YEA
/ 6 /
ject ' o ~
July Aug • • 1- Mar Ap -
faci/itation of Downtown /Pedeve%pment Projects
Downtown Opporfunit Sifes-Program DevelopmeM
Develo Pr ram for Assembl Marketin of Parcels
Coordinate relocation land assembl with Businesses
IdenTif evaluate Cit -owned ro ertfor redevelo ment
Coordinate Cit faciUt lannin with redevelo ment efforts
Refinement of Land Uses in Downtown
Land Use-ltegulations / Design Guidelines
Land Use Refinement Develo ment Proto es
Identif Goals Ob'edives
Evaluate land use refinement o tions
Evaluate development prototy es
Coordinate review of develo ment " rotot es"
Desi n Guidelines
Identif Desi n Guidelines for evaluation
Evaluate o tions for Desi n Guidelines
Coordinate review of Desl n Guidelines
Land Use Re ulations
Identif Land Use re ulafions for evaluation
Evaluate o tions for Land Use Zonin Re ulations
Coordinate review of Land Use Re ulations
Commuter Rail Block
TransH Center Redesi n MTIP Grant A licaiion due
Transit Center Redesi n--MTIP First Cut
Transit Center Redesi n--MTIP Final Cut
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 21
Tigard Downtown Work Program - 1 Year
TIGARD D• • • RK PROGRAM I --YEAR
FY 06-07
'Poject / Task July A • • • 1- -b Mar A• -
/mprovement of Fanno Creek Park/Opea Space System
Fanno Creek Park Public Area
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan
Pre are RFP Sco e of Services
Iswe RFP seled consultant
N oTiate execuTe contract
Mana e consultani contract
Coordinate Publfc Involvement
Public Area Use FeasibiliT Stud
Public O en House 2
Identi future fundin r ram
Incor orate into Parks S em Master Plan
Fanno Creek Trail S stem
Determine feasibilit of Trail Extension Main St. to Grant 51.
Rail to Trail Hall to Tiedeman St.
Pre are overall feasibili stud
Execute oint a reement with ro ertowner
land A uisifion
Land Ac uisition flood lain ro erties
land Ac uisition Public Area
Coordinate with affeded ro ertowners
Establish time frame for relocation ro ert conve ance
U►ban Creek Green Corridor
Identif o tions for im lementation
Pre are feasibilit stud
Select O tions Coordinate review
Evaluate for inclusion into Parks Master Plan
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 22
Tigard Downtown Work Program - 1 Year
TIGARD / • • • ' ' ' • • AM 1 --YEA•
I
' oject / Task
July A . - • . D- Mar A -
/i»provement of fanno Creek Park Open Space System (ConfinVed)
Restoration 8 Wetland Mitigation Projects
Coordinate with TriMet CWS re: mitigation siTes in Fanno Creek Park
Park Restoration
Public Area Improvemenis / Fanno Creek Bank & Restoration
Farmer'a Market
Interim Location
Identif options for a Downtown Location
Identify space / infrastnucture needs
Prepare Timetable for move
Final Home
Deve%pment of Comprehensive Street/Circu/ation System
Refine Circulafion Plan for powntown
Determine Evaluate Circulation Plan Options
Coordinate Review Seleci Circulation Plan Option
Streetswpe Enhancement Program
Bumham Street (Final Design / ROW)
Final design / ROW
Construction
Commercial Street (Main to Lincoln)
final design ROW
Consirvdion
Main Street
Main Street "Brand Tigard" Improvemenis
Install Street Trees
Ash Avenue (mprovemeMs
Ash Ave. (Bumham St. to Rail )
Engineering ROW
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 23
Tigard Downtown Work Program - 1 Year
TIGARD / O • • ' ' ' • • . . R
' i a / • /
July A • • • 1- -b Mar A• -
Deve%pment of Comprehensive Street/ Circu/ation System
(rontinued)
Ash Ave. Fearibility Study (N. of Fanno Creek)
RR At-Grade Crossing (vehicular and pedestrian)
Initiate discussion with RR as to criteria / requirements
Establish timeframes and agreement with RR
Ash Avenue Improvemenfs (continued)
Coordinate Ash Ave. Open Space Design
Burnham St. to Overlook
Ped / Bicycle Bridge
Terminus to RR Tracts
Hall Blvd. / 99W Downtown Gateway
Gateway ConcepTual Design
Intersection Design Input / Washington County
Coordinaie Review of Preliminary Design
ROW Acquisition
Main Street Improvements
Install Safety Improvements
Green Street MTIP Application due
Green Street MTIP Isi CuT
Green Street MTIP Final Cut
Pedesfrian / Bike Plans
Update Plan (TSP)
Parking Management Plan
Monitor Parking in Downtown
' TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 24
AcknowledgemenTs
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Tigard City Council Downtown Tosk Force City Staff
Craig Dirksen, Mayor (former members) Craig Prosser, City Manager
Nick Wilson, Councilor Jim Andrews Tom Coffee, Interim Communiry
Sydney Shenvood, Councilor Janice Arave Development Director
Tom Woodruff, Councilor Carolyn Barkley Bob Sesnon, Finance Director
Sally Harding, Councilor Martha Bishop Gus Duenas, City Engineer
Marland Henderson Dennis Koellermeier, Public Works Director
Chris Lewis Barbara Shields, Long Range Planning
City Center Advisory Commission Mike Marr (Chair) Manager
Jim Andrews Judy Munro Dick Bewersdorff, Current Planning Manager
Carolyn Barkley Dan Murphy Phil Nachbar, Senior Planner/Downtown
Gretchen Buehner Jan Richardson Development
Alexander Craghead Mike Stevenson
Suzanne Gallagher Sue Wirick Project Stcrff
Alice Ellis Gaut Joshua Chaney
Marland Henderson Ken Dawson Phil Nachbar, research & writing
Nancy Lof, graphic design
Ralph Hughes Craig Dirksen Darren W ss a hics assistance
Lily Lilly Heather Guevara Y'~ P
Mike Marr (Chair) Paul Iford
Judy Munro Susan Morelli
Roger Potthoff Lisa Olsen
Mike Stevenson Nicole Palmateer
Carl Switzer Yudhi Patel
Catherine Renken
John Wilson ~
~~C
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY 1UNE 2006 PAGE 25
u~-~d ch lo/,.r to, a ~
~ .
J
r _y' ~ t e ~ ~ s~i ~rrF s t $~°y3f,+ ~rrr? ~i" ~s f ~ i• t ' c~~"at•t a~ 'P
9+
~ -r~ ~ :t `f-•- _ r'''aiI e's~-..ai~`~ „_A'~'' = 7' ^.`.ri" .,~~..:`k~.r'~^"~}1.~~'S'~•...=,~,°j~ `N r.f.,5~ ;~~'e~'`='{~2f~yawll,J;-i ,c~• F`.r"f - ,,,~-.y~.{' -
l! .A f; i R..~ ~i ''~f4~'{ t~'r.,t 7-'!~-'- ~i~'D~~' .C'i ~tt.~, ~F i:.t~ ~".,-i~ ~vJ' ~••,'f~ 1_~`,,. # ~~f '`'"~s I~ ~'i1.~ .i( A L ~,~y~.r„e$~;.~. a~.~ ~~-e,oc-•w=•~ n~ .T~_F_.~,t.r~.., s.,.., s ~,-;,3. N'~-' J. h;is~~'' ~s✓~y7. ..ty,
/ . :f. ~.~£y'~ r~ ~+s't;~'2~ ;4,~ti;. f.~M~~~~;~~ r:,'+..,T-. ,4~ ~_~-+;r~ •s;:t ~?s,s «"tl f ~ "`^?'~C~,.-:ii . '~'~S+'" .Lr,~~)' :.1' i',-t~r"~:,aG.~.+.t,:, ''~~i~. ^.^~Y+ .+a.~y.,:^'c"y. )4
~ j--+•` • o~,~~ , ~~4,6. h ' v '
r#a
{ -~~-C~„*;~~;. ~5'i 3~1 ~r..cs -..S .n ~t .J,: -;+3*" `~1 Jy :,i ♦ .vy~ 4~~.. y„f. _'s~ ~~~;vti7;F
~ rf.,: p ' } 'C; ~ ~ _ ,,~,~c ~ t~ ' Yy y t►. s c~~''~
_ u~f.• .,r ~X , ~ '.~...s~~~a,' ~ ~.,w '.~`~.;o,,, 1.yS~. :`+q°~,~`' t:~, ~.c~~ e . rP .,:°i1C ~ ~ ,.ry~t '..'s` a; ' "~.!l.4. _ , c~',< kJr .~i.:Y'~p 5 w',., ..~h';~ C . 'Iic :1~` .~'ra..
- 'S.r ~ f'. ~f ,.~~~C_,.~~.. ~~~-r,~~ ;~).~c p ;1'~`?;J-~~-.'> a.~''~j,~ ,'=w: _ ~~rJ,~r 'i'~` ~ ~~0~ ,~t~7 % • iT+~~,~r'~E~2• f~1. ~r ~~,,•3. ' f . ~ a,,: .r4~.Y..~S
~ ~~y"~ }.t~ ~tt' ..i -+,..,~y~.S~"3'fh. 7tx'.f.~'` .ca:9..~~13+'~-i:'Y:,"YF~s:! :rfr l3i~isd:~ ~ n: '~.:~.;~.'4''.~n 7~. L~2 ~~Y. ;~~~4~'t ! . .x i~.*'a ~;lfg'!` *4~ '>.L3,'~y~;-.o~ r~a1•,'i ~i=G
r~
- ,s` +."~''y,"r i"' a;,.:~!~~ ~j;:~~~ 'R. S~,~)~y~}..~~' ,~7 ^ e~~f".~'1 ~9.~~*`, Lu~~ ...~~r:'".y,, c~yu?~S?Y'~4 r'~* ~t}C~ ~•r ~/li,t ~1.1~t~, 'z`"~Z+~~~~i'~ ~~ti +;:r~k }t~xi'n'z.`-`. ,t`
R'FY~
r _...i-n.'Dt"~',f~g .a~]~. -r~71 tir' Y kt ~`~.a"L' ( u. ti v ~~'2~. r~ b.~r,t ~u)dzt7'~9 . ..yryr ~~-r~ ~-~"R,~.°~~-r;r~ G f ~',7't ,?u✓,.x:"`~s_'~
y~ ,~,_n_ _ `'~,C'.. ' ' `~..."'.+~r"~,~,...y!''. u'.'F"~,.,i~ x t++ `:z y ~-4r~,~~Z ~ ~ r K~ , y ¢i. :-1 ,i- ~ a s ~."Es:a. -'sP',^ ~ ~•J J-N-
MCi
y;~4+y~,..`~; E ,I. ~~'i~,::s,~!•[~:..~i~ r` -St~•~K•'?~j~a~~R~.{ ~da~.~ ~.;r. ~ ~ ~,s-~ :%'t ~'~f.~!G'~ul,'?+.:~s7h;iq. `a:~I'.~;~3; "~~b" ~s
'~,'1'~'..X, f= ~'9'. ``~.tt.•~~L~s~'-;•y"~:i1~~.,`~~C .d~ry~_d~;.~,.Y~ ,~g ';r'$.~, ~•:1'514,.1. ..i^ }-.:~r.;$.F J1r~~ '"~'s b.-:~,;~.~.~. ~~`d~ v--+c: : F~-.;~H~~.~Yc"~:~
~✓!~'`•'Z^~ :~~•~F.~rs° ~.~,,y'~, r~' a ~rs~~tC ~i,°' [ 'i[ti Mz:~ i%i~l ~'a.lr1 - Jt7Cj r ~`t'l ~ -
`1..~ -'~.1 ~,r,. •`~~tC3~a'~.Y`~i~~.l}`.c~fs~.~ :q,:f;.~n ~.~~~n y'14'~ "~*~,td%~'~- 'Y ^ar4?+~lv+ i~i~,~l r.. .~~5`Ct~{,x-rS`+..~ i.y
i-M ' r~ 'Z`. t . ~F~~• ~~7~}.7~ ~a^ ;~i~ ~ r.Y r~ W -n ' _r ,L L'~Z-9i
r~.ra~
' k„~
~~'?~S.r.Jt~~t~-"i,y Ji
1~
t: 2~~~r '~'r% '.~tiFa,- .~;'"S ~.7 ..%r?'~r "i(~...l-- r~-^'..~-aw, .~i.~~:~,~s.,:•~'`'~,~.1?~~:;;a~?:.,,~.aa3y ~1~~'~i~&.R.~-~,~.~'o~li~ad;~
•ajv~y:-~~~,
l ^,r j ,~.~`-J f~,~e° ~~•Y:~,.~f.',~¢,~,w.,p.'.iy~.~_~~,t!, i-),r~ ,s~ . . 1 , 1 ' ~cvg^~"^*.y:~.' w .,~.9'-y'"f'n. p, h„*,~, . .,..a
a r~ 7 .y~ ,;,~5'~ f' , •,t...~ wi" ~}$i'~`yy .r`~+'r7i1°~~ Jw.T.l`~~~~~, ~3 +t'•`}~~~ - +r .wu5. t:~.`wr'~.~..~,.:~:i.;~~ ~r. J..:
° 'Y„''~~g P i .s 3 ~^~,,'.x'' ~ 3 ' T''"` 0. n .?n+~
~ j.t
YY~,~t~~
2 ~
't [t k r7 „
~
k;k
~^~F'rit'`~~ R~ ~ ~ 7 ~"~'1. i f" "~'~4,~ a -c'?^~~'~ ~ ;'•~p~~-`a'x4~~~ S~ ~ , ro°~' y-,~* x -i.
~I
T~~a
L ~~~n~~'~'~~ ~D~LY.: r ~ y ,u ; ~ c; ~ r c` r 3t.~ t ~ •.I. ~
~.t.~
B' ~ i 4''>' c i'a-~ ` NY.;~' rTr+.'~^'.~ ~ ~ I r~. ~ f, aY`~ R~ 7MS,~"'
Sd, r f
F 4-'
~~•y ,1;? >A~ ~S f}~ ` _ ~ ' ~.;i~'"~ ~ .~~t.J~h t_L.L)ti` _
Y' l
~ ~ TY / •"t. ~ } ~~,~M~ f~
y^~ .t 1 ~ .1~~!"~~1- t~.q'y,? r.' iy` ~ f c»,=, f►..
~~i~~t~~,y'~'`'IY~w~1 , ~ C' ~~~'~+:a ' 0 ,~~,,..ck' ( L~ (.a,~~~A~~5 ~~,`'t ;;,ti~-, .,,.~P'x .
3rf.Lti' ,~r~~~•E~ M e~ ~ . '~,~y, t_ ~p}~.. 1-+,.~ .g.~.,~~6~'-,~'b°`t~J a.r 5~rqes~T. r~..
~:~c •,'~Yc~i t _ t~l 4t,r~' w'~ r•~~
i
i~'yI''~'~ j'1-, : P:1".,0 s. J ~~ti.`>> ~rj,. $~,.,-;.4x...~F. ~t ~ i
3
1rm--~ ~ ~ r,,, r • ~
L
t~
l~,~.R
3.
~Ma,w•~ ~1 ~j#t2 ^~~~a-~y~
S~
xs' f~..{
P: y~``c ~&a lt `#+.dnz4'+w
~~f~~.p'~
rDrr,~,~ ~Ij N
L .iYTt Cw ~!eM.n.i~e"lt~~ x1 - ~A"„~i~,p~• i n ~ ~ ~...~-~7 1 ~ '~rt~ ~1`~. `
kt . ~`s :i'~ + , f f .,,}_,.tt~ +--.il~~j~'; ~ ~ ~'?'a-~~. +;~;r:'`4
3 ~ ~y . ff+!S
.~~Of
~
• 2+~~ . . G1 . t~~'} F,7 f ~ SY F.~ t.. 4' F. rn• F~'~~^r 1 t~ .
~a~•-a~.~d ~ ~r~.-~ t+~ ~i~~ ti
. 1.~r yrfrt~.-~a7~.K~~~ , t~i ~r'~"•~~ ' ' 3 r R ~ y g~~t ~ y+~ A ~t . . -
:"7~i:~r' S F:13 ?4_'~'c .r •~;.~5! i.._ - °<i~ ~ -!1wch1 1-• I + _ -s.~,y ~
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ~
Tigard City Council Downtown Task Force City Staff _
Craig Dirksen, Mayor (former members) Craig Prosser, City Manager Nick Wilson, Councilor Jim Andrews Tom Coffee, Interim Community
Sydney Sherwood, Councilor Janice Arave Development Director
Tom Woodruff, Councilor Carolyn Barkley Bob Sesnon, Finance Director
Sally Harding, Councilor Martha Bishop Gus Duenas, City Engineer
Marland Henderson Dennis Koellermeier, Public Works Director
Chris Lewis Barbara Shields, Long Range Planning
City Center Advisory Commission Mike Marr (Chair) Manager
Jim Andrews Judy Munro Dick Bewersdorff, Current Planning Manager
Carolyn Barkley Dan Murphy Phil Nachbar, Senior Planner/Downtown
Gretchen Buehner Jan Richardson Development
Alexander Craghead Mike Stevenson
Alice Ellis Gaut Sue Wirick Project Staff
Suzanne Gallagher Joshua Chaney Marland Henderson Ken Dawson Phil Nachbar, Research & Writing
Nancy
Ralph Hughes Craig Dirksen Lof, Graphic Design
Lilly Heather Guevara Darren Wyss, Graphics Assistance
Lily -
Mike Marr (Former Chair) Paul Iford
Judy Munro Susan Morelli
Roger Potthoff Lisa Olson
Mike Stevenson Nicole Palmateer
Carl Switzer (Interim Chair) Yudhi Patel
Catherine Renken ~
John Wilson
ARD
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 2
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Glossary of Terms Green Street. Refers to the use of sustainable Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. The
" methods of handling stoxm water runoff, such as Plan for the Downtown developed by citizens
. Bfand T~gard. The Downtown Improvement natural infiltration, native planting beds, pervious with assistance and guidance from Staff and
Plan referred to specific improvements in the paving materials and swales. consultants, adopted by Council September 2005.
Downtown that could cxeate a unique identity or
"brand Tigard." The use of Gxeen Streets (see Long-term actions. Actions occurring beyond a Tax-Increment Financing. The method of
below) is one way of creating a unique identity in three (3) year timeframe. financing authorized undex Urban Renewal. Tax
Downtown Tigasd. Near-term actions. Actions occurring within a revenues generated itom the appreciation of
three- ear 3 timeframe. property within the Urban Renewal District are
Catalyst Project. Refers to one of eight (8) Y used to finance projects within the Plan.
projects in the Downtown Improvement Plan Open Sj~ace. Area designed for use by
thought to attract or stimulate new development. Tzgard Urban Renewal Plan. A Plan
pedestrians, public space. It may be built with hard
developed in accordance with State Law to qualify
Ecologzcal. Refers to the restoration of landscape surfaces such as concrete for sidewalks, or
for use of tax increment financing to fund
using native plants that are adapted to the specific landscaped with plantings.
projects in the Downtown.
soil and climatic conditions of the area. Overlay Zone. A zone with specific site, land use
Urban Creek Corridor. A series of park-like
Gateway. Refers to the design of the intersection or building design xequirements. Usually cxeated
blocks running north to south in the Downtown
of two streets as an entryway to the Downtown. foz a specific axea to address envixonmental of
• The intersection might include landscaping, walls, building concerns unique to that area. connecting the north end to Fanno Cxeek Park on
the south.
or monuments that would be visible by drivers by, Streetscape Design. Refers to the design of street,
and recognized as a"gateway" to Downtown. parking~ sidewalk, street furniture, and landscaping Urban Design. Refers to layout and function of
Green Connections. A blend of natural ecological for a particular street. streets, pedesuian circulation, open space, and
land uses (residential, office, mixed use,
features as seen in Fanno Cxeek Park integrated SustaZnable. Refexs to the use of natural methods commercial).
into the Downtown.
of addressing environmental concerns such as
Green Heart. Term used in developing the Tigard storm water runoff, habitat restoration, or building. ~illing Seller Environment. The Urban
Renewal Plan does not permit the use of
Downtown Improvement Plan meaning the center Includes the use of water infiltration through use
condemnation for land assembly. In oxder to
of the community containing natuzal and of porous surfaces instead of paving or concxete,
assemble land fox xedevelopment, it will occur in a
landscaped open space. native plants, and recycled building materials.
"willing seller" environment, where property
owners will be encouraged to participate but will
- retain their right not to sell their property if
chosen.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 3
What is the Downtown Implementation (Strategy?
The Downtown Implementation Strategy is a document to guide the City's ,~-acuons to translate the "vision" for downtown into a"realiry". It incorporates c
the policy objectives of the Tigard Downtown Impzovement Plan, adopted by
City Council on September 25, 2005, into a strategy and set of "near-term" and ~,,a
"long-term" action.r the City should take to implement the Plan. The Strategy
includes three (3) key strategies with twenty-eight (28) supporting actions, a 3-
Year Action Plan, and a 1-Year Work Program. 0,,
~
~
How was the Downtown Implementation
Strategy developed? e,
The Strategy was developed by iesearching the Tigaxd Downtown ~ • c'9t/
Improvement Plan, the Tigard Urban Renewal Plan, and deterinining the key
policies and pxojects within those documents that could be used to organize a
strategy. Thexe were also many discussions with the City Center Advisory
Commission (CCAC), foxmer powntown Taskforce Members, and Staff
before devising the Strategies.
-~.~i .
How is the Downtown Implementation City Center ~
Strategy intended to be used? PlannRenewal
The Strategy is intended to provide genexal guidance to develop specific Tigard, OR
actions necessary to unplement the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan.
~
The 3-Year Action Plan and 1-Year Work Program accompanying the Strategy
are intended to provide direction as to pxiorities and actions to be taken. As ~
projects and actions are completed and more experience obtained, the Strategy pxogress or timeframe adjustments. The 3-Year Action Plan should be tied to
should be revisited and revised accordingly. It is recommended that the 3- the City's Capital Budget to reflect priorities and funding requirements for each
Year Action Plan and 1-Year Work Program be updated annually so that
project.
progress can be monitored, and new Plans/Programs revised to reflect
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 4
Executive Summary
The primary strategies in the Downtown Improving Fanno Creek Park and developing of the Comprehensive Streetscape Design Project,
Implementation Strategy are to: an Open Space System in Downtown is a tenet improving streets in areas with high potential for
- of the Downtown Improvement Plan, and takes redevelopment, refuung the circulation system for
1) Encourage and Facilitate Redevelopment advantage of Tigazd's unique pxox Downtown> developing a"Gateway" at Hall
. iity to a park as
Projects zn Downtown an amenity. The "Green Heart" as an identity for Blvd./99W, and installing "Bxand Tigard"
Downtown, and the Fanno Creek Public Area, improvements on Main Street. Long-term actions
2) Improve Fanno Creek Park and Develop
an Open Space System in Downtown which will be pxogrammed as a public gathering include achieving consensus on alternative access
space for outdoor events, axe integral parts of the to Downtown, obtaining an at-grade rail crossing at
3) Develop Comprehensive Street and Plan. Key near-term actions include: developing a Ash Ave., developing gateways, a bike route plan,
Master Plan for Fanno Creek Park, determining the and a Parking Management Plan.
Circulation Improvements in Downtown.
feasibility of the Uxban Creek Corridor, and
Encourage and Facilitate Redevelopment developing the Fanno Creek Trail west of The 3-Year Action Plan provides a summary of the
priorities and actions for powntown, and the 1-
Projects in Downtown. Under Urban Renewal Downtown. Long-term actions include: constructing year Work Program identifies more specific staff
Law, taxes generated from the appreciation of the Fanno Creek Public tlrea and complete Open actions for the first year of the 3-Year Action Plan.
property in the Downtown may be used to finance Space System in Downtown, determiiung the type Both will be updated annually to reflect progzess
projects within the Urban Renewal Plan. As a of public spaces in the Urban Cxeek Corridor, and and timeframe adjustments.
strategy, the City will facilitate redevelopment so developing the "Rail to Trail" system
that the appreciation of properry results. along Tigard Street into Downtown.
The City will carry out near-term actions to: uutiate Developing Comprehensive Street
and manage high-priority, "Catalyst" projects, and Circulation Improvements in
identify redevelopment opportunities, maintain a Downtown is the third strategy and
dialogue with developers, assist in land assembly, is refezenced in the Downtown
r
xefine future land uses, and develop Land Use and Improvement Plan as "Streetscape
,
Design Guidelines. More long-term actions to Enhancement," a"Catalyst" project.
~
.
encourage xedevelopment include: developing Undex the Plan, providing well
projects that incorporate public open space, and designed Streets that axe "well -
assisting businesses to relocate in order to provide connected" and "promote walking,
parcels for redevelopment. biking and use of transit will attract
development" to the Downtown.
Near-term actions include:
implementing the recommendations Tigard Urban Renewal District
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY IUNE 2006 PAGE 5
- c - - - -
- -
I. ENCOURAGE AND FACILITATE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS IN DOWNTOWN
"Our vision of Downtown Tigard is an... active urban village at the heart of our ' -
AFE
community... pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation,... recognizes natural resources as an asset, and enables people to live, work, play and shop
in an environment that is uniquely Tigard."-Tigard Dosvntoum Improvement Plan
Overview: Downtown Tigard-Circa 1940s
Stimulating redevelopment in the Downtown is critical to developing a long-term funding source under
Urban Renewal. Under Urban Renewal Law, taxes generated from the appreciarion of property in the -
Downtown may be used to finance approved projects. As a xesult, any new development will result in an
increase in tax revenues to support projects within the Plan. Since all new development will generate needed ~
tax revenues, it is important to facilitafe redevelopment projects wherever they might occur in Downtown
without preference. The City will assist in bringing about redevelopment by executing projects in the Uxban k'-
Renewal Plan and cooxdinating opportunities with developers in Downtown. Some of the key public projects -
in the Urban Renewal Plan include: streets, paxks, plazas, a public maxket, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, a
perforining arts center, or other assistance to facilitate redevelopment.
There are inherent challenges to facilitating redevelopment in Downtown Tigard in particular. Land
assembly faces the challenge of the relocation of long-standing businesses, and the difficulry of assembling .
land for redevelopment without the power of condemnation. Assembly of land will require a"willing seller"
process which is untested in Tigard. One of the goals for the first few years will be to identify redevelopment Downtown Tigard-2006
opportunities and develop a program for land assembly.
The City's role in facilitating redevelopment projects in Downtown will develop over time, but will uurially
include prioririzing public improvements, developing a program for land assembly, working with developers
to identiEy opportunities and ways in which the City can participate, developing Land Use and Design
Guidelines and managing key projects necessary to implement the Urban Renewal Plan.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 6
i. ErdC'OURAuE3 Fa.C=LlTAYE Rs=CE,%EiOnMENIr
Neoi-:errrJ dx: F<,ans Z.? IdentiA, QnplrturaitY
.4re=<as frrr la't~tl€~zcl+s~rtazfn~ '
1,1 rl7rrza:~~e "(;r~t~tl}~sL I'>~~7€=cts"i~z ;s...
.~f3~w~'rct(f4:ira !ct=f;;i.: a- ;in-:~;- c:, :.,i: f>f
I`t.,.<
A"ii{?i7i'd 'A, .It. . , t 3 . - , jn,-.Ccc.t;tai.t:i.a, dlt 'i
,
Ad.+..i . uii ti('t1'hO{yt~S.i:Y Cd;YCtv:i'":}:':il 7l' .
z1~c :-aE~;t ~?-~:si-.;<;~; F'~o,;c*r~c~~._ .,cati
y,..., ,
t;5.. nc1 ..xt.:i-s= !aea:f<';i ,t: .'as ('~t;l 3i;4ct,';9Ys~
~ ' ~i~;tR~ii.i'3! yti' 3+ e `:t?{c.LiCx7:iFtUl; : ~t'~ ~~~'i'~;t.p.r;~pJ .
Wr<,.,,. 1F'i>'i
p;z~' ~ iuc;zot,-f;~}* I
[+T-~t'4:~s- : ; is:i, l ',t*.t~,,.,s, i, Te. 1;{ 4~s a~i'.fsl t i _ i S ~
i~} )-•z•.'1:.lil;klt'+. R:€', ~F~iB:xtc~~. . IF. . '~~8~
It
c:r.n:t,<, B 1 '~r.ki :+:~F 1;7~ ~.(nic-U - St.
~ ~ 'it{':tiIIli6u} z,,v i~ p' ;C":~iittf u,
(l i .
e4, `.n
di+i':ttp:fit 1e}i{ i,lt }e'.i) C^`.t:'
ln c:Ctt:'.t-m.i ?c..: tt,k~. tz,r ' n:ti'7tti`f!' ?t7 b2gA'l ?a~ EvL:;'lCC
c.i'd'.[)l't:. fl5(+s o•.]d:timA.il ixP'.`['l:6 J^:ti' i;CCY.
' ' .s!fv:ic'^!, ,';i,: •~I3tRUi ECi`_i..,F'ia`:aY . „ ~
i;lcut:t~t~~i :r:~cni¢ ;~y.~t:: ;s~'t;,;i1~il~:i::>:: tt f~li~x;c~ : . . ~
. . i.°ea$~k:f~i IiI ilC:l: fitL t 3i9ifiiit{ti i'J '*.1 ',a : .
~ ~
Stzm=-c47t i)«tn. Aml I'::nt,., i.rc,i; ['„rk. C)p,.:; i
ivk~
- [ r .;.n FJC't ?n::tL:ctp:ic tt: 1
r{l;' 4'Fii`;" ='Cf:i?g '{;'.;l ~~t::~tLutil~.~4; x._f .t;.'ti F.i;'..<.
~ .
i ;ti'k {s:VrlC dptl ( )!}t.l SpSCt; 1, i':li' iY.,lSSJ4Irn-i1 q'u , . .»...w.,
.-..cie , i:sln~xtYa=.'t'. ci',tt . _~i.,'~~Y ~ 7~C ~:iti~i z:~;? 1.•* ~~iIZ3SftI81I iI DdtTl{)~`#t.f' s7.'21~~7
~
~.t,,.,., . . . . . , - . .
i
-~tf.' ~
.,...,.,.x ,:~.;~7s;L 3<~r ~tIlcc,+ " t..,l;, , t.,~F '~,i; Cs~'If3 YS , , , . - _
. ~ a2r
. . . ~ , .
,
~ ~ . , .
~ -
i~r i ' d t.f?l ic~f :k` r'. r. :1._ ~ .i:ilc..l...;., I.+t . . c. i . 3 ' i C L t,. ~ '
.
Li
, . ~ _ i,:„ ~rr~erres6 es'sgsa A14erra$E6ve
dc;z",~~it:4~zr . . . . c,,:r:.i:~;ittt•; xc:xi:u.._,,: -
.
t,.. • . fie'=c~l~,i,~_... ~a:~,iiAir,, iti.? r:::t: :„=t' 7ig{e:r! 6o'.;,to,n ir.+pto'e~menl Pian
tliII:'+ iii. ;1C ':i:.+. 7., .iS:i+
:i<
i~:l".. ,`:15~l.!li,. ` ~ _
-:P.c, i'vi£E:?ls', .}nd ..w,,w.v It':l:i?_ ' ' '+t it~itt~i3i~> J .f .CCi C~E[;i~..,. . ix~','.i
t4C"C;'st}:t?Cn" s>J+E'ti . jF1Pi:i tiVs.C.-6!:$ `i,,;jy iF:.i;'.L+IillilP .i :1~ i}e _ n . 'ite.
~i'
;'r~ yc':'~ . n~t I ~
af{.:.:tU . .nii:6':ct .•1 e;i i,:~~ • '":i`:f",' x fliil. n tihi_ ~.:i.£' itl'J!p, \S;(.t ;i
. ~ ~ ' " •
}'cV' C ~'<ii,: :;;l..
'
~:t!•.....:;._+s2F2L_.- i;t'c_'['i,. .ti.-.a_. ~ _ ' t ~ M` ? • . .
'
S Nn:: ; v! ~:ia - hC . . , , _i.CnH.27 ttiC ....C T1 ,e•it" =.ti}:9:5] ns t?s. :t•.~,:'i".;: E- F}:tP vir iC~l QL•. :'>tia:';li
~ ~ '
i};tifil)imP,...x...t.]iFSi!`c tl:Qll:C21Is;3;y11+:i.Y..r.
W£ 2rtJd . ~
1. E"a;:i."~iJ2t,GE& fA~ILi A?c RcaE"Y'ciOR^nENT:.
. m . . . . . ~ . .
Necsr-?"eam okcticDtzs L6 lirfiare Z.ccncl [;'.:es i
Z4 1)eue7op a I'rogram f6r Larsd in I3owntoze.ra
~
ASS#'#e?blTi a,. ,4, E: 3
. j
<<x7u~xT::ex s at
Y n.i: ~a[.C~TS` HtV1135 t1ELF,y2YC- 1. tT c.'TCit}~)'.itr'i-t
~ ~ .
. r .t..+'~,?.c t, ln.~.. ~.s:~r xra3;1~ :[r =ttlei'. c~t Iattcl_ ~:s~5 ~sx r65t
ve ta a
~
~ . tf7i, il`as..t 4oIFCalia.aftRiii'"±{- 1 ^
po~~GO~. ~cw ~t ri;~. c~x;p<xx as~'E~' sv~z~a deFC~I<,~cx~,, ,l,ic; ` I
_ ; ' ,uiz lec-;.;;, °nid mill ,ised to i , + it,, cz~iTl u•,ri: wtill j:fyrPccr nirnz-r, ant§
h_ 2cfinc~c1 bi.foct. a
sc~~ Dc3a t r , cLY1r3k 1 iid r' LicMf+P1Et'fll, y;
ti3 .
ltxllv. E tPi. .,ss.n.,lc 1,e:id u.,~tii s1,.4j~inv~~ts rattd usi ssiax:r ;.a2i be
, a:3i~~ted, a.s c.t~.iUt-attnn <.r ml~cz~e~zt ue.,,t~x t-rlaaix l.cerwat h+xe(i s:az.
~ '
.E= io:8 .`F} . . i ~ '
~3 :itEfYG~- kFIU'~ I
~i,c «=cIc : =rxicc ~s n.D ~n 6 t ~wc-ces' t~xrel a t t}>~n
-
'nson° t.uic m.it
Reiae.wa; I'7 n=1<m unr ui iu.1e c.o,u3tisucnt`z<rn Asa ~
t
?IoIlt. `lt'tft.Fi;ma1
cxitilxrsE fri at5 d s~ev~r`itx Wut#u g erx t`%vtlfivg ' .
3,[>O5179n1 3z,pui
,(u; irnIt t tis3sus a'u. iic usll icqcil +hal tht £'np
tpp«.,_~s~fi~r ~at.~~,aernli~y da~-ti~~~pcs, ivSl~a,~~~ £r~
cc~t.~~t,rni t<o
:aluah{e iss et4tt.e+:wv g t[tas<e j
i
,i1,5 Evrzlzcccte City-Ownetf I're}pc:rtyl"vr
Rerleveloprrxerat i
1,7 T'rtc•oa€rra=e Pr-cblic
lisct.t,p s3i f72S3QlUPtJd2PZt
t ISiN=.;atcd Iand in tt7e- I>,,wu;oeax?. c;f tixnc s . ~sefgzet~. are
_
.~cr~~~. :tt;- c,c.3cxt, :,E~u 7l a..r,::. zrre. c!c .ei=:~t7.~:i lciil'~ 4e~4 pi'r.c.
.ICl=ClUD:f,Ty lt R'fll i}C -
ti
t ~ 1 n,i~b. 3cr1 u t!3c t iC jn~2~ rr I<iGAttxi m
AStS.~fi:l,$YkL tU l'i5S{tii~~ 3 t: i~lc
SfCSLtf,~iC ;tita,4\l--',SECk.a;e fi~%lYSZi1tC1l2 f)Ca].t1 't5 .
ll S:IEP 2tt i~tL
t t<tr Isxe E f I tk, tr i?lan f~~ f utrti. L.;csljir', 1`Ljkla.= 1('f ~'ic"~
~ d< tg.n? p 2ceyS 'X aCb 3
i ~ s eit: r ~ us ts tul~ n, wpau,el itt ct .a}3 tq rr, . .
t rri..c-r3[ LuliuT €xist'si tiYe (,7rbtia DES.
c,m.~eltdarc is. ~e_d pt i~c.t., ltc 1 t~'r le,c^r-irr tts 9n
tt~~ ,E,2c1 s.~~ i> ~tl.iiss~ a
~cr pznr::is E~'~rx-rrcfe-ECii.~2r~errt E3>e ~tr;lv¢i. ,
c Vr,:,.,wn cej3c<,e?.[,
d2C flrt`3 ~Ltied:8. isUY
. . _ .
T.t,aBi~ Nw2v.r+/N.5 $t,gGr tuN~. 70v3d ?AGE $
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. ENCOURAGE & FACILITATE REDEVELOPMENT
citizens can be accornplished. For all of the key be developed to insure that development proposals unique feature which ties into the "sustainability
- public projects such as parks, open space, plazas, ox other actions would not conflict with future use theme" and can garner public support for the
- streets, public art or a Pexforming Arts & of open space. revitalization effort. Experience from other cities,
Community Recreation Center, citizens will be including Lake Oswego, has shown that pursuing
encouxaged to participate in the early stages of 1.9 Stimulate New Housing redevelopment projects that have a public space,
design through meetings, open houses, Development park or plaza, as a major part of a project, is a good
presentations to advisory groups or by simply New housing is considered a catalyst project Way to develop public support. Interviews with
reviewing documents posted on the City's web site. because it will stimulate other development in the developers conducted in February 2005 also
In addition to this, public and private projects Downtown such as local xetail, and provide the indicate that developers view park ox plaaa space in
require the usual public hearings as part of the land resident population needed to activate the area and commexcial districts as an added amenity and good
use process where citizens will have anothex create a sense of community. Likewise, new, foz business.
opportunity to react to specific proposals. residential development will be able to take
advantage of unique amenities in the Downtown 1.11 Facilitate Business Relocation on
such as Commuter Rail, pioxiinity to new parks
1.8 Develop Land Use/Design Key Sites
Guidelines for powntown and open space, and in time, key civic places such
One of the challenges to land assembly is working
- as a Performing Arts and Communiry Recxeation
Befoxe the Downtown Improvement Plan can be Center, an Outdoor Amphitheatre ox Farmer's `x'ith existing businesses on key sites to facilitate
implemented, the Ciry must insure that Land Use . their relocarion. Many of the businesses have been
Market
regulations and Design Guidelines are in place to in the Downtown foz a long time, but may have
guide development pxoposals towards the type and The Plan identifies locations for housing, favoring interest in relocating. Othezs may not be interested
quality envisioned in the Plan. While the City has moderate to higher-density, mixed-use in moving. Once opportunity site have been
an existing Land Use ordinance for the Downtown development, with availability for a wide range of identified and redevelopment interest is
in place, it was not developed for the new income levels. One of the first steps will be to established, the City will woxk with business
Downtown Improvement Plan, and will have to be conduct a housing study to identify needs, owners on a range of options compatible with their
revised or replaced to meet the intent of the Plan. affoxdability, and the potential use of funding or long-term needs.
Design Guidelines ace used to review specific site incentives.
and building proposals to insure a level of design ~
quality and will be developed for the Downtown Lon9-Term Actions
Plan. In order to reserve or protect land for public 1.10 Pursue Redevelopment Projects that
space, such as the "Urban Creek Corridor" or Incorporate Public Open Space Q
Fanno Creek Pazk, a land use "overlay" zone could -
Having a City park close to the Downtown•is a
Downtown Streetscape
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 9
II. DEVELOP FANNO CREEK PARK AND THE
OPEN SPACE SYSTEM IN DOWNTOWN -
preserves what is desirable in the area, and promotes a public `green' and
open space character... consistent with the vision for the community and its
Downtown"-Tigard Downtoivn Impmvement Plan
, ~ -
-
Overview: . .
~ •A.
\
Fanno Creek Park as the southern edge of Downtown presents a unique situation foz Tigard. It
provides an opportunity to restore the native habitat and ecology, provide important civic
gathering spaces, and bring the "green theme" into the heart of Downtown. The "Green Heart" `of Downtown and Fanno Creek Public Area are an integral part of the Tigard Downtown ~
Improvement Plan, and the expansion of Fanno Creek Park is essenrial to realizing this goal.
Other key design elements include an expanded open space system, and the "Urban Creek"
Corridor, connecting Fanno Creek Park with the future Regional Commercial District on the north
end of Downtown.
Urban Creek Corridor: Making a sparial connection from Fanno Creek Park to a futuce "Gizen
Corridor" that would run north to South in the Downtown is an essential feature of the open space plan. This would, in effect, bring the park into downtown, creating a unique miY of the urban and
natural environment. The Urban Creek Corridor would have an organizing impact on the Downtown Existing & Future Open Space
Downtown, defining a clear pedestrian link and providing an ameniry that
future development can capitalize upon. Future projects bordering the • ,
-'r. - - ~r ::Vi,..w.', i green corridor would be encouraged to orient acuvities to take advantage of . ~r; • _
the public space value of this amenity. This project serves the dual role of
stimulating development while connecting Downtown areas.
~
- .1 - _
Fanno Creek Park
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 10
II. DEVELOP FANNO CREEK PARK & OPEN SPACE
Near-Term Actions applied to the restoration of Fanno Creek Park and ^~z
~ >
- landscape design and planeing palettes for 44
_ 2.1 Develop a new Master Plan fOr powntown including all of its open space. II
Fanno Creek Park.
A new Master Plan for Fanno Creek Park is the °pO
23 Determine the Feasibility of the
fixst step to assigiung value to the mission of co-
Urban Creek Corridor in Downtown.
developing Fanno Creek Park and Tigaxd's -
Downtown. The Mastex plan would address Determining the design concept, form and
Fanno Creek Park itself from Hall Blvd. to Main "footprint" of the Urban Creek will require a
detailed feasibility study to determine preliininary Urban Creek Corridor drawing
Street, including a public area with connections at design, constructability and cost. Once it is
Main Street and Burnham Street and Ash Avenue,
and the alignment of a potential "Urban Creek determined that an Urban Cxeek is feasible, it will
Corridor". be unportant to pcotect the potential footprint of
this amenity and ensure compatibility with
Downtown Land Use and Design Guidelines. One
. 2.2 Incorporate Sustainable and option would be an "overlay" zone to ensure the
Eeological Design of Fanno Creek Park xeview and coordination of development proposals ,
and Downtown's Open Spaces. that might have the ability to limit or preclude
One of the "Great Ideas" genexated during the options for its location.
formation of the Downtown Plan was establishing
"Green Connections" as a theme. It was thought 2,4 Expand the Fanno Creek Trail West
of as a blending of natuxe with the built of Downtown.
environment with emphasis on wide sidewalks,
The Fanno Creek Txail west of Main Street
linear paxks, plazas, trees, native landscaping, and Fanno Creek---existing conditions
water features. Because Fanno Cxeek Park provides an unportant link to Woodard Park, the
F
contains sensiuve wedands and has a creek running owler School Campus, and surrounding
through it, it does not lend itself to active uses, but neighborhoods. It is a critical link in developing
thrather more passive ones and restoration. e full regional trail network through Tigard, and
Developing this "natural green" theme fuxther ~'~'ould provide a continuous connection tl~ough
incorporates the ideas of "sustainability" and Fanno Creek Paxk to its southern destination,
ecological restoration. These concepts will be Tualatin Community Park.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY 1UNE 2006 PAGE 11
i?EVctC`FP 'AI^fNi1CFEER:P?FKC??F.-iSi':`..rt
Loeaq-T~erfat,ddions ..',t~....<:lo. s..ii<'. L,d ..ntj
S_tc'Ci. i Ci:i •.wII? ✓p.'s r110 ~iiUi~ .•R..Ci L<: 'iCati~- ~l.;l '
DG'w'tlt"}p FtI7kT2flPttblZi'A7'Pa2t7iL2 {rz':r: t7_01, ;ii•.,~- l'i t,ici .a., t'ln'
i:ijnc.
~c~,r:tci<,r rrx :.Er(= :i
Ct'71Tt'c7/ Gt.L;btrItj~,, 13lC2Ct,
t.,
L~i:c ;.i.~si~iziru: ~ <.i ~:~<<!c,.l : :_:iil;:.u~ ;I ~ I. 1ie .,:,...,r.~ t_.tt lt.r<,,; .z,.,{ ,.a.t
a < t
, 1t3~.c,~;LU,lxtf[no i it^.:i,P:ai, a-:i;-•:ih1::tT'liltsi?IR,Ir.:,z i::'.'Z:.;:_t
.,.It
ditt,tt4?? :tn(r1;,-Cp1C:,i ~'i...-.
~ "3'ii<• t",:,,o,:•t~.l , ti~,.~~t~1 1j,- i~•._~..1cre<i L;. i~,:tt~~:,
f'.,<•l: Ir,:rr:. Siani snc' ii:iml;;:t?t 'r~c;t~et, ;:u1 iv, -
~ :tc: _ _;i>fC i.,.Itl PoI}. _'i, p:i... :3ii.1 11e<I. ~
r,sr.,.,t. ..i,-i ,.Errt-~i
~}t. ...ttia_riu~t,
,psCt cc~t~>>;i!
mr7.r.i<- f'rx IEt,. ~i?;asci (`:.i!~iijri': j.1:u'I:vt, a
•r;:i,ki. ,:~3~-.,,~;n.tt~'I-„ c.- c~itic;:.~,u~:c~~:~ .-.:I114' ,
:1{Iii ::ilit9r 4'c:91i'.
~ , . ~ - ; J•~,
2,6 T)eveIz~p art Etpctncled 4")pnrr 5ptrcr
Systerr: tbroaag}f DrFwntr,wn.
~[xr~~u~~i: ix„~+~r.ti:i,'~f .ii~,<...i r, clc.•i~~.~ t;::rr.,:.. ~ . , ~,s
l:~ :([:.l i:.lll .E :tit: ~;1i1~~tr~1 , .iy111•i PUo. i
~
' 4y
rY
r: A.v .
-i~`t« 2~-'a!, ?4 ;E
Ill. _
EVE~~~ COMPREHENSIVE
;
TREET AND CIRCULA'tIO `
I P VE E T~ IPI DOWITOWN
; '..s:.:,..> `.ryro ,
tTt7dI' £'CTff1ptTC'7 C't3tT', tYC('t.',tS2i}k 1F.y :Xll t7Ttitlf's Lff tqsi
.
~
]'g15jT,. . :tCi, fili?;; .iK ilr.[ tllP.'C_~tiV• ~:tifl4- ir24C .i
~f { r OfU a:.
,
:;t: "~s~it~~.,_ .c'.;ft:t iRi?~<.<'i:ii'. S~1it tF:i~ ..zs..C~i't'-
, . : ~
:ic.'Arctl is~. ..t a.: lii~~ltttt~::P, 11'i~+to:.cj".rlit i`..._: lli:irL1~~ tlic .tr:':t
l:;+pnu' ' niA:_ .tPl ot'tte, ih:' tlv: r i Zro
i
11 i:Ol*,rj 71:ic, %i1Ji a ptiv.t:btc wnj;itn.t<. ..ftu tlw w,th.,t :s
~te,lati.:eWL `.`ri~t3 JiTrr'h•, I
C':~t r.,[ f;a~
j.,t
;(s c.r+.;t~; r.s tlc~.c~,..~~ i:[_ c~cc~:~~. *..~~r~~ ~'_.i~y c~ilr-~r~~~~t k~inci;,•t,-,
.Ai^"~nl'.'.?ri.iFD :P'.v:'iiH I.f' 14mi:xoi'd '.-:i{h hpfi-17ti :'tiI"t'1'Yit{:e:., 4].RlF1;." ~
C:e21:. lftcti j"r,lS7~.tS7xi
ise Jc.., :;rd n-g,\' ;r:"Ciic ,Zr(=E'C
411L t,. 3r-s ~,,;mc„i~F:!- r1; ~ ~'rdrsu,.:,E.•itcc . '.r ~cri' u i,c th~"; 'c~_
c'.
}>pA;,k Aq 1"tli, t.;p,:.. rN, ,+,L m.: W ,ili? 4p"woi;:in ,:iR`. ~
13..truli:ss. 4t..ct. a `r*sw. ..rt't", _ i.: .`n ..a'et .nt,: thc
I
i{'nWOtO:`.Il. E{i:: `::ili i',._ dC`y_'ti['u 1U bt,lf'I i.'l"fC Sl;?::Si 0TW11% tiwX W i
~^.t0.A~~~. . I'ci' j'ti~:iti~.t}'l:ai !T :Si~`, ::effGd. `.t:, t~ . :'i":.. ~.eT::iiiat'v.i1 S'1li n•••'° n ~a r..,n.>.,e , y ^ , ,
..:C:. Y=iCv'a19 •St:l {)c Clai;_:tCJ R bi,o 'h. 11 .di~i:.. .i.CY': . ;C., ,e.s.'-
tftr ct?u,c' r..,'& ~Tdw 1ta2Si:rytF ' - - -
} 16 ` Ccaacceptuai Frame
i
i;Gai%J?:r~Wra*^'.YV=_rc,:7=C.Y a;lkE 2G~:?fi r.tGE ~n
II. DEVELOP FANNO CREEK PARK & OPEN SPACE
Long-Term Actions 2.8 Develop a"Rail to Trail" corridor
along Tigard Street into Downtown.
- 2.7 Determine the Design Themes and The railroad righc-of-way on che north side of
Progression of Public Spaces for the Tigard Street from Main Street to Tiedeman will be
Urban Creek Corridor. abandoned in conjunction with the Commuter Rail
Connecting the two anchor "Catalyst" projects in Pxoject, providing a 35 foot ROW for a potential ~
Downtown, Fanno Creek Park and future trail coxridor. The trail coxridoz would provide an °
development at Hall Boulevasd/99W, the "Urban additional pedestrian/bicycle path into Downtown,
Creek" was conceived as an open space with and as a looped connection with the regional
landscaping, water features, and public plazas. It Fanno Creek Trail. West Commercial Street Gateway
has the potential to become a series of diffezent
public spaces with park space, native plant gardens,
public art, or other amenities.
r E i If i ~ f-,~,
Since one of the key themes for downtown is ~ / )
~ ~ f ~ ,
~
"sustainability", the Urban Creek corridox could be j~ r- i~ If I
If /
designed to reflect this message with native / J
-f /
- landscaping and ecological design, and natuxal
methods of conveying and infiltrating storm watex.
The corridor could become a model demonstrating
the ecological process. The Urban Cxeek would be ~ommer'tidl St. ~ i~ ~r'~~~``~
integrated with new and existing development,
providing an alternative "front door" to
redeveloped properties along its length. I
West Commercial Street Gateway
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 13
Ht. Dc4'.Ei.i?RSTREEi': & t":R:,!}lf.TlO=v !PA.P"nC?VCRtEi-i?$~
aht':D€t~ul;ct3,.s%tZ'ti tf";ttZspFiYfsZllt97-.' Sy`31~'tqY.nSt,_t:t<i->k 3itilL:', ~.c.i#=_3 j>c C t:aa -.3..... Pnnt 'r;~ 35 A5525' Xlft'ti?Z S#'.. TYfX32StL"Zoft/I7Z5tG7ll
. ~ . > c 1~,f~±rr[i3i~* sfe~iCx~x, .~'P?}~;yBYtIYy '~~JYL7121~ TL 7X't~:>'
a1'D(J1t4~.~L~~:' 77£i~fti~~'f£€?,`cf. ~'C-'d$1iPf`~'7Xf;e~~ ¢ Y µ c~i y
peY:~FSiS. OfZA ~'k~ ti.~}4Z fZ f .il+lii.•~' 4YTZt~r ~~pLSl - $~~(~'•£ov~'yneFF3~{ ~faYiV { 3~L4L
' r 3.4 zanprove ,Streets zat Ar-eas w-ath Iligb
a ~ RF+-ra rc ~ tc2~4 } r~~:-FC.~ail~ u'an rs ~t b~'itCx
R~ 3 `
ecie.~~~lc~prnerrt 7 cst> x ritsul,
. itc ecitI Ait~ .r.`. t te>vin qi14` [ 6 t tt .~xt°
, l } NiPdL'71 t ..s '
tlie cIvs-,d<spn.cnf ox amac9iv e t cL.s itz:tt ,rrve a EtacUt . pctle.tt-s,?v uncueed. Loam_as•ru,,1 disii.ct
,r,...iT.L tEe.s-}r: iiAi7 cteu=r %vett cur.rxiFuu rc, ctzr dc.:i;:n i, akc~ eit titcw riaai- eiill 3yc-1p
~n .~.~i;.~l trsr _
ittttx>iux '?ct±~ .s i`S~x <n _a.x,3: s!c qn3-t o'r
Ne£tY-~~S?YZ1T AtPf£5~3,5 ,'+t'rc.r{af .~,7 t,r }.l. w~ji:nwi~ an19 .3ie l'z< 'i~,
u-clevel=iEr.i„ar, ~i'iit is .v,I~un an:l coifstructicrrz ed P,LU:^. `trci.t tides-a an etttj>it .t, E,s, +_lzt pede:,-tsiaz.
c ;2h uwt< ccI -ez~at kw, ncet n e~ v, varic i trkk g,
IlE#.'{)rpf7YCLlC'"CyYe£'7i SEYf.*£'t"D'SLg3T d.rwxiCou❑ sttetr: i.'s aiEd:: it'1i'li (5sg{t
,
WetteYC'Pf}ss$blL', xctia;-s-u~C>[nem in;frnCts:; wtflcntoter:igelittc<ts*.iexit ctitiL+ c»it2.af~.e•- to ule C.nnllmur. Hau S~tn.vn
tnrl pwrviIc as5ur:tncc uE tP f tl,-'s fsnanci.i1 arzd I x,azo C:xuck Put T'}ic Wwnruwrr
S..YtG11 1Yt sii5` .2' l},T?J~' c4diilflCL'.£~ :vL Ltli' .
" C,`titll4a, [:.C9T P{s'z7l:JWt1YnWtl, ftIlp11z>t ISi li tifftl FtCtt4T11E:tcCl (il Sct`t{ 1i YC.kYP A
`I3cix1~S 1:tics, z~Ibratnc E-~v an pIc inrtuua;
D.~stlm~ilowhea.. her ut F=
uf z t I7c~~u t~~r rfcti
< ' , , hO<<;a . .
e-fvjg-or..rx` asici ptzmats<sir pL,_Mrtt m t6_c
i'ltixz_ 'Zlie i3z,";ntouori mprolw5*i ,r 3'irxti Cae1s ,
tnc aa.tcgzzt zrr f~iun?at rz t[: }'ar~: ancl np<u 4p:~ce i?c,,=rnrr,vu uanqt,~ tr~ 1`i~~ard.
tiztt> th; iinnvntuw,-?. Btc-e7oping a>>tc=_•n j . . _
Korcts":<an mr.enctun "£swrn £_3insttctiinns" ~ '~trk.
[F t
}'i(l~yC10 L'tSl'LSIt)11t. L(i 41CC1 ~l3CC[iIC 4 RAt ~`p} .(r~.v!q .
t e ~'2 SSt(Ff25 A$e ,~~r.~_ §3«&5§Fx .
tr,t metZi t.3t.eiihcd atdqdt; na a3a[ .,.=.1rrmton ,`°aa.exa.x~
aa~
re
flxxcl clea~f i~. ~ f sri ni w tres run ;~Ff Errm
_,..,J
uli d'w i '.,w'l_I . ~ . .
tulnix-dicm a7vi: ~acr<<t, ,tdt:a'a.io;) t15irmy
a
se ui n-n c p>xnx ax ]s<ds, pt t t.us ptving
r.aair.rials. [~,aics,ancl ~L_iict:v~,< I}eaelisl~ts~i? ! ,"~i,~,,.,,~°` ~ .
.x..*«~ t .~unaliol'73a . su~li u n13t< dtsigrr cksnriz!; fn t€zc ` ~ ry
~ ~
~
ii wnozst*.,ti lriilds uPii 7ii. '~pfn 111re s Eft-tn kfi
x ~
tnti Ik}L
c mix M ru t alaic;, tn ntsui'_ i z<<t c~ ~rrc::t
~ ~
+cs r.a5-it*t(+v e> >>r d r ,muwci. ushtsz -E
fiA,iain STsech w.ot3c°p#De`>Fgc~ . . .
~;r..... .____:T.
TIG#o-'D OGWFi7C4Yix,.frAr..~t. iJ'v_ 2rj?5. PAGc" 16
III. DEVELOP STREET & CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
Near-Term Actions people into Downtown and start to draw them
a
- further into the Downtown and catalyze new
. 3.1 Implement Comprehensive development.
Streetscape Design in Downtown.
Washington County is curxently managing the
Compxehensive Streetscape design has been
redesign and construction of the intexsection at ,
developed for key downtown streets. These
conceptual designs will be used to prepare Hall Blvd. and Highway 99W. The County has
agreed to allow the City to provide design input to
preliminary engineering drawings for Buznham ~
consider more pedesttian oriented treatments, ~
Street Commexcial Street at Main Street and Main
Street' The design process included the Streetscape landscaping, and the inclusion of a"gateway" to Downtown.
Design Working Group, City Staff and a
consultant, and repxesents a coordinated effort to
bring togethex initial ideas from the Downtown
Improvement Plan with professional expertise. Green Street Example-Portland
Key ideas which may be transferred to other streets
in the Downtown include an understanding of
uaewcaUx
street hieraxchy, use and function, pedestrian 1 ~~,~,,B,~,TM_~ ~ G i • _ i _I ~ ~e • -
rnnK
< 1 1 + ~ ~ ~-~ASIIAYGUIC ~ ~ • oriented design, and "green street» design.
= y, a B~=n.~ ~ u o~ Burnham-St. ~ s
3.2 Develop a Gateway to Downtown at - ~~''-E
Hall Blvd.199W Intersection. ; lr
7~
The Downtown Improvement Plan called for a ~J X v
Gateway at this intersection in order to make a
strong "entty statement". Hall Boulevasd provides
; ' = I
a natural gateway into Downtown Tigard, given its
~
intersecrion with Hi hwa 99W. This ke atewa
g y Y g Y
with its prominent visibility from Hwy 99W is N~
proposed to be redeveloped and will include a
cwl
public plaza space. The purpose will be to pull F&IM CRM
_ - - - ~ , • -
. ,.,M
;iBurnham Street Concept Design
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 15
1+ DE?lE:rJF' STrE:cT & 41Rt U`:? 7'f?N W~i,>tiEMEN•',.`,:
~.wt39~~~~t'TI?.~~f{{'3dP5 ,n_~tc;~:. i" I a!,:;..; o~~n~.,.c~, t'if>~.,zi-c. I'.zt:~ 3~i~~~n ri t~,°c:< itl ~::$=:Lii
t?<r,,im3e <ra ua#;ttss zt T.'z3siv nnc( pas3rirg uz ljratit:n
.''s.i Ach}e2:£` C215z2u'sd3Zt5 {D,'T AlZe?"}Jat$?fZ`
3.9 t)btnin a fiuatt-ocici (:rossing n#Ash ~
Dt1wtltflKErlt AL7Ce%s I932prY1'UL''37IE'?2t5. !,rctir? nac~fv~..r5 'rra~,'tvsrcl ii ri~a,s~.
A vf..'9tt${'.
at) 2t-er s tc n n t> ti i.tiv~n aik id hs5 wt>jir, 1 itt i's_~t I xnd & V csncr, 4' isl u.acf Ite t.t ts .
a,wcf, ai°?'t c3~~1lc~<<e~a ~t.c.e.; i.,a: 99tlf on siie .~i.~j .~}P~tJ~.'~i?~ ~.r,~~'tF2?1IX~SC~`t~L~1'
c{c3un2if,x~t Iirns~ zbi , z~it nac ri,,;,n~,s 1~v -
w sr ,idc i]bni°re{In tt tttic.;:nta?r5bacm csn 9')V'Y' ut ~ .~1#~Ct"§C'C.ttil'd5.
i:t4Ei1 ~~g sn 3 2 s(t ~,f tnttr~tL r.-t~~u';~vsnii.
tiirrc-
}>c ih tixx;t~ ir i.. 7 3r=uuntr.rdanon ~,F c1ie
I onrons nt'ztz PIin Chn i}ie (Ov ; tt:s patie_t, limits ntc+.s fo.twta'r, t17e n,.r li ,tnd Csarera + ,ts'ltec ut[on=cw+t t(sa; sc:az, py A#ine
l21]t t„q }~nre, ~,i rh U~-,~t~oI he4tr,~7 ~~,~~s~i~ct, aac': e:,ry kr+_c~) t~~pc f3~+~,sir~7w~;, L3t1 l,e},~ul c cai<.u
t~llf[i 9'I t r31P_14fl:!i3f~ t }}d)(L~:LId~ s~fi!'TS32i1LYS . .
H'ettll'Y8. iSl'CYR #t1 IISL tili2ff~ z Ell i3F~:E1, aiP ;1lPi121 LC~..Ldt;F ~ 1:1; g W,i1S" ,tic 1=:fSf +TT 5ftiB P'~l:tir)Y
toS~nTi~Stt~'~.t,r „c.'s> tu tetn4attr+YVn1.
'*1rc'S a?: vvtl;cr ezsf}s «f the :'la trict. lie icadti; g .3rs,gz,.. .;j,ci xtiz`•S 1>e iixroqsurn4v-u mtn ~„reet
Ytxe t,h ,ccr,uc/Dt>waazuwn _iecsa auidr tivi;I yvea-eeptsc,n sa .t dc,e~s7urn, tlvxt is iunL a..i,; lf: nrbas-; scc<Sn<trt.ct >sa =s rlaat esk4-s pi 3cr s,ver tin;e. `i 3zer4
„dziresr.:lan" x;id Inn,. mTm titunwpurrab.xe anzzn'is ptz2ce :nrt ilvo srpar,xre airzks tu a,a7txeciEd_ 'ic arr scacal gawvati Wats w,- th;,t pvc_,rnt this
rhar ,3,ii1 isnpztate .ttce=s 10 :nsti froin rhr Locnric>wn, I.rysro.~c.zx:.rir IT'eas3 ~c<t,n~ina,.4iy Lt,nt a f7ptr;i=tu>vtyc 2s';iraban+ ti-rrcz n, d-3sr1I 13hci., Norc3:
Sjo»wi:pz?tr. I'hc (Atv as cvali:tttng other stctiv a*-grsac st.,ssin; ui cl'we nstSrnai! £t;x_icS he anc3zitsut(r itf:sn Srse+c.t nt )ff T'igse.<, i_ir-rr at
Oppo*_tuult,vM Tr; Ani1._n.e ac..e>w cn Duzz=a3t:>tia'n JLVU-}a,pe, a<mp thc l.li lt,cniu im+gcss2+.ri,t t.itP <,f Mnis: S,rez°t, C':cn.n.zrz:iai ~r:.et ::t M,.in Stirc^t.
inc2u<ling tv 9hc anz, o{ qy\X 1h;x3 acar.l ytan ;ht}uld co. #tcule ;o
. . ~ _ . .
ct %z tezrbure [Zc3 t vnter `+1 iniE isecrir,n; wo-k strirl Pzatti:uztl r`t iXeatc iz
~ j
e is;tic~'icmuE nt buSC~in' 'mttc t+n t~~t cavt snte uE 1~ 'rrmr.I snat `ite ' 31)t I R nI
i!bk i+~
f !
1},ixil>avrr zx:idetrt` i~s (>ilae ,at-- ofuv'um,; T?usai;n < t' in.rS, frj7r5fvn~ E x
q+fic rCu D+trix,< y r tufrii lti \ost id- uf ulmmiz'if,W _.c ao3g
1
9 rW 9rctai cii tmnl~ fF~ lt~,.~d .ui d t<ns-unE feia1 ~
t z,_,~f3 "rr; tm. 3.10 I)evcfop a Pcrrk irq
~rs
I~f7JZLI~ysF}7SP?Z~'~~laFT. R-a~~~~,~ ,
3.3 Dczelcap cr Pedestrinntl3irycte Ii~irrte t,<, ~
- ~,p c Ef k Fea.txatonr a p axs z u
Iv6t9T cnt ttgi. }Ari) h.
r z
j+ ( if1' 4n.11 rwt c tr d m+ cl 1 t.av.rnt d adconarc Io rs t 7an
I
r ~ z~rt
E;e<inrnmi „ml uv-v4 ylt„aER7 c ttu>ts C) , no,e a=u pukit v,qzfqh ri ..<vhkx,t_,
Lar Wr e.{1crpr vnnlrl< ar+ti 3e „bic zccrss i,y . Tf^;nl i s :sd satir„n_a t*L ' . '
Cofnme.ctaE St:ee±vatewuy St;eet
T,GA.RGGON?.l,t:Vt;ti.TRATEvT.' ."EW5 P{EGc.3E.
III. DEVELOP STREET & CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS
Near-Term Actions 3.6 Refine the Circulation Plan for
These projects are intended to help focus attention Downtown.
0
on Downtown and generate and maintain Vehiculax circulation addresses access to and from ~
i
momentum. the Downtown, movement throughout the central
business distsict, block size, parking, and plans for
Improving the perception of Main Street can be
future capacity needs. Street cixcularion lays the
pardy accomplished by showing small but visible
foundation for vibrant, active streets that
physical improvements along the stxeet. This
accommodate anticipated uses, are friendly and
presents a design challenge to develop a"Brand
Tigard" identity that can be recognized as a theme walkable for pedestrians, and allow traffic to move
appropriately within each district. Movement ' i
unique to the community. Examples of how a
within pedestrian oriented areas should be more
Brand Tigard idenrity could be expressed include:
deliberate and slow, and faster in areas where S. Main St./Hwy 99W-Gateway (CAD)
1) Inclusion of "Green Street" design on Main pedestrian use is less.
Street.
The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan
. 2) More prominent landscaping such as street identifies .a conceptual street pattern fox
trees.
Downtown. This circulation plan needs to be
3) Intersection unprovements that include public refined and reality tested based on future uses and
space ox "gateways." transportation engineering analysis. As part of the <
4) A Commuter Rail "Gateway" at Main Street. Streetscape Design process, an evaluation of
5) A Fanno Creek Park Gateway at the bridge on vehicular capaciry for powntown Streets will be
Main Street. done to identify the paxametexs for Street
6) Public Art. Standards.
7) Building facade impzovements such as Block size in Downtown Tigard is relatively large.
awnings, painting, or exterior modifications. The span between Main Street and Ash Avenue is
over 800 feet without an intersecting street. To
Events such as a Farmer's market, sidewalk sales,
parades can also become part of an evolving Main Provide for adequate vehicular circulation, allow gumham St/Hall Blvd.-Gateway (CAD)
Street and Downtown and represent small changes for parking, and encourage pedestrian use, it will be
. towards cteating the public gathering place that the necessary to evaluate block size and street
standards to meet the guiding principles for
Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan envisions.
Downtown transportation.
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 • PAGE 17
i i~g nLti ;tawnt.>.: n rar«i,-,r. Fien
9GARS.e' 0.d'ffiB N5 i~WNAimTB'6,dN PLAN-37 S;A9X
Pra~~~~t ?~eii~ars ~~c~~ ~ Y r 2 ~d~~+r 3 fukur~ ~
FF Y c-t37 ffY ~~-~8 rY ~$-C7"a
; farr~rraverrresal ~rt` fin€rrr ~'ree~r I~ork ~ tJpen S~auce .~yst~rre j~~ar~~rrz~~e~
, :<i~.,. ',:~.is:`i:znjf'F"t.. "•.°~ui % I
' s=er'..>~✓.-,:':a..;
' :'vb. ~ A:ec::::~,i:•;vG!::e"r: X % X i
,!3ruan Creak ; Gcesn Cerr:dar '
U-';:rl:~,.""r•. ~ ~ I
.l..atDqi'l}::s Viv.7itlYt:'t!S )
•,r,~:o~,.. t
~Asi: ,+ue. Stsae? ' €?pen Sp~t* Dereiy ; x ' .
;ItviE to Trc~i( ~ 4:ti. ta Ti^ceer.tt:s CF,}
~ea~~lca~srzterrt raf ~'asrtrpr~lsensr'€~e Stree~ ~ C'irru~rr~aes~t .~yst~*rrr
Ci:twmaw:; C;~<ulntian PEan
_
~,S;reE!scrxo~ E.thnr,sErrceni ➢rngt=ssr,
I F~::'nhr~ i:.`;:reer.{;,.'-.i Cr;-:i~.,.
x A
~ . . . :!C:i ` 'S:il: !'J ...r , X n
..rvn. _ ~ . .
t. I
-T;r aR~ L'^'+dN7;1.•+:+ST.frtT=C.~"F tUh~ "si:tG ~'rG~ 20
Tigard Downtown Action Plan - 3 Year
~ TIGARD DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN 3 YEAR
~ Projett / Attion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 future
_ FY 06-07 PY 07-08 FY 08-09
faci/itatioe of Redeve%pment Projetts
Downtown Developmenf Opportunity Sites-Program
_ Development Program for Land Assembly / Marketing X _
- - - - - - - -
Refine Land Uses, / Redevelopment Feasibility _ X X X
~
Land Use-Regulations / Design Guidelines
Land Use / Building Types Refinement X
- - - - - - -
Design Guidelines X X
_Land Use Regulations X
FI -
Commuter Rail
i' - -
Commuter Rail Station _ X , X
Commuter Rail Block / loint Deyelopment X _ X_ X
Shelter Upgrade X ~
- - - - - _ _ - - - - -
~ Downtown. Housing Development
Housing Study _ X
_ - - - - - - , . _ -
Housing_Program Estimate = X
, Implementation
- - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - . . . _ ~ X X
Performing_Arts / Recreation Cenfer
- _ _ - - - - , - • -
Performing Arts Use / Feasibility Study X
Land Disposition / Acquisition X X
12
Posf Office Relocation
Initiate discussions with USPS X.. C,
Follow-Up Adions (Relocation Study / Facilitation)_ X X
~
Comprehensive Plan Policy / Modifications X X _
, r.
/mprovement of fanno Creek Park & Open Space System
- - - - , - -
Fanno Creek Park / Public Area . - '
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan X
Funding Program / Parks System Master Plan X - _ ~
• Public Area Use Design _ X
Public Use Area Redevelo ment Feasibilit f-' X -
~ TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 19
fi;:CrfJ JC.ti'ni'v:`in'WGYG Prqy Oi°.--- : ~lvt4f
l1iiMmommummi
1 ~
Avellifatiorr of Downtown Redevelopmer~~ Projects ~ - _ i
6owndtian fl arfunif SiTes.-Pra som Peveio mea? ' i , ~ ' ! i ~ ,
.
Ceeeiou Prcc~rc~:r, {ar Tk:sen:o7Y~Na.ket:n~ Qf
._.rY
1
I Caardi~icte re;occatiort ; ici=ic! cssse~;6i wiih $u=,inesses ' ~ ~ " ~ ~ - `
_
Iden~i!_ ~ eacr;uoie ~lr -sxnaC nroi~~s: r6r redevsfia rt:a, ~ ~ ~ f . i ~
i
~^icnrA:n vi[F.:ed~~.eioort;erit e£;c~+s i ~ i i I ~ '
~ toordina4e C.._7i*' #vciiitX
~.......__.._..H._._..'~__"'__._._'___~___._.___'___~__._...._.___.,..
Ra{~nzrc:=ns c( tt~nd 'JSes ~n C~owmcwi: i i r : ~ i I i i
"_"_"'.____-_____.__~..~_..___..I_.__.___.. ~p __-L."__~__._ ................._}-'-~--r_.........~..
I
LansS tSse--Regulafiions j besign tSuidaiRnex_.._._.._ _ ~ ~ _ . _ - _
~ J
~•..~~d Use Re~inertven?
~
.
?eerv:;yGsro(, t Jb3ari'r.as
i Evaiua:e iu•,d use rzR!:en;ent oPt;ons
----..._-----__----------_____-----____.._.__...---------1
CM1'?,V£1t2 0EV@IO'lllvpV'v !'3i~3s ee
_
~ _.f.,__~.
Goo!'dinate ~eri~o~ oi c3eveio :ner[Y "pro:o, pes I i ; ` :
i ~
Des~ ~ Gu;deitnt~
}[iEmi,1dC1mo,, fC•EYC{up:~0it
e"
E,c;{uale a~:!ioz~: icr Desiqr~. ~~u:de4tne
~'.:o~rct~nc2te r~rie~a nf MIQ,;i?i~ C~~i~tSelt:~as i I ~ ~ a ; ; E I
- -t-- ~
le;:d u,e (+z;~uictians '
icnat~~n:=,tfo:ero{,u+iar .
______.._.._..._.~._..~._.___.~_.._._.__m__y._..._.__...1._.___._' -_'._._....i.
rc ___.._E.._..__._.._._...__;
~
„ ~ ~
~ E.olur.!z apt ;nT(or ~u~:d vse . Z,x~:;::~ eW,~.:a-'_.
`oc:cf;r~or~ rav~e~~ ard ~mendn:e.,t af ia'IC Use pet:ic:'^°ns..
_ _ _
%Carr!mwerRni#B;otk
i____'_______._..__,~.--.._..~_....
> ?rn7r:t'.`.enrsr.i'pc}e>iqn?A?3'v:c^tAp;::~c.-ft:~r :f;:t' ` ~ .
-
1 ~..-a„+
: "r.t(t,~,.._..6re`.P'?@£iCl;i-~N5''i#'Fi:;{;.~t;
. . . ' .
. ~
,U?'tiF GCi~b PA<s€ 2
22
Tigard Downtown Action Plan - 3 Year
. TIGARD DOWNTOWN ACTION PLAN - 3 YEAR
- Projett / Attion Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 future
Deve%pment of Comprehensive Street & C'ircv/ation System (conrinued)
Streetscape Enhancement Program _
Main Street ~ - -
Main Street Safety Improvements X ,
Main Street "Brand Tigard" Improvemenis X ~ X X X
Storefront Fagade Improvement Program X X X
Comprehensive Streetscape Improvemenis X
Ash Avenue Improvements .
, Ash Ave. (Burnham St. to Rail
Enaineerina / ROW. X
Construction ;J X ;
Ash Ave. North Peasibility Study X
Ash Avenue (Fanno Creek to Burnham St.) . X
RR At-Grade Crossing _
Initiate Vehicular Crossing Negotiations X
Pedestrian Crossing X
- Vehicle Crossing - - X
Open Space Design X
Burnham St. to Fanno Overlook X
. Ped / Bicycle Bridge X
Terminus to RR Tracts X
Hall Bivd. / 99W Downtown Gateway
Gateway Conceptual Design
Intersection Design Input / Washington County X
ROW Acquisition X
Intersection Construction X
Final Design (Gateway) , X ,
Gateway Construction X _
Downtown Alternative Access Study
Downtown Alternative Access Study X
Greenburg Rd/99W/Main St. / Center St. Intersection X X .
Scoffins / Hall Blvd. / Hunziker Realignment X X
Traffic Anolysis--'reenburg Rd. / Tiedeman / N. Dakota X
Pedestrian / Bike Plans
Update Plan X
Parking Management Plan
Monitor Parking in Downtown X X _ X _ X
Determine Catalyst Project Impad X
Pre are Porkin Stud Plan - X
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY " ' JUNE 2006 ' PAGE 21
7i~GU<? u=o,+r:za~.:~'..r~>r`r Prec~rnm - t "f~cr
1 s #
z
1/inprovemerrt ~f frrnno C~~~k Park ~~eii .Spo~e Syst~~ ~evotilnvedi ;
i Coafdiea'.` wim 7r:Met CW"s re~ rr.?7grrtlon site,la F<;:,no Cr?ek Pcak____.-__....
.
P~hi;c,t~eal:r;rtro~<rr+e:n:: a~'r±e:<i*:e~i
. . _ _ . . _ . . .t._..___.}-...._.~}_.._..._J _ . . _r .-~--_Y ~.G._
f--....
~
. ~
.
..7.
_.__..r........_....._..._.._'
. . . . . ` ...4.. .i... x . i
T..._ _..y.....~ ;
I, ?rBµaYe Timelnb'E Pa, etaue'_
. . . _
-P- ' , , t l t
Develor~rent o~` L°ortr r~e/~ensia~e ~`tt~~~t rc~rlatro~ ~te~m
~ ~ -~'a-- ~
i
[Refine Cir<n9a#San Plan Far t7awnfuwn
' _
ve~er'n+ir.~ , E n4,;c~fe ~_~rc~~k.~iiar: Piat• ~p!ion= ~ ~
'
~
' Co<xdinnte Peuie~, . SzlP, :.itaiititi-n £':nrv r5a+?an
~
j5ttee3sca eFnliance:nesrfFragnsm
i
i S-aruhain y'sreei {F;n;ei Df>iyo : RvWJ ~
~ '
'tnq{ tlE51C~~5 i Rh" l.W
-4-
; ?:arntrwc!ion
~ C:on;~ _ _
f lEl'C'Gt ~Jt'E2? !+ViGifri:T {.(:1COi(:1
~ ?'uin'.dE;i o,. K.'"jN
' _.._.~___...__...._~....._m__....._ _.._._..._._._.._..___.._..___~....___-+._-~__.__.a.._~_---F-.._.~._ _._~._'_._.._p ~
tri. ~
7 Cia Clrlael
~
.
~ u._ecrct,~t?igcrc~' ;;arc<smeri._._.-_"__"'_'_"'~_'
i '.kS•;.Z~.:,irc3°._.._._.._.
I......__..___ i : ; F ~ ~ ~ .
iAsh Axenae impravemenfs
_ _..7_.... _
~ t,stiaaa_i3vr.,hc,rSr.+oRasi;
i
y
_
-
._.__""__'___.._.__'_~...__._-....-__"'_"_"_i--_...__Y_.'_w._.._ _
° w .
~ ` .
ni:a~?a_,,:.r~~ t_R~~.f__ ;
~
`
T:G,zkP Rt}•+V^iiU"dvN 5iRA;EC'„-i tUNE .'.:}C~ ~c se la
Tigard Downtown Work Program - 1 Year
TIGARD D• • • ' P' • • ' '
I • I
_ ' oject / Task
July A • -p • o I- Mar A•
/mprovement of fanno Creek Park/Open Space System
Fanno Creek Park Public Area
Fanno Creek Park Master Plan
Pre are RFP Sco e of Services
Issue RFP select consultant
Ne otiate execute contract
Mana e consultant contract
Coordinate Public Involvement
Public Area Use Feasibilit Stud
Public O en House 2
Identif future fundin ro ram
Incor orote into Parks S stem Master Plan
Fanno Creek Trail S stem
Determine feasibilit of Trail Extension Main St. to Grant St.
Rail to Trail Hall fo Tiedeman St. '
Pre are overall feasibilit stud Execvte 'oint a reement with ro ert owner
Land Ac uisition
Land Ac uisition flood lain ro erties
Land Ac uisition Public Area
Coordinate with affected property owners
Establish time frame for relocation ro ertconve ance
Urban Creek Green Conidor
Identif o tions for im lementation
Pre are feasibilit stud
Select O tions Coordinate review
Evaluate for inclusion into Parks Master Plan
TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 PAGE 23
Tigard Downtown Work Program 1 Year
TIGARD D• • P' • ' • • •
f.l
' o • ask July Aug -p • • I- Mar 'p
Deve%pment of Comprehensive Street/ Circu/ation System (contieued)
Ash Ave. Feasibility Study (N. of Fanno Creek)
RR At-Grade Crossing (vehicular and pedestrian)
Initiate discussion with RR as to criteria / requirements
Establish timeframes and agreement with RR
Ash Avenue Improvements (continued)
Coordinate Ash Ave. Open Space Design
Burnham St. to Overlook
Ped / Bicycle Bridge
Terminus to RR Tracts
Hall Blvd. / 99W Downtown Gateway
Gateway Conceptual Design
Intersection Design Input / Washington County
Coordinate Review of Preliminary Design
ROW Acquisition
Main Street Improvements
Install Safety Improvements
Green Street MTIP Application due
Green Street MTIP 1 st Cut
Green Street MTIP Final Cut
Pedestrian / Bike Plans
Update Plan (TSP)
. Parking Management Plan
Monitor Pcirking in Downtown ' TIGARD DOWNTOWN STRATEGY JUNE 2006 ' ' PAGE 25
" What is the Downtown
Implementation Strategy?
Tigard Downtown
Implementation Strategy • Policies To Translate the
"Vision° into "Reality'. ~
a \
■ Incorporates Policy
Objectives of TDIP
~
■ Prioritizes Near-tertn
June 2006 Long-Term Actions ~
■ 3-Year Action Plan
•
....:c;`r.F._.i~ \
■ 1-Year Work Program M ' • ~ ~
~ •
How was It Developed? How Is It Intended To Be Used?
.
■ Researching TDIP and ■ Guide Priorities and Actions
Urban Renewal Plan.
t■ Discussions witn ■ 3-Year Action Plan and 1-Year Work Program
CCAC, former
Downtown Taskforce -'""a`■ Tied to CIP
`Members, and Staff
k:
N~.
■ Revised Annually To Reflect Progress and
Timeframe Adjustments
~ Encourage / Facilitate Redevelopment Encourage / Facilitate Redevelopment
■ Manage "CatalysY" Projects ■ Identify Opportunities
` ~««^W f for Redevelopment
Develop Land Use / Design Guidelines
■ Develop a Program
s ■ Encourage Public Involvement for Marketing / Land
Assembly
~na N ~ ~y r~ ~M, ,
■ Facilitate Business
~ ~ Relocation
_
■ Maintain Dialogue
1
V
Develop Fanno Creek Park & Open Develop Comprehensive Street /
Space System ~ Circulation Improvements
■ Develop New Master ~
Plan n Strelets ape Design
■ Determine Feasibility
of Urban Creek ■ Develop Gateway at
Corridor Hall Blvd. / 99W
~
■ Refne Circulation
■ Develop Fanno Publi ~ Plan
Area `
. .
■ Achieve Consensus
for Altemative Access
I 6..:..:".'.._...__.._._o±:wr±_w"_•_-.___. ~
.
1-Year Work Program / Work Group l-Year Work Program / Work Group
~ ■ Refine Land Uses /Bldg July to Sept ■ Urban Creek Feasibility Jan to May
57
Types CCAC CCAC
■ Develop Program pct to March
■ Develop Land Use / Se t to June for Marketing / Land
Design Guideline planning Commission Assembly CCAC
■ Fanno Master Plan Sept to June
~
CCAC / Outreach
■ Refine Circulation Plan December to April
CCAC
2
Agenda Item # ~
Meeting Date 6-20-06
COUNQL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
City Of Tigard, Oregon
Issue/Agenda T"itle M'ITP ffietro-12olitan Transportation I=rovement Program) Project Proposals
Prepared By: Duane Roberts Dept Head Okay" (atyMgr Okay
ISSLJE BEFORE THE COUNQL AND KEY FACTS
A presentation on the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (MTIP) and eligible Downtown project
proposals.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
This is an inforniational item, No action is required. A resolution authorizing the submittal of grant applications is
scheduled for action on 6-27-06.
KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY
The Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (1VITTP) identifies how federal transportation money is to be
spent in the Portland metropolitan region. The Surf ace Transportation and Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality
Prograrns are federal programs that annuallyprovide Metro about $30 million dollus in flexible funds to finance a wide
variety of transportation-related projects and prograins. Metro distributes this money to local jurisdictions, public
agencies, and special districts based on applications submitted by project sponsors. Metro currendy is accepting
applications for the 2008-11 MTTP funding cycle. Applications are due June 30, 2006. Public hearings on the proposals
will be conducted October-December 2006.
Competitive categories for MTTP funds include: Transit-Oriented Development, Green Street Demonstration, Road
and Bridge Construction, Pedestrian Improvements and eight others. As in previous cycles, Metro established current-
cycle funding ceilings for each County, Portland, and the Port of Portland. In the case of the counties, the funding
ceilings are based on population and 200% of the funds anticipated to be available during the funding period.
Washington County has established MTTP dollar limits for each member jurisdiction and for the Tualatin Hlls Parks
and Recreation District. Tigard's target allocation is $2.7 million. Under fust-time Metro- established guidelines, Tigard
is allowed to submit no more than two project proposals. The same Cou.ntyimposed $2.7 ceiling on requested grant
dollars would apply whether the City submits one or two requests.
Staff recommends the City submit two Downtown-related projects for MMP funding. The two take into account the
Council goal of "Implementing the Downtown Plan" and the overall competitiveness of the projects based on the grant
program selection criteria and the advice of program management staff provided in a City/Metro pre-application
meeting.
Redesi,gn of the Transit Center Site. One of the proposed projects is a master plan for a joint redevelopment project
with TriMet for the existing Bus Transit Center site. The overall goal would be to upgrade and modernize the existing
facility to improve its efficiency and compatibility with a revitalized Town Center area. It would be redesigned to be
more functional for TriMet Bus use, include plaza and other pedestrian improvements, and if space is available, a
development project. Staff has met with TriMet management staff, who expressed support for the project.
Design/Constxuction of Main Street I=rovements. Tlus project would provide engineering drawings and
construction funds to retrofit a portion of Main Street in Downtown to full "Green Street" standards. This project
meets the preferred funding categories as identified by Metro. The project would incorporate recendy developed
Streetscape design standards for Main Street with Green Street Standards to meet funding objectives.
When completed, copies of the two applications will be forwarded to the Finance Department for financial review.
Staff are scheduled to return to Council on June 27' with a resolution authorizing the CityManager to submit the grant
applications.
OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
• Not to submit one or both project proposaLs.
• Identify and submit other projects.
COUNCIL GOALS AND TIGARD BEYOND TOMORROW VISION STATEMENT
The two projects are consistent with 2006 Council goal of Implementing the Downtown Plan and with the Community
Character and Qualityof Life Visioning goals of upgrading the Central Business District (Nos.1 and 2).
ATTACHMENT LIST
N/A
FISCAL NOTES
The anticipated grant amounts requested for the Station and Green Streets projects are $300,000 and $2.4 million,
respectively. The required local match amounts would be $30,000 and $240,000 each. The Metro application
process calls for grants to be awarded for fiscal years 2010 and 2011. No local matching dollars have been allocated
as yet.
i/lrpln/council materials/06/6-13-06 MTIP proposals