07/09/2008 - Packet OwCity of Tigard
l City Center Advisory Commission — Agenda
MEETNG DATE: Wednesday,July 9, 2008, 7:30-9:00 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Red Rock Creek Conference Room, Tigard City Hall
13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
NOTE: The City Center A dvsory C"rvrassion will be touring the new Commmity Partners for AlordaYe Hcwuing
faality in Hillsdale(the [WatenW)at 6.30 p.m %zein return to City Hall for their business meting at 7.30 p.m
1. Welcome and Introductions ......................................................................................................7:30 - 7:35
2. Review/ Approve Minutes .......................................................................................................7:35 - 7:40
3. Burnham Street Joint Meeting Debriefing .............................................................................7:40 - 8:00
(Discussion)
4. Land Use &Design Guidelines - Open House.....................................................................8:00 - 8:20
(Sean Farrelly)
5. Organizational Leadership &Capacity in Downtown.......................................................... - 8:40
(Subcommittee / Discussion)
6. Commuter Rail Shelter- Windscreens / Betterments..........................................................8:40 - 8:50
(Phil Nachbar/ Carolyn Barkle�
7. Other Business Items..................................................................................................................8:50 - 8:55
CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA-July 9th, 2008
City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 1
City Center Advisory Commission
Meeting Minutes
TIGARD
Date of Meeting: July 9, 2008
Location: City Hall — Red Rock Creek Conference Room
Called to order by: Vice Chair Lily Lilly
Time Started: 7:45 p.m.
Time Ended: 9:35 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barkley; Kevin Kutcher; Vice Chair Lily Lilly; Peter
Louw; Thomas Murphy; Elise Shearer; Martha Wong; Alexander Craghead
(alternate); Linli Pao (alternate)
Commissioners Absent: Chair Alice Ellis Gaut, Ralph Hughes
Others Present: Lisa Olson, Mike Marr, Marland Henderson
Staff Present: Phil Nachbar, Downtown Redevelopment Manager; Sean Farrelly, Associate
Planner;Jerree Lewis, Executive Assistant
NOTE: The City Center Advisory Commissioners toured The Watershed, a new
Community Partners for Affordable Housing facility in Hillsdale, from 6:30 p.m. to 7:00
p.m. They returned to City Hall for the business meeting.
AGENDA ITEM #1: Welcome and Introductions
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Introductions were made.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #2: Review/Approve Minutes
Important Discussion and/or Comments: None
CCAC Fleeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 1 of 8
1
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by
Commissioner Shearer, to approve the June 11, 2008 minutes as submitted. The motion
passed unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM #3: Burnham Street Joint Meeting Debriefing
Important Discussion and/or Comments: The Commissioners held a discussion on
their June 17`h joint meeting with Council on the Burnham Street project. It is thought that
there was a disconnect between the City and the property owners during the process for the
reconstruction of Burnham Street. By the end of the joint meeting, Council said they want
to work with property owners and are willing to go door to door to meet with them. Vice
Chair Lilly wondered where that leaves the CCAC and what is being asked of the
Commissioners. Are they being asked for a recommendation or to come up with ideas?
Phil Nachbar reported that Council wanted to discuss their concerns with the CCAC about
right-of-way acquisition and how it was impacting the project. After listening to suggestions
made by the CCAC, Council came up with some tentative solutions for improving
communication and keeping the project moving forward. The Mayor and the City Manager
will be making an attempt to contact property owners. Nachbar noted that the project had
been well publicized and there was a lot of communication about the design of Burnham
Street. Meetings took place and design changes were made as a result of those meetings,
e.g., the roundabout. Many people on Burnham knew about the project and were well
informed. He thinks that owners may have thought that the process was too formal. Some
people may have felt that they weren't aware of their rights or weren't informed as to what
the value of their property should be. If the City had been more proactive or if there had
been more small group meetings, perhaps owners would have been more receptive. The
City is now attempting to have more personal interaction.
Vice Chair Lilly understood that Council might want to bring a CCAC Commissioner along
for the discussions with property owners. Nachbar advised that the fine details are still
being worked out. There may be an opportunity for the CCAC to be involved, but nothing
has been finalized as yet.
Commissioner Louw said he has heard that property owners feel the Burnham Street design
is being shoved down their throats and that the City has said that the design cannot change.
He thinks of all the things that could be changed, design would be the cheapest. Phil
Nachbar provided history on the design of Burnham Street. This was part of a 10 month
streetscape project in which there were several meetings where property owners were
invited. The specifics for how much property would be involved for the project were not
known at that time. Although owners did not know how it would exactly affect them, the
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 2 of 8
general design for the street went through a long process of public involvement, redesign,
and inclusion of property owners.
Between the initial streetscape design process and the final engineering plans, Nachbar said
that several public meetings were held to discuss the preliminary engineering drawings.
Commissioner Barkley noted that the people along Burnham were very vocal about their
objections to the plan at that time in 2 different open houses. They were told they would
have to live with the plan. They left the meetings angry and haven't felt a part of it since.
Nachbar advised that this design was developed during the streetscape design phase. It
called for certain design elements, including medians and wide sidewalks. Now that the
project is ready for construction, the City Engineer is trying to follow what was approved in
the streetscape design.
It was noted that some of the details probably weren't fully discussed or understood during
the streetscape design phase, e.g., the 18' sidewalks. People were more concerned about the
islands down the street and access to their businesses. The issue is that things aren't being
communicated. Nachbar acknowledged that engineering couldn't tell property owners
exactly how they would be impacted until the final drawings were completed. That's part of
the challenge — how can you tell people how much property will be taken if you don't really
know.
Commissioner Barkley noted that people weren't aware they needed to go to the policy
makers to ask for changes in the streetscape plan. Since the joint meeting with Council, two
Councilors have told her that the islands are history. In addition, Council wasn't aware that,
under the plan, one of the businesses on Burnham wouldn't be able to use their loading
dock. This is an issue.
It was asked if the CCAC could recommend changes to the plan. Staff said that it makes
sense to go slowly before the Commission comes up with recommendations. It's believed
that the business owners perceive that the City does not care about the economic viability of
their businesses. Has this changed? Staff said that the City recognizes that under
redevelopment, some businesses will be impacted. The City wants to ensure the viability of
businesses, but apparently some business owners don't believe that.
It was noted that we need to work on restoring trust and connection to the property owners.
How can the CCAC help with this? This could become a prototype for future development
—what happens on Burnham Street could happen elsewhere. How we deal with conflict and
transition will be key for making project work.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 3 of 8
If Council would like,Vice Chair Lilly volunteered to also attend the property owner
meetings along with the Mayor. Staff believes there will be communication through the
Mayor, City Council, and the City Manager as to how it's progressing. If it's not progressing
the way the CCAC would like, then the Commissioners may want to come up with some
recommendations.
When asked if the City is willing to make changes to the street design, staff said that it's up
to the Mayor and Council to come up with specific actions. Staff advised that
Commissioners can have contact with business owners, but not as a representative of the
CCAC. Staff was told that this is difficult to do.
Nachbar remarked that it's not unreasonable for a property owner to want to have an
attorney represent them to get a better handle on the value of their property. He suggested
hiring an independent review appraiser. If someone has a concern, they could choose an
independent appraiser to review the value. This hasn't been decided yet.
Council has not asked for anything else from the CCAC other than their recommendation at
the joint meeting. Commissioner Murphy suggested asking Council if there's something
they want from the CCAC. Is there any way the CCAC can help? He said that
communication problems can arise from a lack of information flow or from diffuse and
contradictory information flows. If Council and the Mayor are going to be proactive with
this, he does not want to act contrary or inconsistent with that. We don't want to send
mixed messages. We should have some direction in how the CCAC can support Council.
Commissioner Murphy reported that his firm is one of the Burnham Street clients of
attorney Jill Gelineau. He doesn't think this is a conflict of interest yet, but it may become
so. He's not too concerned about a conflict of interest as long as the CCAC is not a
decision making body, but it he (amended atAugust 13, 2008 CCAC meeting) wanted the CCAC
to know.
The Commissioners discussed the wording for a letter of inquiry to Council to see if there is
anything they would like the CCAC to do to support their efforts on the Burnham Street
project.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): On behalf of the CCAC,Vice Chair Lilly will send a
letter of inquiry to the Mayor and Council asking if there is something in particular they
would like the CCAC to do in follow up of the joint meeting on June 17`s, and if there is
something they would like the CCAC to do to support their efforts.
AGENDA ITEM #4: Land Use & Design Guidelines — Open House
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 4 of 8
Important Discussion and/or Comment: Associate Planner Sean Farrelly provided an
update on the land use and design guidelines for the Downtown and the upcoming open
house on July 30`h. His report is attached as Exhibit A. He advised that the draft design
standards will be presented at the open house. The draft is still in a changeable form, but
there are some major points that the subcommittee is in agreement with. The draft could
change after the open house because of feedback.
Form based code (FBC) concepts focus mainly on the way that buildings look — how the
public space is framed by buildings, by open space, and parking lots to create a pedestrian
environment. It treats it more as an individual building rather than a series of numbers and
measurements. For that reason, our design regulations are focused on how buildings look.
This is an attempt to simplify regulations and have a code that's based more on what is
desirable in terms of form. It's more graphically oriented — developers can see how their
buildings should look in terms of form.
The subcommittee has identified certain building types they would like to see in the
Downtown — store front mixed use buildings (e.g., ground floor retail, big windows,
residential or office above). The comer of Hall & 99W will have corridor mixed use
buildings and corridor retail buildings,which will be more auto oriented. The other 2
building types will be residential multi-family (apartments or condominiums) and single
family attached buildings (row houses). Each of these buildings will have a certain form they
should replicate; certain architectural features will have to be present. For example, awnings
or some kind of weather protection over doors or different types of fascia for lower, mid,
and top levels on commercial buildings.
There will be 3 options for getting projects reviewed: over-the-counter process for minor
projects; Type II process when the project conforms to FBC (has clear and objective
standards); and Type III process for projects that are not able to meet the letter of the clear
and objective standards (would be reviewed by a Design Review Board).
We want to balance the desire for high quality new development and also acknowledge that
there are existing businesses and structures that may be there for long time. The design
guidelines will not push them out. There is a requirement that if existing buildings expand
out of their current footprint, they would have to move toward meeting the guidelines.
Another part of the amendment would be to change the commercial zoning district.
Currently, most of the Downtown is zoned Central Business District (CBD); the area across
99W is zoned Commercial Professional,Commercial General, and some residential R-4.5.
The proposal is for one zoning district for the entire urban renewal district called Mixed Use
Central Business District. Existing uses that are not compatible with the Downtown Plan
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 5 of 8
will be allowed to continue, but new businesses that are not compatible would not be
allowed.
The CCAC is encouraged to attend the open house on July 30`h and see what is being
proposed. Staff briefed the Commissioners on the development code schedule (Exhibit B).
After the subcommittee endorses any changes, the amendment will come to the CCAC for
review. The CCAC can choose to endorse it or request modifications. The formal
recommendation will come from the Planning Commission.
Regarding the citizen involvement process, visitor Lisa Olson questioned what we can learn
from the Burnham Street experience and apply it to this so that we can better communicate
and have a better relationship with the people. Staff advised that property owners will be
notified and invited to the open house. Perhaps there could be a way to follow up with the
property owners.
Visitor Mike Marr thinks there may be some property owners who will be concerned about
how a new development next to them could impact their own properties. He thinks we
should be sensitive about this and make sure they understand that the code protects them
from negative impact of other development adjacent to them.
Staff thinks we could be a little more proactive and anticipate some of the concerns of
property owners about the guidelines. Property owners want to know if something is going
to impact them. Perhaps we could make personal contact with those property owners who
will be affected. The creation of new non-conforming uses has been minimized, so staff
believes the list could be pretty small.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Staff will directly contact those property owners who
will be most affected by the land use changes in Downtown, either in a group meeting or
one-on-one. It will be informal and personal so they can ask questions.
AGENDA ITEM #5: Organizational Leadership & Capacity in Downtown
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Commissioner Craghead reported that most
of the material for leadership is written (Exhibits C, D, E). He briefed the Commissioners
on his research during the past month. He pulled information from the Downtown survey
completed in 2004 and compiled the comments from business and property owners (Exhibit
C). He reviewed business licenses issued in the Downtown and summarized what they are —
retail or non-retail; owned by someone in Tigard or outside the City; and other various facts.
He noted that there is no retail at all on Burnham Street. Exhibit C also contains existing
conditions and developer interviews from the Leland Report.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 6 of 8
Exhibit D is an overview of the dialogue with Leland over the last couple of months.
Craghead advised that staff sent an email to the Commissioners which includes additional
information (Exhibit E).
Exhibit F contains information about comparable cities. There is one category (similar
downtowns) that the subcommittee has not completed yet. The draft does have information
on cities with similar populations, budget sizes, and overall physical size. It also includes
what those are cities are doing—do they have an association; do they have urban renewal;if
they have an association, how is it funded; is there any relation to the urban renewal district
and how the district is managed and those associations. Craghead advised that our twin is
apparently Springfield. They have a young district and a downtown that's never been
defined, but it seems to be a single street about 6-8 blocks long. The district includes a lot of
areas in addition to that street (light industry, industry, and strip malls). He said the
subcommittee will have more information next time.
Commissioner Craghead reviewed Exhibit G with the Commissioners. It's an aggregate of
all the business licenses issued last year. Some are duplicates (buildings that had 1 tenant
who went out of business, then another license was issued the same year). The hair salons
have a license for every person who has a chair there. The red and yellow dots are retail
uses; green and blue are non-retail uses which could be anything from Office Professional to
an apartment manager or other uses. The yellow and blue dots represent out-of-area
owners; red and green dots are owners who are registered in Tigard.
Craghead advised that there are 3 geographical areas that appear from this data— Burnham
Street, Main Street, and the Hall/99W cluster. Burnham Street shows no retail. Main Street
shows more non-retail than retail; there are more offices than retail right now. The
Hall/99W cluster has about a 50/50 split between retail and non-retail. There are not a lot
of large employers — Luke Dorff has approximately 70 employees (although they might not
actually work on-site); Russ Chevrolet has about 70 employees; and Magno-Humphries has
about 90 employees. Only 23 out of 308 businesses have more than 10 employees.
By looking at the map, staff believes that currently there's a stronger market for office space
than there is for retail in the Downtown. Commissioner Craghead said that the
subcommittee will hopefully have the remainder of the information next time which will
include what the other models are and how the Main Street model works. There will also be
information on what some cities are doing that have only urban renewal districts and no
associations. All of this information will hopefully provide context to the CCAC for being
able to define what this will look like — if we have an association, what will it look like, what
is its role, what are its goals and criteria.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 7 of 8
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The Commissioners will read the information
provided and think about any questions they may have.
AGENDA ITEM #6: Commuter Rail Shelter—Windscreens / Betterments
Important Discussion and/or Comments: None
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): This agenda item was tabled until the next meeting.
AGENDA ITEM #7: Other Business Items
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Phil Nachbar showed the Commissioners
some new books that the City recently purchased for the CCAC to read. He also distributed
a new Urban Renewal Plan Project Cost Update (Exhibit H).
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The secretary will send a reminder about the tour of
the Elite Care Fanno Creek facility on July 23`x.
Jerome ewis, CCAC Secretary
ATTEST: 11 /_
Vice Chk Lily L'
CCAC Meeting Minutes for July 9,2008 Page 8 of 8
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Center Advisory Commission
FROM: Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner
RE: Update on Draft Design Standards and Proposed Land Use Changes for
Downtown Urban Renewal District and Open House
DATE: June 30, 2008
Draft Development Code Amendments
The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan recommends implementation of design
standards and other development code revisions to carry out its vision and guiding
principles. In April 2007, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to implement the
TDIP in the Downtown Urban Renewal District. It included Policies and Action
Measures that call for the development of design guidelines and standards that
encourage attractive and inviting downtown commercial and residential architecture
and the adoption of land use regulations with uses suitable for an urban village.
A subcommittee made up of members of the CCAC and Planning Commission has
been working with staff since September 2007 on a draft of design standards and land
use changes for Downtown Tigard.
The draft code currently has several sections that need further refinement, but there is
consensus on the major features. The draft Development Code Amendments will
consist of two parts.
1. A new code section would consist of Downtown site and building design standards.
These standards would:
• Use form based code concepts, such as regulating the design of building based
on their type of use, and relying on graphics to illustrate requirements. A map
will specify the location of different building types (Storefront Mixed Use
Buildings, Corridor Mixed Use Buildings, Corridor Retail Buildings,Office
1
Employment Buildings,Multi-Family Residential Buildings, and Single-Family
Attached Buildings.)
• The proposed regulations offer three development review options.
a. An "over the counter" option is provided that allows "minor" exterior
remodeling to occur based on staff review and issuance of a building
permit.
b. Type II Process: Under the Type II process an applicant can propose a
building and site design based on clear and objective criteria which can be
reviewed and approved by staff.
c. Type III Process: This process accommodates the applicant that desires to
develop a project that does not fit the specific clear and objective design
criteria. It provides the opportunity for a development proposal to be
reviewed by a Design Review Board to determine if it meets broad design
guidelines.
• Balance the need to foster the viability of existing nonconforming development
and nonconforming businesses with the public policy goal of an attractive,
pedestrian oriented, downtown. Existing businesses and structures will
continue and transition will occur with redevelopment. Major remodeling of
existing buildings and development of new buildings would require design
review to be in conformance with the standards.
2. Amendments to the Commercial Zoning District chapter would:
• Create a new zone- Mixed Use-Central Business District (MU-CBD)
encompassing all properties in the Urban Renewal District. The privately
owned parcels in the Urban Renewal District are currently zoned Central
Business District (CBD), General Commercial (C-G), and Commercial
Professional (C-P) and R-4.5. New development will have to be coordinated
with the building type map in the design standards chapter.
• Many of the existing land uses that are not compatible with the vision of the
TDIP, will be zoned "Restricted" rather than "Not Permitted." These uses
existing on the date the code is adopted will be allowed to continue and not be
considered "non-conforming", but new uses of this type would not be
permitted.
Public Review and Adoption Process
An open house has been scheduled for July 30, 2008, with all downtown property and
business owners and interested parties invited. The open house format will be to have
"stations" based on four topics to allow for discussion. After this, there will be a power
point review of the major changes followed by an opportunity for questions and answers.
Copies of the draft will be available online for review two weeks prior to the open house
at http://www.tigard-or.gov/downtown/default.asp . There will be the ability to give
feedback on the draft online.
2
There are number of additional steps to take prior to the adoption of the proposed
changes (see attached timeline):
a. Review of the language by consultants (funded by a DLCD grant) and the
creation of graphics to illustrate the regulations.
b. Reconvening the subcommittee and presentation to City Center Advisory
Commission.
c. Planning Commission public workshops and hearings, and workshops and
hearings by the Council.
3
Downtown Design District BuildingType Areas
I T 1
' _r, a, 1 . Highway 99W/Hall
` • L - ' -
.-� • _ •� Corridor
2. Main Street
3. Plaza Area
4. Mixed Use Employment
1
Z •' r� 5. Mixed Use Residential
. , f {k •_ 6. Fanno Creek Residential
wf, rV
� •� '� L — -�:U4 � ark
> \
1. Hwy. 2. Main St Mixed Use 5. Mixed Use 6.Fanno
99/Hall Employment Residential Creek
Corridor Residential
a. Corridor Retail I
Buildings
b. Corridor Mixed
Use Buildings
c. Employment
/Office Buildings
d. Storefront
Mixed Use
Buildings
e. Multi-family
iz J
Residential
Buildings `'
f. Attached Single
Family Residential
Buildings °'
4-
Tigard
Downtown Development Code Amendment Schedule
2008-09
June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. April
Commission Advisory xwvm '
r r r
Team Meetings '
Open House '
r r r i r
r i i r i i i r r i i r
DLCD Grant: Review '
Draft Code and '
Feedback '
CCAC Review i0w Vii
City Attorney Review WNMd
DLCD Grant: Graph-
ics Creation '
Planning Commission
Workshop and Public -
i
Hearings r r r r r
City Council Briefings,
For more
information, Workshops, and Public W VP NW-Vo :W I" NWAW MW mom W
www.tigard-or.govor contactr r i i r i r r r r r
HearingsFarrelly at 503-718-2420 or scan@
tig"-or.gov.
Opportunity for Public Information and Input
DRAFT
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 5
NEEDS ASSESSMENT (DRAFT)
Research Question:
What are the needs of the downtown property owner, business
owners, and residents within downtown Tigard that are currently not
being filled by the city? Also the reverse: what are the needs of the
city downtown that are not currently being addressed by downtown
business and property owners?
Downtown Survey 2004.
In Spring of 2004, the City conducted a citywide survey regarding Downtown Tigard. This survey took
the form of a single sheet of 8.5x11 inch paper that combined a multiple choice section, a scaleable
answer section, and an open-ended question section. Its focus was to determine how often and why
people visit downtown, as well as their impressions of it. Also on each survey sheet was a checkbox
interface asking if the respondent was a downtown property or business owner. Surveys were
distributed at the Tigard Farmer's Market, the library, selected downtown businesses, at Tigard
Chamber of Commerce meetings, and through the City's newsletter, the Cityscape. Survey data was
utilized during the formation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. For a sample survey, see
Appendix (Insert).
Of the 563 returned surveys, 22 came from individuals who identified themselves as either a property
owner in downtown, a business owner downtown, or a combination of both. Of these 22, three were
duplicates, making 20 unique respondents from the area.
Four (4) respondents indicated that the area needed more housing or offices in order to stimulate
economic activity. Generally these sorts of projects come as a result of city regulations (zoning,
design standards), city incentives (tax breaks, grants, subsidized property sales), and private sector
interest. Associations usually do not have a role in such projects, although they could provide
promotion and developer outreach that could lead to deals.
Another four (4) respondents identified parking, traffic, and pedestrian access as key areas that
need improvement in downtown. These are capital projects that are usually undertaken by a
government or an urban renewal agency, rather than an association.
Eight (8) respondents mentioned business mix as a primary concern. Typical requests came for
small specialty retailers, bakeries, coffee shops, and the like. Business recruitment is usually a task
handled by private property owners on a property by property basis, or by third party nonprofits such
as business or merchants associations.
One respondent utilized the survey as an opportunity to state his opposition to the City's plans and
his belief that the survey was a total waste of time. Another respondent mentioned opposition to any
plan that included tax breaks.
City of Tigard GIS Data / 2008
The City Center Urban Renewal District consists of 193.71 acres, divided up into 183 parcels, and
hosting approximately 308 businesses.
According to records of business licenses issued in the URD, of the 308 businesses in place at
present, less than half (144) are registered with ownership shown as Tigard locations. Of these, most
show the same location as the place of business. Of the remainder of the businesses in the URD,
about half show owners registered at addresses in the Portland metropolitan area, while the
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 6
remaining half show as being registered out of state.
Of the 308 businesses registered in the URD, a little over a third (116) are retail in nature. The bulk of
businesses registered in the downtown core are service based or are professional offices.
Retail Uses. There are 116 retail type uses in the URD. These are defined as businesses where a
storefront is essential to business, and thus includes barbers, salons, and showrooms as well as
traditional retail stores, but does not include medical offices or the like.
Most retail uses are concentrated in the Hall/99W region (58), with another large concentration
located along Main Street (35). Notably there are no registered retail businesses in the Burnham
district. However, in both areas, retail uses are outweighed by non-retail uses, with the most striking
example being Main where the ratio of non-retail to retail begins to approach 2-to-1.
Ownership of retail on tends to be primarily locally registered, with 27 out of 35 being "local" on Main
Street, and 40 out of 58 registered as "local" in the Hall/99W region.
Non-Retail Uses. There are 192 non-retail uses in the URD. These are defined as businesses of any
type that do not require a storefront presence. This includes a span from automotive repair to
industrial manufacturing to offices to professionally managed apartments.
Non-retail uses are fairly evenly spread across the URD. There are 49 non-retail uses on Main Street,
66 non-retail uses in the Burnham district, and 57 non-retail uses in the Hall/99W region. In the
Burnham district non-retail uses are the only licensed businesses on record. In the Hall/99W region,
they take nearly equal weight with retail uses (57 non-retail to 58 retail uses), while on Main Street
they outnumber retail uses (49 vs. 35).
Ownership of non-retail uses tends to be primarily registered as local. On Main Street, 41 out of 49
are "local"; in the Burnham district, 46 out of 66 are "local", and in the Hall/99W region, 41 out of 57
are "local".
Employment Downtown. Of the 308 registered businesses downtown, only 23 have ten or more
employees. The largest employer is Magno-Humphries, a manufacturer of vitamins and dietary
supplements, with 97 employees. The second and third highest are Luke-Dorf Inc, a healthcare
related firm with 74 employees, and Russ Chevrolet with 70 employees.
Limitations. This data is imperfect. In some cases, beauty salons (counted here as retail uses) have
multiple business licenses, one for each practitioner. Also, some duplications were noted in the data,
which was obtained from the City of Tigard's Geographic Information System (GIS), most likely
attributed to one business going out of business, and another taking it's place within a short time
span. Most of these discrepancies were in retail uses. Also, some businesses may be operating
either without a business license, or using a license listed at a location outside the URD.
Lastly, this survey of business license data only paints part of the picture, as it does not address
ownership of property, only of businesses and tenants.
Summary. Three notable facts stand out:
Most businesses in the URD are not retail. Non-retail uses outnumber retail uses even on Main
Street.
There is a significant geographic split. Burnham is entirely without retail businesses, and is
oriented towards auto repair and construction. Main Street is primarily non-retail uses -- mostly
professional offices -- with retail coming in second. Hall/99W, with its high visibility, has the highest
concentration of business activity, and is evenly split amongst retail and non-retail uses
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 7
There are few big employers downtown. Most employers have less than ten employees. Small
offices are typical of employment downtown.
Downtown Strategy -- Existing Conditions
In an appendix of the Downtown Strategy, the Leland Group include a summary of existing
conditions in downtown Tigard. Among their findings are:
Low overall improvement to land value ratio. The current value of commercial land in the URD was
estimated to be between $20 and $24 per square foot in 2007 dollars. This reflects "substandard"
conditions. As a result rates of rent are low, generally $12 to $18 per square foot, which is too low to
attract developers.
Broad land use mix. Leland identified Burnham as primarily industrial in nature, with Main and the
Hall/99W region being the primary commercial areas.
Large lot locations. Most lots over one acre in size are located either in the Burnham district or in the
Hall/99W region. These areas would be most attractive to developers.
Downtown Strategy -- Developer Interviews
In order to assemble the Strategy, Leland Consulting Group interviewed a group of developers in the
Portland area, asking for input on redevelopment in the URD. A summary of these interviews was
attached to the Strategy as Appendix B. Among the mentioned items were:
Business mix. A series of business types were mentioned as being needed in the URD, including
specialty grocers and other high quality and specialty retailers.
Property owner engagement. It was recommended that the property owners need to be engaged
by the City to discuss alternative means of redeveloping sites that will bring profit to existing owners
while benefitting the community.
Downtown ombudsman. It was suggested that the City have a key individual whose sole role is
communicating with downtown business and property owners with a goal of championing retenanting
or improving businesses.
DRAFT E�k.(b `� D
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 8
LELAND'S CONTEXT(DRAFT)
Research Question:
What is Leland's broader context for providing a recommendation that
the city support financing an association at this juncture?
Development Strategy for Downtown Tigard, Oregon ("Leland Report")
Funding and support of a downtown focused association was identified as a recommended project
by the Leland Group in the Development Strategy for Downtown Tigard, Oregon, dated October
2007. Leland identifies this project as a short term, high priority project which would cost the city
approximately $40,000 annually, with the primary responsibility being in the private sector
(Redevelopment Strategy, p. 18).
Leland suggests that such an organization would take on a leadership role to champion projects in
the private sector. They further note that the existing association, the Tigard Central Business District
Association, lacks both broad membership and funding, while the Tigard Chamber of Commerce lacks
a focus on downtown. They advocate an association that is born from the private sector and then
initially funded by the City, with an eventual goal of being completely self-winding from the private
sector. This forms recommendation takes the form of Organizational Task 1 in the Strategy.
The "Leland Memo"
In late 2007, the Tigard City Council requested from Leland a list of projects that they would advise
be undertaken with the first six months or first $500,000. In a memo dated 19 November, 2007,
Leland replies with a series of recommendations pulled from the Strategy. Although organizational
tasks such as increasing outreach are identified, Organizational Task 1 was not identified as a priority
for the early implementation of the Strategy. (Letter is attached as Appendix INSERT)
Q&A With Leland
The subcommittee forwarded to Leland a series of questions seeking greater context for their
recommendations. In one of their responses, they note that a downtown association can take on
projects that the city cannot complete on their own, such as marketing, outreach, and advocacy.
Regarding timing, Leland notes that "the timing of forming such an organization is a consideration
that Tigard will have to figure out". (Memo from Sean Farrelly to CCAC, dated 2 June 2008).
Leland also stated that the City should set criteria against which to measure performance of such an
organization before dispersing funds.
(Incomplete, INSERT -- Additional Q&A results).
MEMORANDUM
TIGARD
TO: Alice Ellis Gaut, CCAC Chair
FROM: Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner
RE: Downtown Leadership Capacity/ questions to Leland
Consulting
DATE: July 7, 2008
In response to a memo dated May 30, 2008 from the CCAC Subcommittee on
Leadership Capacity in Downtown, staff contacted Chris Zahas of Leland
Consulting on July 1, 2008. The following is a summary of the conversation
that also draws on previous conversations from staff memos to the CCAC dated
June 2, 2008, and June 8, 2008.
1) Why is the establishment of an association recommended at this stage,
despite the fact that much of our redevelopment still lies ahead of us?
2) Why does this recommendation deserve this level of priority?
4) Page 17 of the strategy mentions the importance of strengthening private
leadership. What role would an association play in this, especially
regarding property owners?
A: The most important reason for establishing a downtown organization is that
the City cannot do everything alone-particularly marketing, business outreach,
and advocacy. Organizations with professional paid staff can accomplish more.
Having an organization also gives the private sector a chance to "put their
money where their mouth is" by forming a BID or other membership funding
and eventually becoming self-sustaining. The organization would also foster
leadership and create a dialogue between the City and downtown interests.
Chris said that the timing of funding an organization is an open question that
the City will have weigh and decide on.
3) Considering the importance of residential uses to the redevelopment of
downtown Tigard, what role is there in an association for residential matters?
A: Residential can be part of the mission, as better retail and amenities would
attract more residential development and increase their value. Residential
development would have positive effect on many Downtown businesses,
especially retail and services. If a BID was formed it is conceivable that owners
of multi-family developments would pay into it, as their properties would
benefit from downtown improvements. It would be a harder sell to get
individual condo owners to pay in, although they would also benefit.
5) On p. 13 it mentioned that downtown needs an organization to "champion
and implement projects." Considering the strong role in downtown
redevelopment played by the City/CCDA , what would private sector
"championing" and "implementation" look like?
A: The City can't do it alone. When the CCDA takes action that could be
controversial, a private Downtown organization could play a critical role in
fostering communication. An organization could serve as a forum to work
through contentious issues and to resolve differences between parties before
they "go public." Staff and other representatives of the City may be perceived
as having interests that are at odds with business and property owners, so an
organization can be a credible advocate.
There are also private projects that the organization can implement that are
independent from City projects-for example marketing the downtown and
attracting a desirable business or development.
6) Do you know of any downtowns with similar aspects such as business mix,
urban renewal, single retail street, early stages of development, etc. that might
serve as a comparison?
A: He mentioned Oregon City and Sherwood as cities with downtown urban
renewal districts in the early stages of development.
7) What information sources can you recommend for other models of
associations than the typical Main Street Program model?
A: The Main Street Program is a good model; however there is a spectrum of
associations from small ones made up a few volunteers, to a large scale operation
like the Portland Business Alliance.
Another model is Public/Private Economic Development Associations, but
they usually have a larger scope than just a downtown- city or region wide.
One idea would be to include 99W corridor businesses in a broader organization
that could pool resources.
8) What can Leland tell us of associations or any models that have failed and
why?
A: Chris said that the main reasons organizations fail is lack of funding and lack
of leadership. Bellingham, WA is an example of a Downtown organization that
had early success, but later struggled. The City provided seed money for a
couple of years, but after that was phased out there was no stable funding, since
a BID was never formed. There was early committed leadership, but when that
person left, the organization declined. There has to be a pool of individuals in a
downtown who are willing to step up and lead.
Overall Recommendation:
His belief is that Downtown Tigard could really use an organization and the
City should play a role in forming it. It could start with a part time director
with seed money from the City. It should eventually support itself with a BID,
which the City (as a major property owner) would be a part of. Early projects
to focus on could be grant writing (Main Street and arts grants), developing a
website, helping to develop a parking plan, and improving city-business
communication.
DRAFT F,� 1-11
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 9
COMPARABLE CITIES(DRAFT)
Research Question:
What are "comparable"cities doing in their downtowns; was an
association involved in those efforts, and if so how?
Initial Comparison Factors
Three factors were used to identify key cities with similarities to Tigard; population, budget, and size.
Due to limitations on population number availability, data used dates to 2006/2007.
In 2006, Tigard was home to 41,223 people. It has a surface area (citywide) of 10.86 square miles.
Its total adopted city budget for Fiscal Year 2006/2007 was $77.7 million.
Cities with similar populations
Cities with similar populations to Tigard were chosen based on total populations ranging from 35,000
to 60,000 residents. This resulted in just four other cities:
City 2000 Pop 2006 Pop
Albany 40,852 46,610
Corvallis 49,322 53,900
Lake Oswego 35,278 36,350
Springfield 52,864 57,065
TIGARD 41,223 46,300
Of these four, two are freestanding cities (Albany and Corvallis) while the other two are suburbs (Lake
Oswego to Portland, Springfield to Eugene).
Albany has a significant historic district and a downtown plan crafted in the 1980s that was very
ahead of its time. To accomplish their goals, the city created an Urban Renewal District (URD) of over
900 acres, including the waterfront, the traditional downtown, and large swaths of adjacent areas
that are industrial or strip commercial in nature. Although significantly larger than Tigard's URD,
Albany's major geographic diversity is similar in character to Tigard.
Albany has a downtown association known as the Albany Downtown Association (ADA). The
association concentrates just on the traditional downtown and not the entire URD. The city provides
ADA with funding by allowing the association to run the city's parking meter program downtown and
keep the revenue for operating expenses. The ADA also relies on funding via an Economic
Improvement District (EID) that assesses properties in the traditional downtown area. This EID is a
voluntary EID, meaning that individuals can opt out via remonstrance. Although there are a
significant number of remonstrances the association has managed to receive significant funding from
this source.
Corvallis has a downtown association but no urban renewal district. Their association, like Albany's,
utilizes a voluntary EID to fund their programs. The association also receives a stipend of less than
$90,000 annually from the City.
Currently Corvallis is seeking to create an urban renewal district that will encompass both the
traditional downtown and nontraditional areas where the City hopes to expand their urban core into.
The Downtown Corvallis Association is a key player in advocating for urban renewal. The city gave
grant money to the DCA to create a downtown plan and an urban renewal plan. Once the process
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 10
begins, however, it is foreseen that the DCA will step away from this role and that an advisory
commission will be appointed for the URD.
Lake Oswego has a thriving urban renewal district located in their historic downtown core. Most
buildings, however, are more modern in both age and character. The city does have a downtown
association, the Downtown Business District Association, formed after the urban renewal plan was
enacted by local businesses. They have had little to no role in the URD's redevelopment efforts, and
are completely self-funded.
Currently the City has been looking into the Main Street program put out by the National Trust for
Historic Preservation. The City is currently leaning against participation as it feels the program is
duplicative and redundant with efforts the City has already taken on.
Springfield has many similarities to Tigard. Their URD is relatively new and encompasses a traditional
downtown main street of 6-8 blocks long as well as light industry, strip-mall development, and a
mobile home park. This creates a significant geographic diversity within the URD.
Springfield did have an association until recent times, known as the Springfield Downtown
Association. The SDA was formed in the late 1970s and was a strong promoter of downtown projects
with a close working relationship with the City. They were dependent on a single leader, however,
who succumbed to Cancer last year. As a result the association foundered and has been unable to
revive itself.
In addition there is a private nonprofit in Springfield known as the Springfield Renaissance
Development Corporation. The SRDC is privately funded and does not focus exclusively on
downtown, but has placed a lot of its projects in the downtown area.
When the advisory board for the URS was created, the City was swamped with over forty
applications. The City hopes to capture the enthusiasm of those applicants and get them involved in
the formation of a new association of some kind. In the meanwhile, their advisory board has a strong
majority representation of stakeholders within the downtown area.
Cities with similar budget numbers
Cities with similar budget size to Tigard were chosen based on adopted budget numbers for FY
2006/2007 between $70 million and $100 million. This resulted in seven other cities:
City FY 2006/2007 Budget (Millions)
Ashland $84.4
Beaverton $93.5
Corvallis $84.1
Grants Pass $97.9
McMinnville $86.7
Redmond $92.2
Tualatin $91.5
TIGARD $77.7
Of these seven, only two are suburbs (Beaverton and Tualatin, both suburbs of Portland). In
addition, Corvallis also appeared on the list of cities with similar populations to Tigard. Interestingly,
only three cities have urban renewal: Grants Pass, Redmond, and Tualatin.
Ashland has no urban renewal and no downtown association. The City does have a historic district
defined and administered by the City, and protected by a design standard developed by the City.
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 11
Beaverton has no urban renewal and no downtown association. There used to be an association
but it became inactive five or more years ago, and most promotional work that it used to do is now
undertaken by the Beaverton Chamber of Commerce.
Corvallis was described in the section above dealing with cities with similar populations to Tigard.
Grants Pass has an urban renewal district but it is scheduled to sunset within the next few years.
The City considers it to be successful and is considering starting another. There is no active
downtown association, instead the City contracts with the local Chamber of Commerce to provide
outreach and soft services.
McMinnville has no urban renewal but has a strong downtown association. They receive the bulk of
their funding through an EID and an associated Business Improvement District. The City also
provides a small stipend of approximately $15,000 annually to the association.
Redmond has urban renewal and has a young downtown association. At present the City is
attempting to determine a role and a funding level for the association, which is fully funded by the
City at this time. The association recently made a request for a five-year, $500,000 stipend from the
City to be used primarily for overhead and for organizational development. City staff are proposing a
significantly lower number over a shorter three-year period and are requesting the association spend
more time on events to get shoppers to return to the downtown.
Tualatin has an urban renewal district encompassing its downtown. It does not, however, have an
association, nor does it have a citizens advisory group for the URD.
Cities with similar citywide size
Cities with similar surface area size to Tigard were chosen based on a surface area between 8 and
12 square miles. This number was pulled from the 2000 U.S. Census, the most recent number
available. This resulted in nine other cities:
City Surface Area (2000)
Coos Bay 10.59
Lake Oswego 10.35
McMinnville 9.9
Newport 8.88
Oregon City 8.14
Pendleton 10.05
Redmond 10.24
Roseburg 9.22
The Dalles 8.45
TIGARD 10.86
Of these nine, only two are suburbs (Lake Oswego and Oregon City, both suburbs of Portland). In
addition, Lake Oswego also appeared on the list of cities with similar populations to Tigard, and
McMinnville and Redmond both appeared on the list of cities with similar budget sizes to Tigard. All
but two -- Coos Bay and McMinnville -- have urban renewal.
Coos Bay has no urban renewal but has an association, the Coos Bay Downtown Association.
CBDA is funded through dues and is stand alone from the city.
Lake Oswego was discussed under cities with similar populations, above.
McMinnville was discussed under cities with similar budget sizes, above.
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 12
Newport had an urban renewal district that included part of downtown, called the North District. This
URD sunsetted recently and the City is now only paying down debt. Newport does have an
association, the City Center Newport Deco District. This association is completely self funded.
Oregon City has an urban renewal district encompassing the traditional downtown as well as larger
expansion areas. There also was a preexisting downtown association focused on events.
Currently the City is looking at becoming involved in the Oregon Main Street Program, part of the
overall program overseen by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The City contacted the
preexisting association to determine if they were interested in participating but they decided they
would rather retain their autonomy and focus on events. To administer the program the City is helping
to form a new nonprofit. This involved getting many stakeholders both within and adjacent to
downtown to meet and get on board with the project. The bylaws of the new association are crafted
to explicitly require the association to work with the URD and be a partner with the City. They also
have a very carefully crafted board makeup that includes representation from the City, the Chamber
of Commerce, the two largest employers citywide, and various arts, culture, and preservation
interests. Representatives from the business community are to be voted on by the businesses, and
property representatives are similarly voted on by area property owners.
Pendleton has an urban renewal district that encompasses downtown plus expansion areas. They
did have a merchants association but it faltered many years ago.
Redmond was discussed under cities with similar budget sizes, above.
Roseburg has an urban renewal district that encompasses its downtown as well as various
expansion areas, including the airport. There are also two separate business associations within the
URD, the Roseburg Town Center Association, and the Downtown Business Association. Neither
receives funding from the City.
The Dalles has urban renewal encompassing downtown and other areas. They also have an
association, the Downtown Business Association. DBA is freestanding and receives no City funding.
Overview
In the cities listed above, when both a URD and an association are present, in very few cases did the
associations provide any meaningful impact on urban renewal efforts. It is only Corvallis that stands
out as an example where the association had a direct hand in the formation or implementation of
urban renewal.
Cities with successful and established downtowns such as Ashland and Lake Oswego have weak or
nonexistent downtown associations, but so too did cities with unfocused downtown efforts, such as
Beaverton. Common to these cities is a reliance on capital investment and centralized control.
Cities actively pursuing the establishment of an association tended to be cities with significant
difficulties in achieving redevelopment goals, such as Oregon City and Springfield, or cities with very
young programs, such as Springfield (again) and Redmond.
McMinnville has a very strong downtown program that takes the lead in downtown matters. This
seems to be an aberration, with most programs being either weak and freestanding, or a small er
scope partner in a URD, such as with Albany.
City of Tigard / Downtown Associations in Oregon... 13
Key example cities to watch
Albany. Although larger by many times than Tigard's efforts, Albany has a similar land use mix within
its URD and is focusing on similar URD goals. Their association focuses just on the smaller traditional
downtown rather than the entire URD.
Springfield. Similar in population to Tigard, Springfield hosts a URD with a similar land use split,
including the concentration of the traditional downtown on a single, 6-8 block long strip within the
URD. Springfield's URD is also a fairly new one, and they are dealing with many of the same outreach
challenges.
Oregon City. Similar in physical size to Tigard, Oregon City has an older URD which has experienced
many challenges over the years. To achieve goals, the City is establishing a new association that is
broad based, with a carefully composed board of directors aimed at ensuring high quality and
cooperation between all parties. Although the historic character of Oregon City is not evident to any
great extent in Tigard, their approach to achieving downtown leadership goals has application to
Tigard's fractured status.
Similar Downtowns
DRAFT--TBD.
Wil!
E4t;tV � G
� T
r•
X i
i
• : •
it / ��� • � \ ( I
4% 4 i
A •• � �
Urban Renewal Zone Urban Renewal Boundary Stream
City of Tigard Taxlot Boundary Railroad
Oregon j
t:srtuOfpltr:Com�}�unity llevtloExttcnt lk� t
Cit .d 1 i tQ Wurh�tkSlun County,,Men)cvo
Urban Renewal Plan Project Cost Update - July 8, 2008
Total Costs to RevisedProject Urban
2026 (from UR Renewal Summary of Urban Renewal Cost Status
Plan) Estimates portion
Urban Renewal Plan Project April 08
Better than anticipated outlook. Projects which
were going to be funded with tax increment funds that
will be using other funding sources include: Burnham
Street Improvements 4419098 NA 4419098 St. , Greenburg Rd /99W Intersection, and Main St.
Better than anticipated outlook. Streetscape
projects that have established funding sources other
than tax increment revenues include: Main St. and
Streetscape Improvements 4419098 NA 4419098 Burnham St.
No change. Projects using other than urban renewal
as a funding source include: 99W sidewalk
Bike/Pedestrian Facilities 546841 NA 546841 improvements.
Parks
Fanno Creek Park& Plaza Master Plan NA 205000 0
Lower Fanno Creek Park NA 2352420 0
Upland Park NA 1328720 611211
Festival Street NA 1193400 1193400
Main St. Gateway / Entry I NA 1 9418001 433228
Urban Renewal Plan Project Cost Update - July 8, 2008
Revised Proiected
Expenditures to Project Urban
Urban Renewal Plan - Summary of 2026 (from UR Estimates Renewal
Costs By Project Type Plan April 08 Portion Summary of Urban Renewal Cost Status
Better than anticipated outlook. Other funding
sources for 100% of Lower Fanno Creek Park, and
54% of the Plaza have been identified. In addition,
Fanno Creek Park & Plaza are eligible for several grant
Subtotal- Parks 3885376 5816340 2237839 sources.
Public Spaces
Downtown Plaza NA 2868240 1319390
Burnham St. Upgrades - to Plaza NA 556920 256183
Better than anticipated outlook. Other funding
sources have been identified for 54% of the Downtown
Subtotal- Public Spaces 3118445 3425160 1575574 Plaza.
Public Facilities 765216 NA 765216 No change.
Planning & Development Assistance 2756003 NA 2756003 No change.
Higher anticipated cost outlook. The cost of
acquiring a replacement property for Stevens Marine is
likely to be significantly higher than the amount
estimated under the plan. However, 54% of this cost
Property Acquisition 956351 NA 2,000,000 can be funded with other funding sources identified.
Urban Renewal Plan -Totall 20866428 NA 187196691 Better than anticipated outlook
From: Sheila Greenlaw-Fink [mailto:sgfink@cpahinc.org]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 10:02 AM
To: Phil Nachbar
Subject: Mixed Use town center projects and the CCAC
Phil:
Just a quick note to pass along a flyer describing the Hillsdale town center project CPAH just
finished. I also attached the invite for the opening which was earlier this week, because the
graphic depiction captures the building's fagade very well.
I know that the CCAC was interested in pursuing a more detailed discussion of how
affordable mixed-use like this might help seed redevelopment in downtown Tigard. Please
feel free to pass these along if they're of interest. It also occurs to me that you've done
field trips in the past, and that this might make a relevant and close site visit. We'd be very
happy to do a tour, or let the CCAC meet in the community room at The Watershed.
We developed a wonderful ongoing relationship with the neighborhood and business association
in Hillsdale as we planned together and were able to build this project. In the end, they launched
a $30,000 local campaign to help pay for the marquee sign, a public drinking fountain, and for
lighting the tower—all elements they knew were unusual for an affordable residential project, but
important in a town center.
As I mentioned at that time, CPAH will need to make a decision on its pipeline in the next
90 days. The local funding award we have in place through the HOME program ($750,000) is for
a senior project in the Tigard-Tualatin area. To date, we have not been successful in getting site
control in Tualatin. We are currently working with our broker on two potential sites (one on Hall
Boulevard and one on Greenburg Road)in Tigard.
However, our first choice would be to consider a site in downtown Tigard, though we are
unaware of any currently on the market. If you have any information on either privately owned
or City properties that might be available, please let me know.
And if we can schedule time with CCAC and/or City Council members to tour The Watershed,
that would be terrific. Alternately,we do have extensive slides available to illustrate the interior
and exterior features. I keep hearing that the City is focused on market-rate projects to kick start
things, and am worried that you're underestimating the quality and speed with which a nonprofit
project could emerge.
Thanks for any feedback you can provide.
Sheila Greenlaw-Fink, executive director
Community Partners for Affordable Housing
PO Box 23206, Tigard, OR 97281-3206
503/968-2724 (Fax: 503/598-8923)
0
I
e waters ed at Hillsdale
randeni"n
Wednesday, January 9, 2008 3-5 pump
6380 SW Capitol Highway, Portland, 97239 `
k
H �
! I
L
L
-- S
i p
A Please visit our Web site,
e r www.cpahinc.org, for
event details and a map
to The Watershed.
Illustration and design by Bruce Rodgers
Come celebrate CPAH's greatly anticipated, green and affordable senior
housing community, The Watershed (LEED silver certification anticipated).
This project is a landmark gateway to the vibrant Hillsdale Town Center.
Open house: 3-5 p.m., Program: 3:30 p.m.
Limited parking nearby. Please consider carpooling or
taking one of Tri-Met's 10 bus lines in the neighborhood
(#44, #45, #54, #56 provide frequent service).
For detailed information, visit www.trimet.org.
FOR AFFORDABLE NOOSING, INC.
What are en Communities?
Green Communities are defined as ones that strive to balance The
environmental (waste minimization, pollution prevention, resource +
conservation), economic (locally owned businesses, affordable housing, Wthed sillsdale
mixed uses and open spaces, economic equity) and social factors (active
and broad citizen involvement, policy based on local values, safe/clean
neighborhoods, adequate recreation, infrastructure, education and health
care systems), as they develop. CPAH's development practices align with
this framework.
The Watershed @ Hillsdale, a project of Community Partners for
Why Green, Affordable Housing? Affordable Housing (CPAH), is a stunning new mixed use project in the
Resident Benefits heart of the Hillsdale Town Center in SW Portland. The Watershed
includes ground floor commercial space with three floors of housing
• Healthier indoor environments that protect families against asthma and above. This high quality, transit oriented development redevelops a
many other conditions caused or affected by housing construction contaminated site and was designed to reduce its impact on the
• Energy savings that reduces need for low-income households to make environment and to contribute to the strong identity and economic vitality
tradeoffs between heat or electricity and other basic necessities of the Hillsdale Town Center.
• Reduced transportation costs Developed with the unwavering support of the Hillsdale neighborhood,
this project will provide 51 units of housing for seniors, with 40 units
• More active living and wider opportunities through greater community serving households earning from 0 to 50% of the median income with rent
interaction through walking access to mass transit, jobs, schools and local subsidies provided through the Housing Authority of Portland. The project
services. includes eight units for formerly homeless veterans in collaboration with the
Owner Benefits Veteran's Administration.
• Operating cost savings through reduced utilities, maintenance and The building design and construction incorporates innovative green
turnover building techniques and materials that minimize life cycle costs, add to
• Reduced risk from building-related factors such as mold and indoor air quality, and reduce utility costs for residents. The Watershed is
sick-building syndrome expected to achieve a LEED Silver certification. The building also includes
features developed through neighborhood participation in the design
• Market positioning, distinction, and visibility process, including a vertical glass and steel tower that creates a gateway
• Public relations and community good will to the Hillsdale Town Center. With guidance from a nationally known
Environmental Benefits senior housing specialist, lighting design, color selection, unit layout, and
common area design, all acknowledge the visual and social needs of the
• Contribution to climate change solutions aging residents.
• Natural resources conservation
• Water and energy efficiency
• Reduced pollution
• Less waste
• Sprawl reduction 6388 SW Capitol Hwy • Portland, OR 97239
Watershed Green Building and& enable Development Features •
Process Stormwater
t ■ Community design charrette to hear community Stormwcter is a design element
vision for site �,
■ Green building charrette to brainstorm strategies building,to the "shed" roof forms, and
for achieving goals water tubes
■ Integrated design process including early selection Stormwater cascadinggardens filt-
of architect, contractor and design subconsultants stormwater and detain initial surge
maintain water quality in nearby
Location Stephens Creek and Fanno Creek
■ Smart growth location with proximity to transit, watersheds.
commercial and services
■ Compact development of 85 units/acre on infill site Water Conservation
• Mixed use with structured parking to improve Achieving 30% - savings with low
pedestrian experience in Hillsdale Town Center flow faucets, showerheads,
and dual flush toilets
Site: Efficient irrigation
■ Brownfield assessment and cleanup to allow controls
development of passed-over site
■ First nonprofit recipient of an EPA Cleanup Grant
in Oregon
■ Reduced Urban Heat Island effect with Energy Star
roofing and 100% of parking underground Materials & Resources
■ 95%+ construction waste recycling
Durability ■ Recycled content materials including crushed concrete base, fly ash
4' roof overhangs to protect building from rain concrete, steel, gypsum
Li
Pand sun Local and regional materials including wood products, windows, doors,
■ Rain screen siding system to improve durability of cabinets, and paint
the exterior
■ Canopies to protect major entrances frorn weather Indoor Environmental Quality
■ ERV system provides continuous fresh air and exhaust for both kitchen
Energy Conservation and baths
■ Achieving at least 30% more efficiency than ■ Low VOC paints, adhesives and sealants
Oregon code ■ Green Label Plus certified carpet
■ Energy Recovery Ventilation (ERV) System recovers ■ No added urea formaldehyde composite wood for cabinets and
heat from the exhaust during cold weather and countertops
pre-cools/dehumidifies incoming air during hot, ■ Daylight and views to improve resident health
muggy weather
■ High efficiency central furnaces & heat pumps for Operations & Education
y . common areas ■ Third party commissioning to verify that completed building met the
■ High efficiency central boiler for water heating design intent and requirements
■ Energy efficient lighting while still meeting higher ■ Non smoking building
lighting levels for the aging eye ■ Resident and management education on green building features
• Energy Star Appliances, windows and roofing ■ Educational signage, tours and presentations for community and
general public
i
LELAND CONSULTING GROUP
L TIGARD DOWNTOWN
Project Memorandum
TO: Tigard City Council
FROM: Chris Zahas,Leland Consulting Group
DATE: 19 November 2007
SUBJECT: Immediate Next Steps for Tigard
Project Number: 4749.2
Downtown Strategy Implementation
Now that the Downtown Development Strategy is complete and the council has
embraced its recommendations,Tigard must move aggressively forward to maintain
momentum and take advantage of the current level of enthusiasm. Since the
Development Strategy identified many tasks as high priority that should be undertaken
immediately,this memorandum provides additional prioritization of those
recommendations in order to give the City a more manageable list of actions that should
be undertaken within the next six months.
The following table repeats tasks mentioned in the Development Strategy and further
identifies staff or consultant responsibilities and likely costs,if known. Only those tasks
that should be undertaken within the first six months are listed. Since each task was
described in detail in the Development Strategy,only a brief summary is listed here,
unless additional information is warranted.
It is assumed that projects that are already funded or planned will continue to move
forward(as they should). Therefore,projects such as the public plaza and Burnham
Street improvements are not discussed below-the City should continue to fund those
projects and proceed forward.
Task Responsibility Cost
Organizational Task 3: Increase property owner Staff, $25,000
and developer outreach. Meet with key property development
owners to discuss ownership status and potential advisor,and
plans for redevelopment. Focus on: possibly a
■ Properties surrounding the new public public relations
plaza; consultant.
■ Tigard Plaza shopping center;
■ Rite Aid/Value Village shopping center;
■ Potential housing sites along Burnham St.;
• Property owners who have recently
invested in Downtown(brew pub,dance
hall).
■ Urban_Strategists, Pagr i
Portland•Denver•Boston•New York•San Miguel de Allende,Mexico
LELAND CONSULTING GROUP
Task Responsibility Cost
This outreach will almost surely reveal one or two
immediate development opportunities-either
public-private or strictly private. In either case,the
City can play a lead"matchmaking"role in getting
projects off the ground in addition to providing
resources and incentives to make projects feasible.
Secondly,increase outreach to the development
community. Consider convening a quarterly
workgroup or luncheon with developers to discuss
opportunities in Tigard,review City policies,and
gather feedback on ways to attract investment.
Partner with the Chamber or a new downtown
organization to organize the meetings. Constantly
reinforce an"open door"policy with the
development community.
In addition to these meetings,conduct one-on-one
outreach to developers through meetings. The
quarterly luncheons will be useful,but some
developers may be hesitant to discuss details in the
presence of their"competition." As with any
focused marketing effort,the goal is to match city
needs with developer capabilities and interests.
Organizational Task 6: Success audit. Using Staff and $10,000
interns or administrative support,prepare a development
success audit to document recently completed, advisor(for set
underway,and planned projects. Post on City web up and
site when complete and distribute to developers structuring).
and property owners at meetings described in Task
3,above. Use the success audit to build and
maintain a dialogue with the media and with
developers,investors,tenants and others.
Policy Task 5:Design Standards. Although this Consultant $20,000 to
was not listed as a"now" task in the Development contract. $30,000
Strategy,we now believe it should be pursued
immediately in order to provide the policy
foundation for other actions such as development
studies and storefront improvements.
Housing Task 1:Assemble Property for Housing. Staff, Can vary
Housing is the single greatest market opportunity development considerably
and has the greatest potential to catalyze other advisor,legal depending upon
investments in the Downtown. Assemble counsel. the strategy
■ llrhun ti7rolr�isls, a�zo�o.IrLrnd�ri+cnlfi�+�.�i»n Pnoe 2 of i
LELAND CONSULTING GROUP
L' Task Responsibility Cost
properties in the Burnham target area of between employed.
one and two acres in size. Control properties Options
through outright purchase or option agreements. If (assignable)are
the City uses options,simultaneously study the recommended.
development options(Task 4,below)in order to set Some shortfall
realistic values prior to committing to a price. between option
Later,issue developer requests for qualifications value and sale
(RFQs) to develop the properties and sell the value may have
property or transfer the options to a private to be covered by
developer. Depending on the subsidy required,a the city-deal by
portion of the purchase price could be recaptured deal. Up to
upon sale. $500,000 for
options.
Housing Task 4:Development Opportunities Staff, $15,000 to
Studies. This task should also be accelerated to architectural $25,000 per
begin immediately. Identify two or three consultant, study. Assume
properties and work with property owners to development plaza studies
develop redevelopment options. Likely candidates advisor already funded
should include: through plaza
■ Properties adjacent to the planned public contract.
plaza(Phase 2 of the plaza scope).
■ Properties along Burnham controlled by
Steve DeAngelo-he has already
assembled land and has expressed interest
in discussing redevelopment options.
■ Either of the two shopping centers,but
only once a line of communication between
the City and the owners has been
established and the owners have expressed
a high level of interest in moving forward.
Miscellaneous Consultant Services. As described Development $6,000 to$7,500
below,Tigard will need ongoing strategic advisory advisor. per month.
services to assist in decision making and technical
analysis.
The above list of actions should be manageable for a staff of two to three people.
Consultants will need to be engaged to conduct the development studies and prepare
design guidelines. The single greatest City expense will be for property acquisition,
however assignable options are encouraged such that the city does not have to fund the
full cost of acquisition. In the case of the Stevens Marine property,the City must acquire
the property outright since it will eventually be a public park. Since the urban renewal
district has few funds available today,the City should identify other sources to acquire
property or secure options. This could be done through internal loans between accounts
to be paid back in later years when the district has greater funding potential. For options
0 Urbim �Irah�,i.�l<, ,iriuu�J�dnndrrn�>ulliu,l.n�m Pap, V 4
LELAND CONSULTING GROUP
L alone,a budget of up to$500,000 would be adequate. Anticipate an additional$250,000
for various consultant contracts described above.
Development Advisor Consulting Services
As described above,the City would benefit from ongoing services of a development
advisor. In addition to the specific tasks identified above,a development advisor would
be able to assist staff on an on-call basis in the following ways:
■ Outreach to developers and property owners;
■ Selecting key properties for acquisition,options,or public-private partnerships;
■ Determining acquisition cost of properties;
■ Assistance in structuring the success audit;
■ Developing strategies and negotiating agreements between the City and
property owners;
■ Programming solutions for target properties;
■ Conducting feasibility studies and working with architects on the DOS program;
■ Serving as strategic advisor to the City Council and City Center Development
Agency;
■ Assisting in ongoing communication to the city council;
■ Providing an overall strategic assessment of all the moving parts that make up
the Downtown Strategy;
Given that implementation requires flexibility and the ability to move quickly on
unexpected opportunities,a consultant contract should be structured on a time and
materials basis,with"rolling" not to exceed caps extended at a pace that is comfortable
to the City. Given the workload planned for Tigard,a budget of between$6,000 and
$7,500 per month would likely be adequate,with some higher months as specific projects
"heat up." Specific tasks that can be forecasted would be budgeted-such as a feasibility
study or part of the team to develop design standards.
Conclusion
Leland Consulting Group is grateful to have been able to assist the City in the next steps
of the implementation of the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. As mentioned at our
council presentation,the work of downtown revitalization is never truly complete and
the City must be vigilant in maintaining momentum. Tigard is clearly on the right track,
having put in place the key policies that will support implementation. Now is the time to
get individual projects underway.
0 Urhnii4of1
Tigard
takes
another
stab
Burnham
Tigard officials hope effort to reach out to them in the
mediation will put first place. And there are other
Burnham and Ash street snags,including contested land val-
uations,arsenic contamination at a
projects back on track drain outfall,interruptions to exist-
ing businesses and the belief that
By DARRYL SWAN the concerns of existing business
OfTheTimes owners are failing on deaf ears.
Nina Matsumoto,co-owner of
TIGARD—Tigard city conn• family-run Kim's Embroidery
cilors are hoping for a second Inc., says the existing develop-
chance to convince property own- ment plan for Burnham Street,
ers to play ball when it comes to including a center median in the
the city's intent to purchase strips front of her property that would
of land along Burnham and Ash interfere with truck deliveries,
streets which are needed for road doesn't consider the needs of
and utility improvements. existing businesses.
Following a joint meeting Michal Weigel, Matsumotos
between the City Council and the son-in-law who addressed the City
City Center Advisory Council on her behalf, said there
Commission on Tuesday, Mayor have been too few"assurances com-
Craig Dirksen and a member of utg from the city for his family to
the commission now intend to feel at ease with the city's plaits.
reach out to the property owners in `Yeah,we're scared.This is our
an attempt to cool a sense of hos- property.It's our business.It's our
tility between the owners and the livelihood," Weigel said. "Our
city. biggest concern is, we're in the
Some owners along Burnham dark•.
Street say the city should have
made a stronger communicative •See BURNHAM,A10
DARRYL SWAN/TheTimes
LEGAL PITFALLS — Tigard attorney Tim Ramis (right)
outlines the legal challenges of a 2006 amendment that
changed how land condemnation cases are handled.
Though city officials are viewing condemnation as a last
resort, further hold-ups on Burnham and Ash streets pur-
chases could steer the city down that path.
A10 • June 19, 2008 www.tigardtimes.com
Burnham: Bid solicitation behind schedule
N Continued from Al tions has been a City Council An Oregon law that went
resolution passed in February into effect in 2006 changed the
Council not encouraged that said the city would exercise legal process for condemna-
The council's outreach effort its eminent domain,or condem- tions, making it a much less
comes as city officials react to nation,authority if necessary to attractive, and more costly,
the first wave of returns on secure the properties. option.
offers to buy the land. In response to that and other Prior to the law, called
A total $5,65 million has perceptions, some residents Measure 39, a public agency
been budgeted for the upcom- along Burnham Street have that failed to reach a negotiated
ing fiscal year to make been hesitant to work with the settlement on a needed proper-
Burnham and Ash street city to further the development ty could begin condemnation -
improvements. City officials plans. proceedings after a period of
hope the improvements,includ- Mike Stevenson, owner of time.The property owner could
ing street widening, storm B&B Print Source,a Burnham then challenge the fair market
water planters, new sidewalks Street business, said there is a value of the property in circuit
and medians, will attract new sense among the existing busi- court.
commercial and residential ness community that the city's Just prior to entering the
development as catalyst proj- tone has been less than sympa- court process, the public
ects to feed long-tern urban thetic to its fears and concerns. agency could amend its proper-
renewal goals. "I've attended meetings ty valuation to reflect current
Money to pay for a bulk of when businesses have spoken figures,and typically the matter
the improvements stems from a up,and 1 can tell you that some would settle out of court.
loan from the city to the urban of the answers given by the Under Measure 39,however,
development agency, which is city... were disconcerting to the condemning agency is stuck
expected to be repaid from some of the owners there," with the, first offer based on
future gas tax revenue. Stevenson said. appraised market value. If that
The street improvements, "The tone of the city has to value is challenged and a jury
which have already slipped change.You have to find a way awards the landowner an
behind the timeframe to solicit to work with the existing peo- amount above the first offer,the
bids for the Burnham and Ash ple there;' Ile said adding that condemning agency is on the
street projects,are the founda- he does not think the problems hook to cover the landowner's
tion for the larger voter- are beyond rectifying, attorney fees.
approved 30-year urban renew- City Councilor Gretchen Tim Ramis, Tigard's city
al plan intended to revitalize Buchner pointed to early efforts attorney who is a partner in the
downtown Tigard. to connect with residents along Lake Oswego firm Jordan
But first the city has to Burnham Street as plans for the Schrader Ramis,said those fees
secure the 22 property strips, downtown revitalization plan could be as high as$10,000 to
something that is proving took shape,and more than one $30,000 per case, which at the
increasingly difficult. At least councilor expressed surprise at high end could add 5630,000
four property owners have the level of pushback arising on to the$1.9 million budgeted
retained legal counsel, and of from the purchase offers. by the city for the remaining 21
the eight purchase offers pre- properties to be negotiated.
sented to the owners only one Challenges framed The city is legally bound to
has been accepted,according to City officials have been dis- offer fair market value based on
city documents. cussing the potential fallout the appraisals, (tampering
The city will first have to get from using the condemnation negotiations in the event count-
permission from the attorney of option, what they're calling a er offers are significantly high-
represented owners before "last resort," if sale negotia- er than the appraisal,something
directly contacting them,which tions fold. a city official said has
is an ethical requirement, occurred.
Schwabe, Williamson and
Wyatt, a large Portland law
firm, marketed its services
along Burnham Street in
January, and is representing
some of the owners.
Overshadowing the oegotia-
R
Revival of
downtown '
Tigard
dela ed
Y
�- By JOHN FOYSTON
THE OREGONIAN
\ TIGARD — A long-
anticipated downtown reviv-
al is stalling because rights of
way have not yet been pur-
chased and some landowners
are balking at selling to the .
city.
Construction on the $7.4 Prosser thinks the project
million rebuild of Burnham likely will be delayed, al-
Street was to have begun lat- though nothing is certain,
er this year and continued in Widening Burnham Street
the 2009 construction season. could be the first dirt moved
After a three-hour meeting in the city's ambitious, multi-
Tuesday, a citizens.advisory year plan to rebuild its down-
committee and Tigard busi- town as a nature-friendly
nesspeople advised Mayor area around a public plaza
Craig Dirksen, City Manager and an expanded Fanno
Craig Prosser, the City Coun- Creek Park. The project is lo-
cil and staff to get more cated off Oregon 99W on and
involved in the process. around Tigard's Main Street.
"1 think Craig Dirksen and The city first must buy
Craig Prosser should have strips of land for right of way
been on the phones doing from the owners of 22 prop-
outreach to landowners," erties. Only 14 appraisals
said Ralph Hughes of the City have been completed and
Center Advisory Commis- eight offers made to land.
sion. owners. Some of the land-
Some version of that owners have retained the ;
involvement may now occur. services of Schwabe,William-
"The mayor and a member son & Wyatt, a Portland law
of the commission com- firm with a strong record in .
miffed to meeting with every condemnation cases.
property owner on the - Prosser said some property _
street,"said Prosser. owners may not want to sell,
and the city could be limited
in its solutions.
"We're committed to me-
diation when we reach that
point,"Prosser said.
John Foyston;503-294-5976;
johnfoyston@
news.oregonian.com
.1►
Come Join Us!
• Please cone- to the upcoming Open House and learn about the proposed
language for building and site design standards and land use and zoning
changes. The Open House is an opportunity to comment on and provide
feedback on the draft language, prior to the public hearing process. While
the new regulations primarily address new development, all properties
in the Downtown Urban Renewal District would be affected to some
degree.
The draft design standards and zoning changes are available for review
prior to the Open House online:
• www.t1gard-or.gov/dov�Tntown/defauIt.asp
If you have any questions or want more information, please contact
Associate Planner, Sean Farrell),
• Phone: 503-718-2420
• E-mail: sean@tigard-or.gov.
01W Example:
❑9 ❑ ❑ ❑❑
El El o❑ao
m m i
Building Design Standards for Commercial and Mixed Use Buildings
�� `Building a heart for our community."
June 18, 2008 Commission Advisory Team meeting
Executive Summary
Members present: Carolyn Barkley, Stu Hasman, Elise Shearer (alternate)
Staff present: Sean Farrelly
Agenda Item 1: Welcome/Introductions
No introductions were necessary.
Agenda Item 2: Review Executive Summary of May 21 Meeting
Reviewed the May 21 summary.
Agenda Item 3: Open House Discussion
Discussed preparations for upcoming open house.
Format:
1. Stations up for half hour/staff/citizens to answer questions/ food
Potential stations:
• Urban Design Vision
• New Development- Business and Residential
• Existing Development
• Non Conforming uses
• Zoning changes
2. Introduction
3. Power point to explain
4. Small groups to answer questions
5. Surveys- paper and online
Publicity:
Press release, Letter to all property/business owners/interested parties, website
Listserv, Tigard Community connectors
Preview at:
CCAC, TCBDA, and Council workshop
Suggestions:
o Meeting should be citizen driven with staff to backing them up.
o Stress the TDIP connection- "we are implementing what you asked for."
o Invite the Mayor and/or other Council members, not as active participants, but
to observe and listen.
o Power point can show example of how an existing building could renovate
under the new standards-for example Manila Express with side windows or an
auto repair building.
o Survey questions should be open ended
o Carolyn and Elise are willing to pick up surveys a few days after attendees have
had a chance to review.
o Staff should answer the technical questions. Talking points will be developed
for the citizen volunteers.
Agenda Item 4: Signs
o Reviewed examples of signs appropriate for a downtown (from Redwood City
Downtown standards.)
o New language will specifically allow blade signs (bottom of sign must be 8 feet
above sidewalk)
o The City of Tigard's sign code is at present fairly strict, so there shouldn't be
many additional sign regulations, other than calling out forbidden materials.
Research other codes for how they do this.
Agenda Item 5 Review Code Changes
Reviewed Draft dated May 28, 2008. No problems were identified.
Adjourned: 9:05 PM
May 21, 2008 Commission Advisory Team meeting
Executive Summary
Members present: Carolyn Barkley,Alexander Craghead,Karen Fishel,Elise Shearer
(alternate)
Staff present: Sean Farrelly
Agenda Item 1: Welcome/Introductions
No introductions were necessary.
Agenda Item 2: Review Executive Summary of April 23 Meeting
Reviewed the April 23 summary.
Agenda Item 3: Open House Discussion
It was decided to shoot for Wednesday,July 30 as the date of the Open House.
o The Open House would be a"listening post."
o There will be a power point presentation outlining the highlights of the draft code
followed by Q and A.
o Invite all UR property and business owners,interested parties,community members,
decision makers by letter.The letter will include the link to a draft on the web ahead
of time and be available to review. Also a press release will be sent to the Times and
Oregonian.
o Copies of the draft will be available to take and review.There will be comment
forms to mail back and an online comment system.
o There will be some visuals from the U of O project,but this won't be the focus.
Suggestions-
Personal contact will get more people to show up.
Vet the content of the Open House with the CCAC.
Ask for specific comment on potentially problematic sections- non-conforming
use/structures. Also ask for comments on other issues- like residential open space
requirement.
Agenda Item 4: Review Code Changes
Reviewed Draft dated May 15, 2008.
Recommendations:
o Allow rather than require active uses along the festival street. Past consultants have
said that retail will not work all the way down Burnham St. and there would not be
good visibility for businesses on the festival street. (p. 15)
o Require active uses adjacent to the plaza. Show what is meant by "adjacent"via a
map.
o Clarify the tree preservation citation (p.6.)
Agenda Item 5: Thresholds and Types of Review
Recommendations:
o Option 4 was recommended.This states that standards apply to any remodeling,
building expansion,or site improvement project on a partially developed or
developed site,except that standards apply only to the structure or to that portion of
a structure or site that is being constructed,modified,remodeled, or built upon.
o This would be beneficial in that existing structures could have renovation projects,
but only the renovation (rather than the whole structure) would be subject to design
review.
o Type I (Design Compliance Letter) for renovation projects subject to one standard.
o Type II -Clear and Objective Track for new buildings and renovations (subject to
multiple standards.)
o Type III- Discretionary track for applications that cannot meet a standard,or for
applicants who choose this route.Do not have additional requirement that large
projects go thru discretionary review.
Agenda Item 6: Design Review Body Options
Recommendation:
o A Design Review Board made up of 5 volunteer members (a majority of whom
would have design/architecture backgrounds.)The Board could also potentially
review Tigard Triangle/ Washington Square projects- in case there are not many
Downtown projects initially.
Agenda Item 7: Signs
Due to time constraints, this item was deferred to the next meeting
Adjourned: 9:25 PM
CCAC time off—July through September, 2008
Name 6/29 - 7/6- 7/13 - 7120- 7/27- 8/3 - 8/10- 8/17- 8/24 - 8/31 - 9/7- 9/14- 9/21 - 9/28 -
7/5 7/12 7/19 7/26 8/2 8/9 8/16 8/23 8/30 9/6 9/13 9/20 9/27 10/4
Barkley Unavil Unavil
8/10 8/10
thru thru
8/18 8/18
Craghead
Ellis Unavail Unavail Unavail Unavail Unavail Unavail
Gaut 6/24 6/24 6/24- 8/22 8/22 8/22
thru thru 7/15 thru 9/2 thru 9/2 thru 9/2
7/15 7/15
Hughes
Kutcher Unavil Unavil
7/3 thru 7/3 thru
7/8 7/8
Lilly long long long long long long long long long
wkends wkends wkends wkends wkends wkends wkends wkends wkends
Jul /Au ul /Au July/Au July/Au July/Au July/Au Jul /Au Jul /Au July/Aug
Louw Avail all
summer
Murphy Gone Unavail Unavail Unavail Gone
7/25- 7/29 8/5-8/6 8/18- 9/5-9/8
7/27 Gone 8/22
8/7-8/10
Pao
Shearer
Wong Unavail Unavail Unavail Unavail
7/31 7/31 7/31 7/31
thru thru thru thru
8/20 8/20 8/20 8/20
City Center Advisory Commission
RECEIVED
JUL 15 2008
City of Tigard
July 14, 2008 Administration
Mayor Craig Dirksen and City Council
City of Tigard
13125 SW Hall Blvd.
Tigard, OR 97223
RE: INQUIRY ABOUT BURNHAM STREET
Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council:
At our regular CCAC meeting on Wednesday, July 9, 2008, one of the agenda
items was a debriefing of the Burnham Street Joint meeting.
From that discussion is the following inquiry:
I
The CCAC would like to inquire of Council if there is something in particular they
would like CCAC to do to follow up on the joint meeting of June 17, 2008
regarding Burnham Street.
Specifically, how can the CCAC support their efforts on the action items
discussed at that meeting.
Thank you for your response.
Respectf ly
Lily Lill ,
v ice Chair U
City Center Advisory Commission
cc. members of the CCAC