04/08/2009 - Packet City of Tigard
City Center Advisory Commission — Agenda
.wlr"�
MEETING DATE: Wednesday, April 8, 2009—6:30-8:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Public Library Community Room, 1st Floor
13500 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
1. Welcome and Introductions............................................................................................... 6.30 6.35
2. Check-in..................................................................................................................................... 6:35—6:45
3. Review / Approve Minutes..................................................................................................... 6:45— 6:50
4. CCAC Goals / Agenda Setting Discussion.......................................................................... 6:50 — 7:10
(Kevin Kutcher)
5. Budget Update.......................................................................................................................... 7:10 — 7:25
i. Downtown Circulation Plan Update and Discussion.......................................................... 7:25 — 7:55
7. Highway 99W Design Vision Update ................................................................................... 7:55 — 8:10
8. Training Opportunities............................................................................................................8:10— 8:25
9. Other Business..........................................................................................................................8:25 — 8:30
10. Adjourn .....................................................................................................................................8:30 p.m.
CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA—April 8, 2009
City of Tigard 1 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page I ofl
City Center Advisory Commission
' Meeting Minutes
Date of Meeting: April 8, 2009
Location: Tigard Library Community Room
Called to order by: Chair Alice Ellis Gaut
Time Started: 6:35 p.m. _
Time Ended: 8:49 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Carolyn Barkley; Vice Chair Alexander Craghead; Chair Alice
Ellis Gaut; Kevin Kutcher; Peter Louw; Thomas Murphy; Elise Shearer; Linli Pao (alternate)
Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Wong and Hughes
Others Present: Lily Lilly, Councilor Marland Henderson, Mike Marr, Lisa Olson
Staff Present: Sean Farrelly, Senior Planner;]erree Lewis, Executive Assistant
AGENDA ITEM #1: Welcome and Introductions
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Introductions were made
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #2: Check In
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Commissioner Craghead advised that he has
been appointed as a full member to the CCAC and is once again a voting member. He
thanked Lily Lilly for her years of service on the Commission.
Commissioner Craghead reported that he and Sean Farrelly recently attended a conference
on retail shopping center and retail development markets. There won't be too much built in
the next year or 2, but after that, things may get a little better. One speaker noted that
people's shopping habits have changed and that, as a result, retail will also change. There
will be more attention to being closer to your market—locating stores closer to a population
that will support them. Also, there won't necessarily be much selling of premium, short
shelf-life products in the future. People are now willing to wait for sales rather than buy the
CCAC Meeting Minutes for April 8,2009 Page 1 of 6
top-shelf, fashionable, cutting edge items. This behavior will probably continue even when
people have money. Sean Farrelly noted that there are plans for a mini-south water front
project in Vancouver.
Commissioner Louw advised that 2 businesses in the Downtown are leaving— the antique
shop and the Main Street Market. Commissioner Shearer said the antique shop is closing
because they had major flooding problems.
Lily Lilly thanked the Commissioners for their friendship and support. She said she was
sorry to be leaving the Commission.
Commissioner Shearer reported that her position at work has been cut to half-time. She is
looking for full-time work elsewhere and is considering going back to school.
Commissioner Craghead noted that he and Commissioner Barkley recently met with Sean
Farrelly about Design Guidelines.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #3: Review/Approve Minutes
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Commissioners Shearer and Barkley reported
some typos in the attachments to the minutes.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Louw, seconded by
Commissioner Shearer, to accept the March 11, 2009 minutes. The motion passed
unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM #4: CCAC Goals / Agenda Setting Discussion
Important Discussion and/or Comment: Commissioner Kutcher presented the draft
CCAC Goals for 2009 (Exhibit A). The Commissioners discussed the goals and suggested
removing the specific months to allow for more flexibility. It was also suggested moving
Main Street Green Street up to #3 on the list, moving the Storefront Improvement Program
up to the #4 position, and moving the Tigard Transit Center down to #5 on the list.
[NOTE: The revised goals are attached as Exhibit B —revised goals.] Commissioner
Kutcher noted that it's important for the CCAC to deliver their formal positions to Council
on these subject areas in a timely manner.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for April 8,2009 Page 2 of 6
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Motion by Commissioner Murphy, seconded by
Commissioner Craghead, to adopt the CCAC goals as presented, with the minor adjustments
as proposed to remove the dates and reordering of the priorities. The motion passed
unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM #5: Budget Update
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean Farrelly reported that the proposed
Urban Renewal budget is approximately $150,000, which is the tax increment amount
projected for 2009-2010. We will want to concentrate on projects that can increase the
increment. In the past, the focus has been on good projects which are in the Urban Renewal
Plan, but won't necessarily increase the increment substantially. One example of a project
that could increase the increment could be doing a development opportunity study on a
piece of property which might then encourage the property owner to redevelop. Staff will
be asking for feedback from the CCAC throughout the year on those kinds of projects.
Farrelly referred to the Financial Forecast/Budget Calendar (Exhibit C). He advised that the
CCDA Budget Committee hearing will be held on April 27`h. There will be opportunities for
public comment. Chair Ellis Gaut suggested that the Commissioners decide ahead of time
what sort of testimony to offer and if just one person should testify for the group.
There was discussion about the joint committee (Councilor Wilson, Councilor Henderson,
Commissioner Shearer, and Commissioner Wong) for the store front program. Chair Ellis
Gaut noted that the committee hasn't convened as yet, but the Council minutes reflect that
the committee should get together, the sooner the better, to start thinking about the
program. It was suggested that the committee meet before the budget is finalized to discuss
talking to business and property owners and see if there's any interest in participating in the
program.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Staff will let the Commission know the time and
location of the Budget Committee hearing. Staff will also provide copies of the proposed
budget to the Commissioners before the hearing.
Councilor Henderson asked the secretary to set up a meeting for the Fagade Improvement
committee.
AGENDA ITEM #6: Downtown Circulation Plan Update and Discussion
CCAC Meeting Minutes for April 8,2009 Page 3 of 6
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean Farrelly advised that the City is about to
start a very important project for the Downtown that has a short timeline. Large block sizes
and a lack of connectivity make for limited circulation in the Downtown. It's difficult for
pedestrians, bikes, and vehicles to get around. The Downtown Circulation Plan would
implement a network, multimodal with improved connectivity, and would provide the basis
to attain right-of-way over the next 50 years as things develop. There could be major
impacts on some properties.
Farrelly advised that the City is currently looking for a design firm to team up with a traffic
and transportation specialist. They would use the conceptual diagram done by the
University of Oregon students as a starting point. In addition to producing a map, the
consultants will produce street sections for different classifications of streets (arterials, local
streets, etc.). In the meantime, the CCAC will review the map to see if it makes sense and
see if there are any changes that should be made.
It was noted that the map shows Scoffins connecting to Hunziker. That should be shown as
a future street, not a current connection. Also,it should be remembered that the residents on
Ash Avenue are adamantly opposed to having a street put across Fanno Creek, connecting
to the Downtown. The TDIP got their support by agreeing to not have that street as a part
of the plan. It was noted that there are other reasons for not putting the street through,
such as going through the wetlands. Anytime you cross a body of water, you create a host of
environmental issues that have to be resolved.
Councilor Henderson remarked that the crossing of Ash Street over the railroad tracks
involves working with the greater community. There was a time when the only resolution
for adding that crossing required eliminating a crossing somewhere else.
Sean Farrelly advised that the designers for the project will be hired by the end of April; the
project should be done by August. There will be an open house in August and developers
will be invited to attend. Farrelly reported that the City is using a State grant to update the
Transportation System Plan. The State has a deadline by September to have the Downtown
Circulation Plan done, so they can adopt it. During the process, there will be opportunities
for public input.
After the Commissioners began their review of the map, they determined there wouldn't be
enough time during this meeting to do a complete review. After discussion, it was decided
to hold a special workshop on April 22"`' to work on the map.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The Commissioners will hold a workshop at 6:00 on
April 22"d, in the Permit Center, to brainstorm about the circulation map. The workshop
will be led by Sean Farrelly and Commissioner Craghead.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for April 8,2009 Page 4 of 6
AGENDA ITEM #7: Highway 99W Design Vision Update
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Sean Farrelly reported that the future of Hwy.
99W is a high Council priority. They are interested in light rail or other high capacity transit
(HCT) coming down the 99W corridor. Metro has identified the 99W corridor as one of the
top 3 priorities for additional funding to study it more in depth. We are working with the
University of Oregon Portland Urban Architecture Research Lab, the same people who
worked on the Downtown Future Vision project. They will be doing a similar project for a
4 mile section of the 99W corridor, to envision what it could look like if there was HCT.
The 4 mile section would be inside Tigard's city limits (1-5 to King City).
Farrelly would like to see a CCAC representative come to the mid-point and final reviews of
the project. He will send an email to the Commissioners with the dates and times of the
reviews. Commissioners will let Sean know if they are interested in attending.
Farrelly advised that Metro did all the work to apply for a Transportation Growth
Management grant to fund the difficult part of coming up with proposed development code
language and extensive public outreach. We'll find out in May if the grant was approved.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): Staff will let the Commissioners know the dates and
times for the reviews. Staff will also find out if Sherwood is involved in the project.
AGENDA ITEM #8: Training Opportunities
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Chair Ellis Gaut informed the Commissioners
that formal training for the CCAC has been a goal for some time. She noted that the
Planning Commission went through this training some time ago and it was very successful.
Consultants were brought in to give them a course in how to run meetings. Staff advised
that the consultants, Cogan Owens Cogan, are specialists in public involvement.
The Commissioners liked the idea. It was suggested that the consultants first come to a
CCAC meeting to make some observations. They could then come back with some specific
suggestions. Other alternatives could be for them to make a presentation to the
Commission or to give them copy of our minutes so they have an idea of what the
Commission does. Commissioner Shearer said she would like to get more feedback from
them on how to interface with the public, especially since the CCAC will be doing a lot of
public meetings and working with local businesses. Chair Ellis Gaut noted that this could be
a 2-tier process — one being our internal process, the other being the outreach process.
CCAC Meeting Minutes for April 8,2009 Page 5 of 6
It was suggested that the consultants give a brief overview of who they are and what they do
so we could see what they could help us with.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The Commission will revisit this issue next month.
Staff will forward a copy of the Planning Commission minutes when they went through the
training with Cogan Owens Cogan.
AGENDA ITEM #9: Other Business
Important Discussion and/or Comments: Chair Ellis Gaut shared a conversation she
had with Councilor Buehner about the south Main Street plan. Councilor Buehner asked
about the CCAC's plan to do some serious outreach there, in terms of talking with business
owners. Chair Ellis Gaut assured her that this is on the Commission's radar, but in terms of
the Stakeholder Outreach Committee, she is unsure what the committee has discussed with
respect to south Main Street specifically.
Councilor Henderson advised that he, the Mayor, and Kim McMillan are meeting with
Greenburg Road/Hall Blvd. property and business owners. They are fielding questions
about the intersection improvement project.
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): None
AGENDA ITEM #10: Adjournment
Important Discussion and/or Comments:
Action Items (Follow-Up or Votes): The meeting adjourned at 8:49 p.m.
1�e2,,4 JL-f-en
e e Lewis, C A Secretary
ATTEST: A-k
Chair Alice Ellis Gaut
CCAC Meeting Minutes for April 8,2009 Page 6 of 6
CCAC Goals 2009
On April 8,2009 the CCAC met to solidify its goals for the coming year. As always, our primary
goal is to uphold our charge to advise the CCDA on matters pertaining to Urban Renewal Plan
implementation and tax increment fund allocations for the City Center Urban Renewal District.
While the Commission will accomplish many goals this year, the following represents the items
the CCAC believe deserves specific attention.
1. Downtown Land Use&Design Code
a. Review land use&design code(April—Aug)
b. Participate in public hearings and open houses(May—August)
c. State formal position to City Council (August)
2. Downtown Circulation Plan
a. Participate in public/business outreach(June—August)
b. Participate in open houses (August)
c. State formal position to City Council (August)
3. Tigard Transit Center
a. Review study as presented to CCAC(July)
b. Provide feedback and recommendations to Council (August)
4. Main Street Green Street
a. Participate in public/business outreach(June—December)
b. Provide on-going feedback/recommendations to Council
5. Storefront Improvement Program
a. Promote benefits and opportunities to business community
b. Participate with Staff in developing 2 project models
i. 1 large scale(full fagade development)
ii. 1 small budget(ie: paint, awnings, planters)
6. Review, participate as needed, and Provide on-going feedback/recommendations for the
following projects:
a. Burnham Street
b. Lower Fanno Creek Park
c. Greenburg Intersection
d. 99 Urban Design and Hall/99 Intersection
Long-term Goals
1. Continually improve CCAC processes and procedures including, but not limited to:
a. New Member Orientation
b. Efficiency of meetings and agendas
c. Annual calendar development
2. Increase our awareness of the impact our work has on the community
a. On-going outreach to businesses and local community
b. Continually work to increase transparency with citizens
c. Continually work to improve communication with council and staff
3. Perform other duties as assigned by CCDA
fre vise
CCAC Goals 2009
On April 8,2009 the CCAC met to approve its goals for the coming year. As always, our primary
goal is to uphold our charge to advise the CCDA on matters pertaining to Urban Renewal Plan
implementation and tax increment fund allocations for the City Center Urban Renewal District.
While the Commission will accomplish many goals this year,the following represents the items
the CCAC believe deserves specific attention.
1. Downtown Land Use& Design Code
a. Review land use&design code
b. Participate in public hearings and open houses
c. State formal position to City Council
2. Downtown Circulation Plan
a. Participate in public/business outreach
b. Participate in open houses
c. State formal position to City Council
3. Main Street Green Street
a. Participate in public/business outreach
b. Provide on-going feed back/recommendations to Council
4. Storefront Improvement Program
a. Promote benefits and opportunities to business community
b. Participate with Staff in developing 2 project models
i. I large scale(full fagade development)
ii. I small budget(ie: paint,awnings,planters)
5. Tigard Transit Center
a. Review study as presented to CCAC
b. Provide feedback and recommendations to Council
6. Review,participate as needed,and Provide on-going feed back/recommendations for
the following projects:
a. Burnham Street
b. Lower Fanno Creek Park
c. Greenburg Intersection
d. 99 Urban Design and Hall/99 Intersection
Long-term Goals
1. Continually improve CCAC processes and procedures including, but not limited to:
a. New Member Orientation
b. Efficiency of meetings and agendas
c. Annual calendar development
2. Increase our awareness of the impact our work has on the community
a. On-going outreach to businesses and local community
b. Continually work to increase transparency with citizens
c. Continually work to improve communication with council and staff
3. Perform other duties as assigned by CCDA
City of Tigard
FY 2009-10
Financial Forecast/Budget Calendar
• November 2008
o Forecast Training
• December, 2008
o Financial Forecast Due
o Individual Department Training
• January 2009
o 12-Department budget worksheets are available on the I drive
o 21 and 22-Department budget training
o 23-New FTE and position reclassification due to HR
• February 2009
0 13-Budget requests and revenue due to Finance
0 17-Budget committee meeting
0 20-HR FTE and reclass reports to the Finance Department
0 23-27-Department meetings with Finance staff
• March 2009
o 2-8-City Manager/Finance/Department meetings
0 11-Budget wrap up meeting with Craig
0 13, 20, 27-Requested budget and proposed budget development (Finance and Craig)
• April, 2009
o 3- Requested budget and proposed budget development(Finance and Craig)
o 6-Proposed budget to printer
o 10-Budget to budget committee
o 20-Exec Staff Budget Hearing preparation
o 27-Budget Committee hearing (CD, PW)
o 27-CCDA Budget Committee hearing
• May, 2009
o 4-Budget Committee hearing (Recap 4/27 mtg., Police, Library, City Admin, Policy &
Legislation)
0 11-Budget Committee hearing (Recap 514 mtg., Citywide issue papers, Discussion and wrap
up)
0 18-Budget Committee hearing if needed
o 26-Budget materials due in council packet
• June 9, 2009
o Budget presented to Council
r
w
n
MEMORANDUM
TIGARD
TO: Alice Ellis Gaut, Chair CCAC
FROM: Sean Farrelly,Associate Planner
RE: Downtown Circulation Plan
DATE: March 30, 2009
The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) found one of the major constraints for
the development of Downtown to be the lack of connectivity - which impedes pedestrian,
transit, bicycle, and vehicle circulation in the Downtown. Barriers to connectivity include
block size, the rail line, Highway 99W, and Fanno Creek. The Downtown Circulation Plan
will address these constraints and plan for multi-modal circulation in the Downtown Urban
Renewal District. It will later be adopted as part of the Tigard Transportation System Plan
(TSP), or could be adopted as a stand-alone plan.
The purpose of the Plan is to:
■ Implement a transportation network with improved connectivity and provide the
basis to obtain rights-of-wap for the network as new development occurs over the
next fifty years.
■ Establish street standards which will lay the foundation for vibrant, active, pedestrian-
friendly streets which accommodate anticipated uses and allow traffic to move
appropriately within the district.
The Circulation Plan will include:
1. A map specifically identifying the recommended location of Downtown streets and
pedestrian pathways within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The conceptual
street network illustrated in the Tigard Downtown Future Vision (Attachment 1) and the
Downtown Streetscape Design Plan will be used as starting points in the development of
the map.
2. A range of flexible, street functional classifications, and street cross-sections to
address the elements of lane width, on-street parking, bicycle lanes, planting strips,
sidewalks, shoulders, street trees, and medians for each functional street classification
(i.e. collectors, local streets, alleys, and other public rights-of-way).
1
A
w
3. A transportation engineering review of the recommended new Downtown
transportation network. The review will utilize existing conditions and future
projections of traffic volumes and intersection turning movements.
4. An assessment of how new transportation connections will affect:
a. The value of properties impacted; and
b. The value of properties in the Urban Renewal District as a whole.
A consultant team will be selected by the first week of May and the project is scheduled to be
completed by September,2009.
Public Involvement
The Public Involvement Plan (Attachment 2) identifies stakeholder engagement activities.
Stakeholders include Downtown residents, property and business owners, the City Center
Advisory Commission (CCAC), Chamber of Commerce, and the Tigard Central Business
District Association. Activities include regular CCAC updates and an open house.
Stakeholder interest is expected to be high, as the plan will have potential impacts on
property values.
The CCAC will play a key role in the process by reviewing the Circulation Plan at various
project phases. After reviewing the final draft of the Circulation Plan, the CCAC can
consider making a recommendation to the Planning Commission.
2
r
Attachment 1 : Conceptual Circulation Plan
F - r
0 0
O
00 O y
O
< O
O0O 00
01 0 00
0 Da0 00r
o ad 4�
OpbO L7
o
o O Q G D
o° �0 o O Q � a
tfP�yki
OO� QO� FR
,/'�
�G^GyYQV .10O Q O�
a o 0 o a P> '�O 6o� �d Q
pOpo
_ UO /y0Q
OVO Q 0
o° o
�0 040
' 0 O b�
1
o� fr
z j ` t' �' �QooAo L-
6
o
4'
•4. r , il�y�f t 7 Vr I4 aQ � - �3 S_.,1'-�' �-
f3 CONCEPTUAL FUTURE POTENTIAL CIRCULATION PLAN
PEDESTRIAN PATHS
FUTURE STREETSlAUTO CONNECTIONS Based on current streets and potential
street continuations as well as alignments
0 EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PATHS of destination points this diagram shows a
EXISTING STREETS projection of future vehicular and pedestrian
circulation,
FANNO CREEK
i
r
Attachment 2
Public Involvement Plan
Tigard Downtown Circulation Plan
I. Introduction
Background
The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) found one of the major constraints for the
development of Downtown to be the lack of connectivity-which impedes pedestrian,bicycle, and
vehicle circulation in the Downtown.Barriers to connectivity include block size,the rail line,
Highway 99W and Fanno Creek.
The Downtown Circulation Plan will address these constraints and be adopted as part of the Tigard
Transportation System Plan (TSP).
The Circulation Plan will include:
1. A map specifically identifying the recommended location of Downtown streets and
pedestrian pathways within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. The conceptual street
network was illustrated in the Tigard Downtown Future Vision. This map,as well as the
Downtown Streetscape Design Plan,will be used as starting points in the development of a
recommended map.The recommended network will be consistent with street connectivity
standards contained in the draft Downtown Development Code.
2. A range of flexible, street functional classifications and street cross-sections to address the
elements of lane width, on-street parking,bicycle lanes,planting strips,sidewalks, shoulder,
street trees, and medians for each functional street classification (i.e. collectors,local streets,
etc.).
3. A transportation engineering review of the recommended new Downtown transportation
network. The review will utilize existing conditions and future projections of traffic volumes
and intersection turning movements.
4. An assessment of how new transportation connections will affect:
a. The value of properties impacted;and
b. The value of properties in the Urban Renewal District as a whole.
Purpose
The City's objective is the completion of a plan for vehicle,pedestrian, and bicycle circulation in the
Downtown Urban Renewal District which implements the community's planning vision. The
purpose of the plan is to:
■ Implement a transportation network with improved connectivity and provide the basis to
obtain rights-of-way for the network as new development occurs over the next fifty years.
■ Establish street standards which will lay the foundation for vibrant,active,pedestrian-
friendly streets which accommodate anticipated uses and allow traffic to move appropriately
within the district.
1
Attachment 2
Public Involvement Plan Components
The Tigard Comprehensive Plan Citizen Involvement section is divided between two goals:
Goal 1.1: Provide Citizens,affected agencies,and other jurisdictions the o]212ortunitY to participate in
all phases of the planning process.
Goal 1.2 Ensure all Citizens have access to:
A. Opportunities to communicate directly to the City;and
B. Information on issues in an understandable form.
Thus, the Communication Plan breaks down each phase of the process and addresses ways in which
citizens and stakeholders can participate, communicate,and receive information about the
Downtown Circulation Plan.
Key Players
City CenterAdvisory Commission
The Advisory Commission's role is to provide comments and suggestions on the development and
implementation of an Urban Renewal Plan for improving the downtown area.The Commission will
review the Circulation Plan as it is developed and make a recommendation to the Planning
Commission.
Stakeholders
For this project, stakeholders are divided into two categories:
• "Downtown": Business owners,property owners, residents,and civic leaders from within
the downtown urban renewal district.This includes stakeholder/leadership groups, such as
the Tigard Central Business District Association and the Chamber of Commerce, along with
business and property owners in the area.Potential issues may include impacts on property
values from right-of-way acquisition, street utility improvement costs, decreased or enhanced
business viability, and opportunities for customer access.
• "Tigard Citizens": Outreach to residents and business owners in other parts of the City,
including the Neighborhood Network program.
Staff
ff'
The role of staff will be to facilitate the CCAC meetings, the Committee for Citizen Involvement
(CCI) meetings,and the open house. City staff will also participate in the review of materials
provided by the consultant.
Committee for Citizen Involvement
The role of the Committee for Citizen Involvement is to review the form and process of City
communications with its residents. This Committee will have an opportunity to review the
Communication Plan at the outset of the project,and will monitor citizen involvement throughout
the process.
2
,. Attachment 2
Schedule
This project is expected to run through November 2009.
II. Project Phases
Each of the following phases will have a citizen engagement component (see Tools Matrix
on next page):
Phase 1: Project Launch
Tasks:
a. Approve Communication Plan
b. Get the word out
c. Hiring of Consultant
Phase 2: Define Current Conditions
Tasks:
a. Review Past Work
b. Present Issues and Findings
Phase 3: Develop Draft Plan
Tasks:
a. Develop Draft Circulation Map and Street Sections
b. Staff Review
Phase 4: Draft Plan Review
Tasks:
a. Traffic Engineering Review
b. TSP Consultant Review
Phase 5: Plan Adoption
Tasks:
a. City Center Advisory Commission Recommendation
b. Planning Commission Work Sessions and Public Hearings
c. City Council Work Sessions and Public Hearings
Phase 6: Implementation and Monitoring
III. Project Schedule
Phase 1:4Ph:se
efiane se 2: Phase 3: Phase 4: Phase 5:
•
Project Develop Draft Plan Plan
Launch Conditions Current Draft Plan ` Review Adoption
3
Attachment 2
IV. Public Involvement Tools Matrix
11base 1: Project Launch
Involvement Tools Comprehensive Plan Policy
CCAC Meeting Participation
CCI Meeting Participation
Stakeholder Meeting Information
Develop Website Information
ListSery Messa a Communication
,,_Phase 2:,J,)efiiie Current Conditions
Involvement Tools Coin prchcnsive Plan Policy
CCAC Meeting Participation
Cityscape Article Information
Update Website Information
Listsery Messa a Communication
Mraie 3: Vffl�aft Plan W"
Involvement Tools Comprehensive Plan Policy
CCAC Meeting Participation
Open House Participation
Cityscape Article Information
Update Website Information
Listsery Message Communication
Phase 4: Draft Plan Review
Involvement Tools Comprehensive Plan Policy
CCAC Meeting Participation
Comment Period Participation
U date Website Information
Press Release-NN Websites Information
Listsery Messa a Communication
Phase 5: Plan Adoption
Involvement Tools Com rehensive Plan Policy
Planning Commission Work Sessions and Public
Participation
Hearing
City Council Work Sessions and Public Hearing Participation
Cityscape Article Information
Update Website Information
Press Release-NN Websites Information
Listsery Message Communication
Phase 6: Implementation
4
r
Note:This was requested at the March 11,2009 CCAC meeting.
Excerpt from Transcript: 2/17/09 CCDA/CCAC meeting
Agenda Item 3.3: Downtown Commercial Fagade Improvement Program
Mayor Dirksen: Can we assume if most f not all of us think that a facade grant or loan program for the
Downtown is a good idea and wr should look into having that in this comingyear.
CCAC Member Louw. Did not think them would be any benefit at this point time. We have a number of
businesses looking at leaving Downtown because of the economic conditions. Having gone througb the permit
process and understanding the codes of the City, he thinks it is premature to a proper code development to allow
these improvements to be significant and actually heo the businesses Referred to issues with sign codes that do not
foster a good business environment that should be addressed
Mayor Dirksen advdsed part of the issues raised were based on where we are in the process of creating our design
standards and codes. He asked staff to address.
Phil Nachbar said the focus for design would be that because we are able to form a grant program to incorporate
rules and regulation we want. The standards we are now developing for the City do not necessarily have to be
adopted by the City Council Senior Planner Nachbar confirmed Mayor Dirksen's statement that the City could
make people adhere to these standards now. Senior Planner Nachbar said the standards are being refined and
advised there is a consultant working with staff on the refinement of the design standards. By June, if we were
start a program, we would have standards in place that would be almost final(not adopted);we'd be comfortable
using these as a benchmark for the program.
CCAC Member Barkley said she does not have an objection to a faFade program of some sort or look into it as
something we might want to da;she suggested that a first step would be to walk the street to determine what kind
of interest there is in thisprogram before it is drawn up. There could be morepeople with similar opinions to Pete.
There have been people who have been putting money into their buildings. `Those of us who are slower are going
to be able to reap the benefits of a fafade program, where the people who jumped on it, are not." Could the
program be retroacttve. A property owner might not be interested in participating if they think the building will
be torn down for some other kind of development. She said it would be a good idea to talk to the people `bn that
street"beforryou set upyaurplan.
Councilor Buehner asked if this something the CCAC would be willing to take on and come hack in a month or
so with a report.
CCAC Member Louw.• Most of the retail type businesses do not own the property. The landlord would
participate to increase his rents. "Unless there's more business to support those higher rents, that's not going to
happen." He suggested it would be better to bele them do things to increase the business to support the higher
rents.
Councilor Buehner commented that she was a small business owner, but she's not in the Downtown. She said she
hears constantly from other small businesses that are not Downtown that they =11 not move downtown because
most of it looks "ro ratty." It is a deterrent to business coming Downtown.
1
Council President Wilson said it's a "clikkenl egg thing,"where we hope that by improving the appearance, it
will draw more people down there. Pete said he agreed with that— but suggested rather than the fafade, it's
because of the weeds in the sidewalk and the trash. Council President Wilson disagreed. He said be thought the
facades are absolutely important. Pete refereed to the drive train and bicycle shops— those building are derelict.
Pete noted there is a residential maintenance code, but there is no commercial maintenance code for keeping
sidewalks clean, repairing cracks, etc. There are some basic structural things that might not cost the City any
mon y — making people clean up their properly out to the street. He noted there would be the same state of
disrepair unless people are required to maintain the facades.
Mayor Dirksen said when we develop the criteria, if we were to create a grant program, we would make the
criteria that to receive a grant requirements could be included relating to the viability and the commitment of the
property and business owner. Another thing that could be required for a grant, would be the issues of
maintenance. `2fyou come to us and ask for a grant to improve your fafade, but your sidewalk is in disrepair
and there are weeds and trash, what are the odds we are going to give you a grant...Offering f4 fade fronts might
actually create incentive to make people do better at maintaining
Councilor Buehner said she would hesitate to impose more regulation from the City as being anti-business in the
Downtown. "...We ie trying to give you a carrot to take care ofyour property. The question...is how do we get
hold of the absentee landlords that never come down and look at what's going on. That's something that,
hopefully,you guys can up with a brilliant idea of how we get them to become engaged."
Mayor Dirksen: "Well again,you offer them money to improve their proper y..." If you have a business owner
that would like to see the fayfade of his business impmved, it might encourage better communication between them
and the absentee landlord.
Council President Wilson said he wouldpropose a different approach. He said that not every expenditure on a
building would qualify as an improvement. He said he would suspect that a lot of business owners might not have
ever dealt with an architect before. He agreed with Com. Barkly to start a conversation to flesh out the idea with
business owners I think ought to allocate some money to hire an architect and solicit participation by up to about
five people in having an architect draw some sketches of what could be done to a building. Then, at that point,
they would become eligible to develop a proposal further, with a budget from a contractor. It would be important,
just starting, to set the high bar and to put more mon y into it(8001o) as an example project of how a building
can be totally transformed. In subsequentyears the contribution would be less. Because the first one is always the
hardest, becauseyou do not know if it willpenalout,payoff. Once itgetsgoing then owners can see the benefit of
that. I think it would be good to do it fairly quickly, despite the economy. If there is higher City participation,
then there would be less hesitant.
Ron Bunch said he would be enthused about engaging businesses,property owners, and absentee landlords with a
demonstrationpn ject whereyou can showpeople howgood a building could look. A demonstration project with a
designer. It would be a great idea to hold a chard to illustrate how good these buildings that are seen as
commonplace could look with new paint, a window reorientation, some entry work, some sidewalk help. It would
be a very good thing to engage those proper y owners and businesses.
Council President Wilson added that especially in an era of uncertainty...maybe some businesses will actually
pull out soon. He referred to the `bld sprinkler building"on 99WI— thy moved out and it has been fixed up
(near the old administration building for the school district).
2
f
Mayor Dirksen said what he is hearing is perhaps an alternative, where instead of this year creating a fully
funded faFade grant program, instead we devote some time and energy to coming up with a criteria for one and,
perhaps putting together a pilot program to do a demonstration in this coming year. Is that a compromise.
Phil Nachbar asked for clarification.
Council President Wilson said "we will engage an architect. We will solicit participation from a limited
number...maybe we have some criteria for selection if there are more than five...maybe it's based on their
visibility of their location. Of those limited number of owners, they will work with the architect to have some
things drawn up at no cost to them. After which time, the process will be competitive. The City wid select a
number— i.e., they'll pay something and we'll pay something. We'll pick one or more projects. It needs to be a
"big splash and it needs to be significant enough that everybody would want to participate, because it wouldn't
economic sense to not participate. Then in subsequentyears after the pilot is done., it would be more 50150."
Phil Nachbar—Architects are really good at drawing out improvements that are eye-catching and capture the
drive-by...they would also hep during the bidding process, so that the property owner that is uncomfortable with a
big process can be assisted. It is a good idea in general to employ the uses of an architect for this type of pmgram.
The average cost—about$20-30,000 for improvements. Some of the programs offer up to$5,000, while others
offer up to X20,000 for matching funds. The more expensive programs can do more and solve multiple problems
(windows, awnings, masonry work). If we were going to undertake a project, we wouldn't necessarily have to do
an extensive project, but one that shows whatyou can do—what impact small improvements can make.
Mayor Dirksen: We might want to consider having two different kinds of projects. One that is strictly an
improvement project, which Wright include painting or flower boxes. Another grant program that s 50150 for
people who want more substantial changes to the f trots of their buildings.
Mayor Dirksen: In the short term, asked to have Council President Wilson and Councilor Henderson to be
part of a subcommittee and have the CCAC appoint two members to work with two City Council and members
of staff to come up with a pilot program for this coming year. There was consensus...
City Manager Prosser— "...want to bring the fiscal reality in here. Inputting something together, it will be very
much dependent on how much money the District has. We are still very on. If weget too big, we're going to have
start at looking at loans from the General Fund. Just remember that we still have these fiscal constraints...I
think we're onto something here with the direction we want to go. One other thing that occurs—maybe develop a
program where having some sort of architectural rendering paid for by the City as a gatekeeper to a grantprogram,
for the long term...again, it's within the available resources or we're talking about loans from the City and how
we can actually afford. And, that will all get sorted out in the budget process: And none of this could get started
before July 1.
Mayor Dirksen: Suggested that the smallergroup meet sooner rather than later for the scope, so that it could be
considered in the Budget process.
Councilor Buehner Thought Alexander had a good suggestion that, if and when we pick a place for a pilot
demonstration project, that it be in the section of Main Street that is going to be part of the green street proposal.
Mayor Dirksen: Said that this could be considered, but not necessarily need to be limited to that.
I:\ADM\CATHY\CCM\2009\Excerpts\facade program- 2 17 09 meeting discussion with ccac.docx
3
41
MEMORANDUM
TO: Alice Ellis Gaut, Chair CCAC
FROM: Sean Farrelly, Associate Planner
RE: Highway 99X1 Design Vision/High Capacity Transit Update
DATE: March 30, 2009
Tigard City Council has made the future of the Highway 99W corridor the subject of three of
its goals:
2009 Goals:
1. Implement Comprehensive Plan
c. Continue to lobby for light rail in 99W corridor
5-Year Goals
Obtain 99W designation as the next Light Rail Corridor
Long Term Goals
Seek to improve Hwy 99W corridor (land use, alternative routes, traffic, etc.)
To further these goals, staff engaged the services of the University of Oregon's Portland Urban
Architecture Research Laboratory in January, 2009. This is the same department that
produced the Tigard Downtown Future Vision.
The goal of the project is to develop a land use/urban design vision for the 4-mile Tigard
portion of the Highway 99W corridor. It has three purposes:
A. To illustrate the potential of the Hwy 99W corridor to develop the requisite land uses at
urban intensities necessary to support regional investment in High Capacity Transit. It
will provide a three-dimensional graphic representation of the design character of an
intensely developed, amenity-rich, mixed use, urban corridor.
B. Serve as a City communication tool for citizen engagement efforts; evaluation of specific
sites' development potential, and evaluation of future infrastructure and public facility
. needs.
1
C. To illustrate how the corridor's livability disadvantages can be overcome to develop a
place where people want to live,work, shop, and recreate; and develop ideas to
incorporate "green" design elements into future corridor development.
In the past semester, a professor, a graduate fellow, and a class of graduate students worked
on documenting the existing conditions of the corridor and doing preliminary drawings of
potential future development. In the upcoming spring semester, an architecture studio class
will create a "3-D" vision of the scale, form, and character of a transit supportive urban form
for the Hwy 99W corridor. The project will continue with selected students throughout the
summer continuing project tasks, including visualizing potential station nodes. The project
is scheduled to be completed in November, 2009.
Stakeholder involvement will include invitations to the "pin-up" review of work in progress.
An open house is tentatively scheduled for July and will include review of studio work, and
potentially a guest speaker- an academic expert on development in transit corridors.
High Capacity Transit
Parallel to this project, Metro has been undertaking a High Capacity Transit (HCT) Plan.
Last week a draft HCT System detailed evaluation was released, including a list of corridor
priorities. The corridor roughly following Barbur Blvd and Hwy 99W from Portland to
Tigard to Sherwood was ranked as one of the top 3 priority corridors. The intention would
be to begin Alternatives Analysis (the next step towards design) for these corridors in the
upcoming planning cycle (the next couple of years).
Metro staff, in partnership with the City, have also applied for a State Transportation
Growth Management grant to complete a High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan in the
Highway 99W Corridor. If this grant application is funded in May, the project will start in
November, 2009 and have a timeline of about one year. The outcome of the plan would be a
set of land use corridor alternatives, opportunities for transit-oriented developments, and
zoning recommendations leading to plan amendments. The Design Vision will be an
important tool in the future land use planning process.
2
Downtown Projects(Staff) 2009 Timeline
April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Downtown Land Use and Design Code
Review by CCAC/Design Subcommittee x x
Open House x
Planning Commission workshop/public hearings x x x x
Council hearings/adoption x x
Downtown Circulation Plan
RFQ out x
Select Consultant x
Public/business outreach x x x
CCAC Review x x x x
Open House x
Review for inclusion in TSP x
Tigard Transit Center Redevelopment Study
Project meetings x x x
Bus stop relocation study/public and business outreach x x x x
Complete Study x
Brief CCAC/Council x
Storefront Improvement Program
Budgeting x x x
Program development x x x x
Main Street Green Street
Public/business outreach x x x x x x x
RFP x
Design and Engineering x x x x
Burnham Street
Final ROW acquisition x x x
Construction x x x
Park and Ride connection
Downtown Projects (Staff) 2009 Timeline
April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Lower Fanno Creek Park
CWS re-meander creek x x x
Replacement of bridges/paths x x
Greenburg Intersection
Design and Engineering x x x x x x x x x
Hall/99 Intersection
Design and Engineering x x x x x x x x x
Gateway
Brownfields Grant
Potential grant award x
Highway 99W Urban Design Vision
U of 0 work x x x x x x x
Open house/forum x I x
Presentation to Council x
Other:
Rail to Trail
City of Tigard
City Center Advisory Commission — Agenda
�xrioti:ti:.:�twkurJe.rrrNLL+wMSl.nrwrr1+!Y+L's+Y16rft nrcxlrrn�V9T7t7Rsadsim�:u:i6m[Oa�J'caaG*.s e,.:sYi�nnmr�K;��9f��:h:�.aR7��1�w�fsny.4ea�:.:.iz1�',:�9aPrY+lrVfl�ale4ct/l7tfisllctisli
MEETING DATE: Wednesday, April 8, 2009 — 6:30-8:30 p.m.
MEETING LOCATION: Tigard Public Library Community Room, V, Floor
13500 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223
1. Welcome and Introductions.................................................................................................... 6:30 — 6:35
2. Check-in..................................................................................................................................... 6:35 — 6:45
3. Review / Approve Minutes..................................................................................................... 6:45 — 6:50
4. CCAC Goals / Agenda Setting Discussion .......................................................................... 6:50 — 7:10
(Kevin Kutcher)
5. Budget Update.......................................................................................................................... 7:10 —7:25
i. Downtown Circulation Plan Update and Discussion.......................................................... 7:25 — 7:55
7. Highway 99W Design Vision Update ................................................................................... 7:55 — 8:10
8. Training Opportunities............................................................................................................ 8:10 — 8:25
9. Other Business.......................................................................................................................... 8:25 — 8:30
10. Adjourn ..................................................................................................................................... 8:30 p.m.
CITY CENTER ADVISORY COMMISSION AGENDA—April 8, 2009
City of Tigard 1 13125 SAY/Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1 503-639-4171 1 www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 oft