The URL can be used to link to this page

05/01/2011 - Packet , II Completeness TIGARD Review for Boards, Commissions and Committee Records CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Name of Board, Commission or Committee May 2,2011 Date of Meeting Signature Doreen Laughlin 11/6/14 Date 1s " City of Tigard TIGARD Planning Commission Agenda MEETING DATE: May 2, 2011; 7:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City of Tigard—Town Hall 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL 7:00 p.m. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 7:02 p.m. 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:05 p.m. 5. BRIEFING—7:05 p.m. REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE:UPDATE&DIRECTION 6. BRIEFING—8:05 p.m. 1ST HCT LAND USE PLAN UPDATE 7. WORK SESSION—8:50 p.m. MAY 17 JOINT CITY COUNCIL / PLANNING COMMISSION 8. OTHER BUSINESS 9:05 p.m. 9. ADJOURNMENT 9:10 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA— MAY 2, 2011 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 of 1 111111 1.,`" City of Tigard TIGARD Memorandum , To: Dave Walsh, President; and Members of the Planning Commission From: John Floyd, Gary Pagenstecher Re: Tigard Development Code (TDC) Regulatory Improvement Initiative Update and Workshop Date: April 25, 2011 Staff wishes to update the Commission on the latest package of Regulatory Improvement Initiative (RII) code amendments pertaining to decision making procedures and related sections. Later this year the Commission and Council will be asked to consider a package of Tigard Development Code (TDC) amendments relating to decision making procedures. This package constitutes the next phase of the Regulatory Improvement Initiative, and builds upon amendments to the Use Classifications Chapter that were reviewed by the Commission and later adopted by Council on September 28, 2010. Decision-making procedures are the next logical subject as this general subject constitutes more than a quarter of the inventoried problems with the TDC and is the subject of several recent Director's Interpretations. Staff anticipates public hearings to begin this summer, following a joint Council/Planning Commission meeting on the topic on June 21. Project Scope Due to the underlying structure of the code, approximately 39 chapters will be impacted by this project. A full list of the potentially affected chapters can be found in Attachment 1. The intent of these changes is not to change approval criteria or standards, but to clarify and streamline how the city processes and administers the various types of land use reviews required by the Development Code. During Phase I of the RII, staff established a working database of known issues that required a code amendment to resolve. Some are minor in nature, such as name changes and scrivener's errors, while others are more substantial. At present, there are approximately 68 entries requiring action. This amendment package will directly address at least 18 of these entries, and provides a timely opportunity to address the remainder on a case-by-case basis. Page 1 of 3 Principles & Goals When preparing these amendments for Council and Commission's consideration, staff is filtering each change through seven questions to ensure that any proposed amendment is meaningful and effective, and not change for change's sake. While presented in question form, these questions contain and implement the underlying themes and goals of the MI. In no particular order, these include the following: 1. Does the proposed amendment improve consistency with other sections of the Tigard Development Code, the Comprehensive Plan, and applicable land use law? 2. Do the proposed amendments clarify what is required in the simplest and clearest way possible? 3. Does the proposed amendment solve a known problem? 4. Does the proposed amendment codify or clarify existing administrative practices? 5. Does the proposed amendment enable the kind of development that Tigard wants to attract? 6. Is the proposed amendment consistent with Tigard's historical experiences and uniqueness? 7. Does the proposed amendment provide enough flexibility to adapt to unique or unanticipated circumstances? Council and Planning Commission Direction Work completed so far has identified the following aspects of the project where the Council and Commission may wish to provide early comment. They are: 1. Is the Council and Commission comfortable with the principals and goals of this phase of the MI, as outlined in the section above? 2. Code Amendment packages provide timely opportunities to efficiently "clean-up" the code. To what degree do the Council and Commission wish to address problematic code items which are known to require attention, but do not fall strictly within the definition of decision-making procedures? Two examples include the codification of recent Director's Interpretations, and necessary changes to Chapter 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) as a result of amendments to Chapter 12 (Water and Sewer). 3. Do the Council and Commission have a preference on the placement of legislative history within the development code? This could take the form of commentary (current practice, but inconsistently applied and losing relevance with age), or a list of implementing and amending ordinance numbers inserted at the beginning of each chapter. Staff introduced this latest package to City Council at its April 19, 2011 Workshop Meeting. Without changing the scope, principals or goals of the project, the Council did discuss decision making assignments with respect to subdivisions. Currently a Type II administrative decision, there was some interest in considering Commission review (Type III) of subdivisions to allow for greater opportunity for public input. However, in the past, when the Commission did review subdivisions, Page 2 of 3 one council person commented there was little the Commission could add substantively given the development standards in the code. Additionally, infill development was briefly discussed. Staff would like the Commission's input on these questions and any other comments the Commission may have with respect to the project scope, principals and goals. Direction received will inform development of the code amendments that staff will bring back to the Commission's joint meeting with Council in June. Attachment 1 - Potentially Affected Chapters Page 3 of 3 Attachment "1" Decision Making Procedures Development Code Amendment Package: Potentially Affected Chapters # To be removed * To the extent necessary to accommodate new terms and definitions ** To the extent necessary to update citations and submittal requirements to avoid inconsistencies Table of Contents 18.100: Introduction Legislative Notes # 18.110: Introduction 18.115: List of Terms* 18.120: Definitions* 18.200: Administrative Procedures Legislative Notes # 18.210: General Administrative Procedures 18.220: Zoning Administration 18.300: Land Use Decisions Legislative Notes # 18.310: Summary of Land Use Permits 18.330: Conditional Use 18.340: Director's Interpretations 18.350: Planned Development 18.360: Site Development Review 18.370: Variances and Adjustments 18.380: Zoning Map and Text Amendments 18.385: Miscellaneous Permits 18.390: Decision Making Procedures 18.400: Land Division Legislative Notes # 18.410: Lot Line Adjustments 18.420: Land Partitions** 18.430: Subdivisions** 18.500: Zoning District Legislative Notes# 18:600: Community Plan Area Standards Legislative Notes** 18:610: Tigard Downtown District Development and Design Standards** 18.620: Tigard Triangle Design Standards** 18.630: Washington Square Regional Center Design Standards** 18.640: Durham Quarry Design Standards** 18.700: Specific Development Standards Legislative Notes** 18.705: Access, Egress, and Circulation** 18.710:Accessory Residential Units** 18.730: Exceptions to Development Standards** 18.742: Home Occupations** 18.775: Sensitive Lands** 18.780: Signs** 18.785: Temporary Uses 18.790: Tree Removal** 18.798: Wireless Communication Facilities** 18.800: Street and Utility Improvement Standards Legislative Notes # CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes May 2, 2011 CALL TO ORDER President Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Walsh Vice President Anderson Commissioner Hasman Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Ryan Commissioner Schmidt Commissioner Shavey Absent: Commissioner Doherty Staff Present: Susan Hartnett,Assistant Community Development Director; Doreen Laughlin, Confidential Executive Assistant; Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner;John Floyd,Associate Planner;Judith Gray, Sr. Transportation Planner; Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager Also Present: City Council Liaison Marc Woodard COMMUNICATIONS—Commissioner Shavey went to So. Mississippi Avenue on a field trip and shared some of the things he learned on that visit. He was pleased at the successful trip and noted there were about 25 people in attendance. The group looked at So. Mississippi as a good example of what Main Street could become. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES April 4 Meeting Minutes: President Walsh asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the April 4 minutes; there being none, Walsh declared the minutes approved as submitted. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2011 PC Packets\5-2-11 Briefing Reg.Imps.Initiative,1st HCT Land Use Plan updates\Records Division Packet\4-TPC Minutes 5-2-11.doc Page 1 of 4 BRIEFING— REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE: UPDATE AND DIRECTION John Floyd,Associate Planner,was there to brief the Planning Commission on the next phase of the ongoing Regulatory Improvement Initiative (RIl). He reminded them that staff is still drafting the amendment package and that this is just an early"check-in"with regard to the progress and future direction. Floyd said this amendment package would do the following: • The RH project is a multi-year effort to update and enhance the city's development code through phased enhancements and corrections to known problems. • Both the city and the public can enjoy greater clarity of what the code requires • Greater efficiencies during the review process • Greater legal certainty should a decision be appealed He noted the amendment package was adopted by Council in September of last year and provides a foundation for the next phase—"Decision Making Procedures." The desired end result of this amendment package is to enhance the clarity, efficiency, and legal foundations of the processes we use to approve or deny a permit. To get there, staff has developed the following seven filters (questions) through which each change is tested: 1. Does the new language improve consistency? 2. Is the change as clear and simple as we can make it? 3. Does it solve a known problem? 4. Does it formalize an administrative practice? 5. Does it enable development that Tigard wants? 6. Does it acknowledge and support Tigard's unique needs and goals? 7. Does the change provide flexibility for unique or unanticipated circumstances? QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS President Walsh asked the group: Is the Planning Commission comfortable with the general principals outlined in the seven questions? The consensus was "yes." Other questions from the commissioners: o Is this similar to an Omnibus package like last year?No— it's more thematically focused. o Where is this coming from? Is it coming from staff, or people who use the code? Both sides actually. There are unclear sections.Applicants said they would like to see a cleaner code. o When will this come back our way? Midsummer I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2011 PC Packets\5-2-11 Briefing Reg.Imps.Initiative,1st HCT Land Use Plan updates\Records Division Packet\4-TPC Minutes 5-2-11.doc Page 2 of 4 The question was asked "What are users saying? There was some discussion as to whether their preference is to have legislative history within the Code. Floyd couldn't cite a specific example of someone stating their preference regarding that. President Walsh said staff could always send specific questions to the commissioners via email should there be certain sections in the code in general that raise concern. BRIEFING—FIRST HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT LAND USE PLAN UPDATE Judith Gray, Sr. Transportation Planner gave an informational briefing on the High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan by way of a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A). The main points she covered were: ❖ SW Corridor Plan ❖ Major Tasks Completed ❖ Typologies ❖ Upcoming Tasks Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager, gave a brief review of Public Involvement with regard to the plan. It was noted that people want to know where the stations are and what kind of transit it will be—to which Farrelly answered, "There are no answers to that yet—Metro will start a multi- million dollar process to analyze things. An alignment is about 10 years out." Below are examples given regarding this project and public involvement: ❖ Farmers Market 3rd Sunday of the month ❖ Public meeting on May 25th ❖ June 6 Planning Commission meeting will be solely focused on the Tigard Triangle ❖ Balloon Festival in June Farrelly navigated to the city website and pointed out that the Citizen Advisory Committee meetings are on-line in streamlined video form: http://www.tigard-or.gov/sw corridor/planning.asp WORK SESSION — MAY 17 JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION Susan Hartnett, Assistant Community Development Director,went over the draft Agenda Item Summary (Exhibit B). She noted that on June 6 the Planning Commission meeting will be roundtable style and the goal will be that they have a good feel for the triangle. She said I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2011 PC Packets\5-2-11 Briefing Reg.Imps.Initiative,1st HCT Land Use Plan updates\Records Division Packet\4-TPC Minutes 5-2-11.doc Page 3 of 4 Tigard has hired a consultant who will be working with them in a visioning session. It will be a four to six hour day. She noted that at the end of the June 6 meeting they will discuss details on what that type of activity will look like. President Walsh suggested inviting some stakeholders or agencies — ODOT, Metro, etc. Hartnett asked how many commissioners would likely show up at the May 17th meeting— four commissioners indicated they would be there. OTHER BUSINESS Susan Hartnett gave an update on what will happen with the Economic Opportunities Analysis. She said there'd been a slight glitch - an issue Metro. Metro does not want the glossary to use the word "boundary" in describing their maps — so a few words will have to be taken out of each of those glossary definitions... where it says "whose boundary is"... will just say "is shown on." The City Manager or City Attorney will suggest a minor revision to the language that they put forward in their recommendation. So that will be a slight change to the recommendation but other than that it will all go forward as they recommended to Council. President Walsh asked for an update on the Fields Case Pivot Bridge. Hartnett spoke on this to the commissioners and noted that the information is available on the city website under the public notice section: http://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/public notices/default.asp and the staff report is also available on-line: http://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/public notices/docs/cup2010-00002 staff report.pdf The question was asked "Is it appealable?" Yes ADJOURNMENT President Walsh adjourned the meeting at 8:16 p.m. Doreen Laughlin,Planning Commission Secretary ATTEST: President Walsh I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2011 PC Packets\5-2-11 Briefing Reg.Imps.Initiative,1st HCT Land Use Plan updates\Records Division Packet\4-TPC Minutes 5-2-11.doc Page 4 of 4 I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2011 PC Packets\5-2-11 Briefing Reg.Imps.Initiative,1st HCT Land Use Plan updates\Records Division Packet\4-TPC Minutes 5-2-Il.doc Page 5 of 5 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes May 2, 2011 CALL TO ORDER President Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd. ROLL CALL Present: President Walsh Vice President Anderson Commissioner Hasman Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Ryan Commissioner Schmidt Commissioner Shavey Absent: Commissioner Doherty Staff Present: Susan Hartnett, Assistant Community Development Director; Doreen Laughlin, Confidential Executive Assistant; Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner;John Floyd, Associate Planner;Judith Gray, Sr. Transportation Planner; Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager Also Present: City Council Liaison Marc Woodard COMMUNICATIONS —Commissioner Shavey went to So. Mississippi Avenue on a field trip and shared some of the things he learned on that visit. He was pleased at the successful trip and noted there were about 25 people in attendance. The group looked at So. Mississippi as a good example of what Main Street could become. CONSIDER MEETING MINUTES April 4 Meeting Minutes: President Walsh asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the April 4 minutes; there being none, Walsh declared the minutes approved as submitted. I:ALRPLNV Planning Commission A2011 PC Packets\5-bL Briefing Rep,Impr.Initiative, IICC and Cx Min upda[es\4-l'PC Amule,5-2-Brise Page 1 of 4 BRIEFING— REGULATORY IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE: UPDATE AND DIRECTION John Floyd, Associate Planner, was there to brief the Planning Commission on the next phase of the ongoing Regulatory Improvement Initiative (RII). He reminded them that staff is still drafting the amendment package and that this is just an early "check-in"with regard to the progress and future direction. Floyd said this amendment package would do the following: • The RII project is a multi-year effort to update and enhance the city's development code through phased enhancements and corrections to known problems. • Both the city and the public can enjoy greater clarity of what the code requires • Greater efficiencies during the review process • Greater legal certainty should a decision be appealed He noted the amendment package was adopted by Council in September of last year and provides a foundation for the next phase— "Decision Making Procedures." The desired end result of this amendment package is to enhance the clarity, efficiency, and legal foundations of the processes we use to approve or deny a permit. To get there, staff has developed the following seven filters (questions) through which each change is tested: 1. Does the new language improve consistency? 2. Is the change as clear and simple as we can make it? 3. Does it solve a known problem? 4. Does it formalize an administrative practice? 5. Does it enable development that Tigard wants? 6. Does it acknowledge and support Tigard's unique needs and goals? 7. Does the change provide flexibility for unique or unanticipated circumstances? QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS President Walsh asked the group: Is the Planning Commission comfortable with the general principals outlined in the seven questions? The consensus was "yes." Other questions from the commissioners: o Is this similar to an Omnibus package like last year? No— it more thematically focused. o Where is this coming from? Is it coming from staff, or people who use the code? Both sides actually. There are unclear sections. Applicants said they would like to see a cleaner code. o When will this come back our way? Midsummer I:ALRPLNVPlanning Commission A2011PC Packets\522!Briefing Reg.bilge Initiative,toHCl'Land Ls,Plan upazms\J.TPCA[rmto,i3l LAm' Page 2 of 4 The question was asked "What are users saying? There was some discussion as to whether their preference is to have legislative history within the Code. Floyd couldn't cite a specific example of someone stating their preference regarding that. President Walsh said staff could always send specific questions to the commissioners via email should there be certain sections in the code in general that raise concern. BRIEFING— FIRST HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT LAND USE PLAN UPDATE Judith Gray, Sr. Transportation Planner gave an informational briefing on the High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan by way of a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A). The main points she covered were: • SW Corridor Plan ❖ Major Tasks Completed 4 Typologies ':• Upcoming Tasks Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager, gave a brief review of Public Involvement with regard to the plan. It was noted that people want to know where the stations are and what kind of transit it will be— to which Farrelly answered, "There are no answers to that yet—Metro will start a multi- million dollar process to analyze things. An alignment is about 10 years out." • Below are examples given regarding this project and public involvement: ❖ Farmers Market 3n1 Sunday of the month ❖ Public meeting on May 25th ':• June 6 Planning Commission meeting will be solely focused on the Tigard Triangle ❖ Balloon Festival in June Farrelly navigated to the city website and pointed out that the Citizen Advisory Committee meetings are on-line in streamlined video form: http://w w.tigard-or.gov/sw corridor/planning.asp WORK SESSION — MAY 17 JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION Susan Hartnett, Assistant Community Development Director, went over the draft Agenda Item Summary (Exhibit B). She noted that on June 6 the Planning Commission meeting will be roundtable style and the goal will be that they have a good feel for the triangle. She said Tigard has hired a consultant who will be working with them in a visioning session. It will be a InLRPLNV Planning Commission A2011PC Packets A5-zu Briefing Reg.imne.Initiative,1 ir I I..ind u1da..5Aa-'mc Mmuttr 52I Idoe Page 3 of 4 four to six hour day. She noted that at the end of the June 6 meeting they will discuss details on what that type of activity will look like. President Walsh suggested inviting some stakeholders or agencies — ODOT, Metro, etc. Hartnett asked how many commissioners would likely show up at the May 17th meeting— four commissioners indicated they would be there. OTHER BUSINESS Susan Hartnett gave an update on what will happen with the Economic Opportunities Analysis. She said there'd been a slight glitch - an issue Metro. Metro does not want the glossary to use the word "boundary" in describing their maps —so a few words will have to be taken out of each of those glossary definitions_ where it says "whose boundary is"... will just say "is shown on." The City Manager or City Attorney will suggest a minor revision to the language that they put forward in their recommendation. So that will be a slight change to the recommendation but other than that it will all go forward as they recommended to Council. President Walsh asked for an update on the Fields Case Pivot Bridge. Hartnett spoke on this to the commissioners and noted that the information is available on the city website under the public notice section: http://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/public notices/default.asp and the staff report is also available on-line: http://www.tigard-or.gov/city hall/public notices/docs/cup2010-00002 staff report.pdf The question was asked "Is it appealable?" Yes ADJOURNMENT President Walsh adjourned the meeting at 8:16 p.m. Doreen Laughlin, Planning Co II'ssion Secretary J�. ,OF Aar All EST: Prestent 'alsh LALRPLNVPlanning Commission A2011 PC Packets A5-2-I1 Briefing Reg.lmpr.Initiative,1st ITT llana L,se Plan opducs\J-TPC Minutes 5-311 Aoc Page 4 of 4 .:.*,, .,,..... ..111;1.. -,,,1 47,447,#.:4101,,,_.illiist.',...r710_,7,,,,i4: ,....------_-__1,-' :_Z;7.1.-.7.77-11 7. ..;._.72: VI,...) ____,. r �am�. y yf k7 •�i - �' IPj. r r�.� , jag" t ,�`„ .1 \ C v p;.d: �,• , �S N1\ ,y\ ��,- ,., w'• ham'-- — 1� -;—r '; ,)r\ .=.F— HCT Land Use Plan Project Update Planning Commission Briefing May 2, 2011 114 ■ , : City of Tigard I High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan -r D et'-'<,.. ....---- --"'-2—\\--- ,-,JLI eg ' ., Presentation Summary --#+ , Ty fes+ . .1: ` q== ■ SW Corridor Plan ,., � �� ;` 11J • MajorTasks Completed��ilk- ` ,y \ - � ■ Typologies. ,, j ,, ,•,_ _, . ,-,.10 `ice ■ Upcoming Tasks City of ■ Public Involvement Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan \ ,z,.........s.„,.......„ .—.!_,__..jr,,ar ° =�►�= t �- SW corridor Plan - ..„ --, ,,,,,,,,,1 , ..-A-i„..,...,,,, „ii,-,,, ,,-.. ....,,„... „,,,„,, ,„, . f � =,„ , 5 related studies -j, ;t‘., ', Land Use Plans —Tigard, Portland, Tualatin _� "'.1'\\�40.. Corridor Transportation Plan ---- _.' \ i -r �jl i L` * Transit Alternatives Analysis = - °�?h�� ▪ Tigard is first in `'"a _ Portland "Barbar sip ,r_ ,A., `-I ;a, �, Concept Plan" w - . ; , n ,'$)) ` process Metro,ODOT,& The TriMet "Southwest Southwest Tigard "99W Others in Corridor Transit Land Use Plan" ' City of Alternatives orridor Tigard Analysis* summer/fallPlan Metro, ODOT& High TriMet Tualatin "99W Capacity "Southwest Transit Corridor Corridor Land Refinement Planning"' Plan" Use Plan �._ f� �� c. Major Completed ,,....c, tiiii..-- /..ii \--,6„ s : 134,i---;?„ J , ,,,,,,,,,,,,„ , . 0 t -- -N= Stakeholder Interviews Ii SI ; '.IIEr Illgthe 11 elle* 46,,, Approximately 45 interviews Likes & Dislikes leroli..5-,-., �:�h�� Priorities & Concerns f v viol c 'i City of 01 Tigard High ;11-- AP1' Capacity Transit Land Use Plan 6.�_ ^St-rte+.vim-r--teJ�J li= � �= t , Major Tasks Completed ,,,,,,r , ..„N.-„,r.....„. „ i „►. „, - ►�- :, -�� . Existing Conditions Analysis %I ` 4:2C Policies f �, :r.; ,; Transportation Land Use -: - stMarket Conditions ' ‘,V) ce°- Natural Resources Public Facilities �� rt - :y. City of °- Tigard 4 -„ ��$ may, e =11NII High �* — Capacity _" • 4 Transit Land Use Plan r t.ini.=s rrr r�rc , ` �S-r�-- r •—m.4. , � _ it.'[-4.1,e--1"\ =� Major Tasks Completed :,- \;,: .' ' Stakeholder likok, ),, , Oi4 -,,'l"- Interviews1/4 ,f ,.i- . ,a�.ih,S Transit Station *2* ' Typologies puik , $)) \re'''' _ ,Na,, Existing City of Tigard Conditions High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan I/`i' . Typologies ,...,„ ,,,„,_ ,.� .., ori fi ..._1 ,, -.,g,. . , ,,L.,--A \ - ,." • A framework for describing the `''Y ' sIAN. character of different areas �,f�='= ��►►Stisipiir �'k. For comparing & contrasting the ko,..%r'' - o`, characteristics of good places c' fig • Aspirational what could be City of Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan (i,..-..\-,--i:,...,,,a„..- -...., ,A..._._ — �.�. � :. _. _ Typologies f_ i.„, ____,,,,..0,,-„„-, \._ , _, ..,...., , ,,,,..,„ „,-..--- , ter o ill 1 . Town Center Main Street ~` " ? ,. , 2 . Employment Retail Destination 44 3 . Transit Corridor Neighborhood .17� -r- C,. -fo,. Y ,.44 4. Transit Neighborhood aro(' j)9 City of Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan •ort"".... ..%,,,2111Lin...\•-E..=e,._ mm. .. ,,/:(e•_ :---„,, _.„1-.ZZ--- ,....___ ..ruAt_i_l Cif'k.,, 7=7--"2-—" •.°T'%•-;"•-__..... , '''''t 1:11, -•-•- 'hr., -_.-4.---- --.Zi-,,-----7— Z,..,- r'vfnr: 1,'",.-,:".`t.'rtfl- i ---.--7,—•••,1 •-4,...--— 4", , 4.--:---A, 0*._ - ' •• \ \ Main Street/Town Center . ,.il „ —, 414: NOrN -Ailiw, i.-41, L-1,--:4:''"'''' MillIfiltaar • 4 ' • ', If. , i e\ii EL.0,.0 • OA lir 14. 11111110w-*A\ -di.... • 1 • - '' i 44 0•••*11"-.1140 ; . ''WA" Urban village feel -.... 1.0r.„ , .• r.'''.1. xe. • ,1.4t4. ', 4 " ' ,t ...totqp.. .,;:liaNv -' ' r.t1 '-'1 -J. Specialty retail, office, :-.-, * ts, A. 00,11- .. : 4'. 0 4.407..; -,.. . N..N, A ,,„.... 1406"011111 " ' dining, and medium to high- ‘:/.,,I..•..- , ' ‘ ' rilorr--*, Ttiff17„t7t1 ktir density housing - V' 11 0 S. .••.-4, • • • i . , . 1.4 .' • s . _ n , -.1;• 44 ) __ .-•".-40y. , ii1-•.,', 1, i rill ,..-. -111",-;‘• ' itliii, _....7' " iiiivolik,,, 10) \roc \ Serves the local population i "ei ''' 1; - ,,7• . . :....; ----ipioih, ...„....„. . _ -7 . r...; Or ' '%Itaii%i IAN- re il H Li i Tigard i .;_ 9 ii - 11,-.41(11 II ,,_ lt, ...„ High , ,.'11: " ";-• , ,'„ ,,, Capacity Transit . - , li .-• :.-•" mei Ili!. Use Plan It '' 0. - — _ ..,.....,,,,...-E...- -..11112.0r., ... ,efe.,` 1‘:.1::: ---,...- IL...„-••__ t,t41:-.11.-.• ) .44.44... ... .44,44. ... ki:'-'''':_:..__.. ii MO • \ \ Main Street/Town Center .. _ 1 #1.-,, • References for Comparison Lake Oswego/First Addition _lifilVil .. Downtown Milwaukie \i 4 IV" ilk Downtown Vancouver I I. !",,A• l ow ., 1)10 jr• \ 1111/ . jp• V 1 City of Tigard i t s " sh vii MON At f 1. ! 4 ? li 2r -•— s li.1:, 4 Capacity A Is 11 / Transit , Land .. , Use Plan I , akaNp ztiliiWijii =�►�= t Main Street/Town Center a_; P* :.: `�_ , = The edges are mostly i -:; . r j wt, # residential ' — ii ~ 'ilk ;; Housing includes condos 4. � ^� }r` ,, I & apartments , }� • gni. 11 F. • i ! t XlIAN ,•, j'\ 'i iti ►1lik 77 \11 ,.: ri 'amipL City of Vis',,.. Tigard High ih_ ��. — • 1 Capacity s. :t v � ' == « ' I14 : ti. 41V , + Transit Land '' %\1\t A $41r.Ail' 414 • Use Plan . , V, •: ,....?: I II II I I I g'..Nr.:,_.„,jo - -.- -... .. -,-•... ,,4AI. '•'----"...c---, ,------";.11 . \\\ 'rPCf..4.. .!-7.--4.:=.-- •—:,..:;',11"'"--7-4--.: \Ili Main Street/Town Center „rill 7stidists-:-....-.•-%=•••=r--. .-1•. ", tt4. ----....:4': MIL._• . - .':'''''••• -,T kh wir-4---st_ . ..._ ,,7....Ampr----....,_ sw„, . ammadr-_,,- Twit., , ...,„it. .,,., Community destinations, civic uses & planned , . , . iiiiiz events rib -moor r-- l1 ow i •"' ', • '-^' '•;i " .:',' , ilri .101110 11 Vi 4 -°. • i-!.. 1 . ..i' -- Ilik_i - 1! - :... - .'• • lir- i — •.-- „ -•, 1.--,. ' 0011 • -5:111' . - - . ...,:: . , .. - 1 _ ,...t.3,/,/tt"-'7'..,/ ---•• , ... s,7•\.".. , . . • -!". , ,%..,.1.1...1.;,,,,II. .., .. Ilk. t . t ••• 'i ---'" -' ..'''.' . ...' .- .. • -\ -..... ' :V41K .V + , :-•• .. Itesi' -"'''-'-' -.'a 0. '44., '4'. ''' ' .r. •••••jialt'. _A. . ), 3. N ' ..i.t•,*, •••••..., 4- j \4';'''''. i:)' 1 '' , . ._,-,„etp7Atf - -. .".1 7„, •_ . ir44,40 if . ,I.,..)•..', ..,;-;-,TOA' , iiiii,. ,„..-.. ....."1"0'4... -.:. -•' 4 ' ' ,-1‘ ,N,i- 14. :- -- ...-fr„. r ......--, „ • - ._,---,''k, ! ..0.. ., • ( k - t ,• i. -.,-- 110-17i,; ''':',— - -,' : ' .i-... , • _.... , ,.., .. . ql-s., ' ' . :.'5 diiteic• • ,. 's,, '- • - t'h%.,-.,,,--:::'' 7 •,e,,. -.-..i.4,,, —14 I Cityof 1- ,, .— Tigard 4 . i, .------ - -= - .., - i ........i„... ,...--).,-e 411,. 7-1 - 1 ... Ai„.. Ir"' ...„.. A High , •. .- ., A '‘),- . _ • ' . • '''''''' -i•,0 '; ,• _ - Capacity H..k t ' _ ,e------ Illitb _. 4 ----- a . _ '-'..r13: . 41:k. wt. ' ; -- - IP ve : -',,...,. 11!: : - C:154.•• : • Transit 04t ii " Land --:.-4-- )1, -' \ ----- • 0.0 - 1;10 .w.„.. ...„. , .• ..,,,,,,...„:„-::_,, --11. ' --- - '''or .,.• lo -, ,N. 1 , Use Plan .6'. . -.4.- .'„, . .',, .-- . .111 ' •i)'''' ' . - .,-.. ••,4 • s' - •Allt...ire. IV 1,'" -7---.. .." . -V r. A_ . •—•-. _ \ \ Employment/ Retail Destination ,i1. 4:;.,•. , ,..44i_ :. , 10,*.s. .7sr.--..•%0--,--_.,:-t-il lr , . .. ......_, ,,,_,„ Focus is on shopping, N.,...•,..: 4;,. ,;,....___---6.-(er . i:.---Iwt..-.=c- Ilf..---' l:- ',7'Ll! . . '. • .'•' ' '•61';1.4' 6- Z•"I employment, institutional • .,. ...7,,,,,- - 111,:. , .. 54.e... • . ! • .. :,;:: ..er 41...kii, . 'pi, • • • in& _.•.:,.., -.1 .:„.,..-• ' uses •,,,,,s.,.... _ .• t,.; ,--,...-..„...:ff'-''' .4 0-,: ..t. ki .7051, va, *,,,4...•,".r... E gi.4`, "-. •,?..,.4." ' .; — 'z,lyt;.: Jr = . - •._ A destination for transit ...i.,..,• . 1C-..?,.--,., '-.:-..::. , _ :-4, .7,..:. . ... v )144,‘ • ,,--- . ,.4::,....-.- „4,-*•z...,,, '‘'... . .# -, 4.-. ,...4, . •,, L., trips ,,p.r-'A.',rf:A 1.,:;. P.1,‘I''. ' l'-',•,...0,:• '.. -- ,.:'3. . .. ''''' •-• .?",..,.: (%,, I - ' ' .,•"..'1ACi .,,. Ai. I-7 t- .1-7-. --'lI:,,.•.-. ' , ,,,,o \ lee, ".-..`''' • 4 1 . . , ,.„_ - • - •_ _ -- - ---s'-_-:- :---., -! ,. , litioli ,',.' •?,:h.0;-AV Yil --.--*--- - r . •..i.. ,''•'-:-'- ' T Tigard -. . ----z-,--.-_-.. ,.., . -,. 1 '''-- I• OF .. ,".,....' • 14 ' *t !"<"'••.,L. ......% _, _.,_„,4, ' ie • , ... _. 2._ ' 41.10 11. . ' • High -- ---- - --' ... .. , / 1 I..,1. 1::!. '.• , • '—' -- .4 o' . 14 - Capacity ' .. :-., .„...-.k 1.. - ,-, __-_-- - IN._ t. . • .- . -.1. - '' --- q.',--. ': • , 61r-!__ Transit . ,1 -14a ..,... --7 ..4„ k , ., -t . ..,,,,,, Land „ ---- . '4. . 46-_-7 3. ',mtvir- Fi, 1_,. '64':.'"* . • .....,„ Use Plan , --- . ,.., 1 */:414 • . -. •'.•:-. ..-,--- . . . .. .- -vir illiallalk ,_. . . . ..._ Aemm., Milk ihil ((e- ,•-=:. - --f,\410-k,u ----.... ...--- ---------: \\ 1-„-,-i--,771;', ,....:-____-.-:--21- :•,. -,,-- Employment/ Retail Destination Ntt ,,-t--miltt41,, / c - -''..11,1A , .,,,..• ,__, References for Comparison ) _-] ,.,w, ., ,, s, ', Lloyd District • **`... \ , Arco' 4 Tanasbourne „--firLIRY nBridgeport Village ____-----_- r ,eiirr VA-7771 swoop se*. ..---‘,:-.,,,,, ,--•.;.‘.0'\ 1, iiii0"71111::'V) ' ,sik . r (07 City of Tigard ,. - --*070":>11 ir • - 4, -,‘ li ALI. -.Tif High ,-. __ Capacity I . Transit Land ,..., - Use Plan J ' ey::2- -.27,-," .-:'•:__ , __"7"--01 41N-=----- -:. -- --- '-----V-•";,1 ."11111P 4 .1%,,,,i --, \ \ Employment/ Retail Destination Large-scale office complexes and/or regional shopping center,housing surrounded by medium fl) 4.I.,. limirrk7 j ' 11A-771 , . ,01110..\ 1 _ City of 4 - Tigard ! zilo — — - ' c1 I. l i 7 I ' 1 , ,s, High — - ...,. _ ,-- Capacity Arilim ' N Transit - Land , _ ----.....4 Use Plan �► Employment/ Retail Destination- = ' qfir iir Si,y i,. b, I! � �_ �- Recreational paths, parks and open space are -, t ti, .;. _, available for office workers & residents +{!I�"" �!L t� • a x '• N�,y`..:�+. •Ai ' �rIYI y ' • _ -ter a,�, ." 4 v. y3_ !�.Iy'� �i - .' . „, ••'ir' V� •47Art• 4.•� /" iir i : s • .,` Lir �'` .. xi ,- GI�.� s �► - �;*tit 1�� % ! �1�: � �,. ,.��'1� .f� . •. -K \ fly 7Aq�• ..::-'14,C'y °'i/' O. *rS• 46 '!` -"l- +ait • •, . '., t +� • + .i,,, �"'� A 4 a y .ri . 4 a j' City of 'w # r. f 1 V-1. Tigard f. sF-' 'h + 0 ;`h High ,4ft, r r• `.'t _ ! _ .moi Capacity j _ 1 t . 7' ' ell- -•i •'. t ' Transit _ ;;, I, ''Y 1 — Land i — - • Use Plan -- .�- _te . a -,. litt-- '► Transit Corridor Neighborhood .„ ....., .ce --; The focus is on shopping, dining and residential 4".1IV . ,. \. '"1 An arterial roadway is a destination for restaurants & retail fil 406.* City of ti- Tigard High ;,,� Y ,- I , Capacity r 1 t Transit — 1! x Land `='=` - Use Plan _` f — I „v,:-.1i-172 ;..-7,''.,. ',....._:- ..,-;•:,--,------r--: Transit Corridor Neighborhood \ 'i\i/s • 1111.-, fir.14‘. References for Comparison Hillsdale / Orenco Village -- •'1 ifOrrAylk 't.”4. ' a it Lake Grove 40 ,). itill .41^ 1110. 44 I .66...- .iii t... ,-4' l 1. ,I. 4 ° __ •-vivo. ,‘"•ii!..,, \ :tiv -wileu ,• ',,-at) , fe * , r, °MAT 4 _ .5.-,, .-2 , 4 1 i - LAIADR City of - __ - - . Tigard 0, - - - IF t .' i ,r, i Bt.. High ,f- -- , f - - Capacity Transit . , Land --+ Use Plan afli 17.; A ---,5=- - ' - ieri c „._ ------.-. . _........ Nada- --. ednj. ,\-_--- —.. ......-'.....1..„ \ \ Transit Corridor Neighborhood 41;-.7-m. li ear • ri 111'7 Vi ' 4-'4. - ill __. Single family housing is within walking distance , c Iv i I . - \„ 4,, ' ,..l .....11...er I.L....„ t Clusters of multi-family housing near arterial the .N • 1(1 i ---io -1 1, - orvo. 0°' , 1- - 4- ... ,.•...,„,.. --- 1” I X " ea * ' •ji MO - ,.., City of Tigard 1 I ct wr p. High Ilillmi - 5. • • ir....—.. Capacity It: Transit , •• a s Land -..,.. Use Plan Is _ .111 ........7r „...k....„--., �= Transit Neighborhood f �- Primarily residential Housing is mainly single-dwelling residential ,f�, 1.71 -1111-1 ,�`w"�� with some multi-dwelling housing mixed in , . '110 r V'7 �M_ 4t r A _ 9 _ ,�' M C' Lel City of + a1 - ' ft? Tigard . �;, ;,, -� arm 01 laic -< �• ray -,, r �1 �i t Jj �;'v,:I High = + w Capacity R� F►, 1G � tY Transit1 tin �� -- L Land _ -, -,.• ,,;.,,, - ' Use Plan '.`'�' . r------ T.-7i" ==�'► 4 Transit Neighborhood N.- ,),,,,„...„: , : � ,,� ®= References for Comparison ,;, , k t ' .,••• #. l,,d,.ir.....k, ,��c . ` Clinton ;•b1g.;\II , I, King City s'',! i.I I West Moreland (Bellwood) - }r r I76x �,,� NA igiir City of -4.7,4•°. . . t • Tigard High ( Capacity V I - 4� J Transit LIS . '- 0 —___:rli', Land i Use Plan ---_ ._. . ' 4. __ - 10,--" Isl.,. .W.,..: • •j_ • ;Aili;241/L-4 Transit Neighborhood . _ ta... ,:. , Small-scale, locally-owned retail or office 7.---i.,._____,..!„,, the ground floor of one or two corners. ,1.it __ .„,,,,,, .._ _\ ,, , ,!..._ __,...... IL Aorovi4 4, k'r- ri ., lko° #"7\741, - - ,--# ' ',-, , • 14, ..-- v 117 .-- '. 4 1' ,.I• ___.- , .•• . , ri _ , i.,' „, I illi l IC lfzigi , ,,.. . ..x.7,11 „ - --**5. ;''---• City of ' . 11 ii , II 5 1 , 0 iii - . ,,E04,,, ' __ k_--0. ,..r .-4,• ...)--...4, ,. -. Tigard ..', ! - , ill " - :;„gt-,- . ;• • 1' . „ r- . High ...it\ , __,.. -.• ...tir, . Capacity AlPr . 1.. ,. ..... Transit .r. — ••„Sr — . , Land I - --- I .... ill Use Plan IMPIIS. I a Rill ...................................... ........................................ ......................................... .......................................... ----------------------------- .......................... --��►.= Transit Neighborhoo.......::::::::::: d .4f„ r,.`„...„,..w„:„.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::....................... . ::::::::::: xiii.,',t.,...:: . ,, Significant tall' fiell _-1\'AikAIIIVAc, ' '', ' retail/restaurant `viw;�, \Ilk .. . . clusters are within - walking & biking � ` , ., •-• ',.,:‘,..-..- a�+`� distance ,*- 'tzj z Schools are within ,, city 0f walking distance 44.., _, �. _- - Tigard. + :. f 11114 Mali High _..: - Capacity Transit Land Use Plan =-�� a 4 Next Ta sks Develop Concept Plan i. i .� :: ,. ' May 25 — Design Session and Public Meeting = June 6 — Work session with Planning Commission I�" � '° � ' `,� June/July — Analyze Station CommunityPlan Alternatives v $. i I I ! 'ifl cyof Tigard / 11171 High V C Capacity ' G 7 Transit ti \ I Land Use Plan. ............................ .................................... ....................................... ::: ( -r-<:77 -77. ''-hysi:::-:-:-:-: ...... ................................. ........................................ ...... .................................. .......................................... ...... ................................... ...................................... . ................................... ...................................... ............ .41.---7.-'-lit: .............'........... ....................._.................:...:...:...:.- -. r _ .. . - Public Involvement . . ...... ... ......... ................. .„,, , r What we ve heard .�' nir � �� ?` ' Upcoming opportunities • •/ t l .`1� ,"t �i- '' Visit www.tigard-or.gov/hct -� = " ,.t , HCT Land Use Plan "7 TIMELINE M City of Winter 2010 Summer 2011 Fan 2011 Winter 2011 Tigard Profect set up High ASS7S5NrN7(COtIA.OYA7ION 2� Existing Conditions and Typologies Definition Capacity Transit ; .IVtYIIOPNINf G Finalize Station Community Mara Land Use Plan APPkn YAI Formai legislative ., a AIS-466 Item#: 0. 0. Workshop Meeting Date: 05/17/2011 Length(in minutes): 45 Minutes Agenda Title: Annual Joint Meeting with Tigard Planning Commission Submitted By: Susan Hartnett Community Development Item Type: Update,Discussion,Direct Staff Meeting Type: Council Workshop Mtg. • ISSUE Annual joint meeting with Tigard Planning Commission to discuss 2011 goals and planning topics. STAFF RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUEST Review goals and provide feedback. KEY FACTS AND INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Planning Commission has prepared goals for 2011 (Attachment 1) and would like to review these with the City Council and receive feedback from the Council. In preparing their goals,the Commission reviewed the City Council 2011 Goals,the Community Development Department's Council Goal Work Plan and the Tigard Planning Commission Work Program Matrix. As a result,the Commission's goals provide a high level of continuity with the City Council's priorities for the year. Because the successful implementation of key city goals will require collaboration with adjoining communities,the Commissioners included a new inter-city communication and outreach goal. The Planning Commission also included a new goal to improve the Commission's capacity through training and knowledge building. The Commissioners would also like to use this joint meeting as an opportunity to discuss and receive feedback from the City Council on any planning related topics that may be of interest or concern to the Council, especially those affecting the work plan and goal related activities of both the Council and the Commission. In particular the Commission would like to have a free flowing conversation about planning for the Tigard Triangle, including the cross over issues related to high capacity transit,the influences of the Transportation Planning Rule and the infrastructure funding needs of the district. OTHER ALTERNATIVES NA COUNCIL GOALS,POLICIES,APPROVED MASTER PLANS The Tigard Planning Commission's 2011 goals support implementation of the following 2011 Council goals: 1. Implement Comprehensive Plan 2. Implement Downtown and Town Center Redevelopment Opportunities DATES OF PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION N/A Attachments Planning Commission 2011 Goals TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION 2011 GOALS 1) Support achievement of City Council Goal 1- Implement the Comprehensive Plan: a) Complete needed action in a timely manner and providing thoughtful recommendations on planning matters,including: • Economic Opportunities Analysis (Commission action 2nd Quarter 2011); • Urban Forestry Code Revisions (Commission action 1St Quarter 2012); • High Capacity Transit (HCT) Land Use Plan (Commission action 1St Quarter 2012); • Regulatory Improvement Initiative (Commission action on second package 3rd Quarter 2011); • Downtown Circulation Plan (Commission action on second package 4th Quarter 2011); • Greenway Trails Master Plan (Commission action 2nd Quarter 2011); and • Periodic Review Housing/Population Projections (Commission action 4th Quarter 2011). b) Focus on the Tigard Triangle: • Undertake a visioning workshop that builds on the Triangle's HCT Land Use Plan station area locations and typologies (3rd Quarter 2011); • Provide input on a funding mechanism for transportation infrastructure improvements such as an area specific System Development Charge (4th Quarter 2011); and • Help define/refine the project scope for a Tigard Triangle Master Plan (3rd Quarter 2012). 2) Provide timely and legally defensible decisions on assigned land use reviews and appeals (ongoing). 3) Initiate outreach to Planning Commissions in adjoining cities,particularly those with shared interests in High Capacity Transit, economic development and urbanization issues. a) By July 1, each Commissioner will begin receiving meeting notices for at least one other city's Planning Commission and will attend at least one meeting per year. 4) Enhance the Commission's technical knowledge on topics such as legal issues, infill/redevelopment challenges, demographic trends, sustainability/LEED, builder/developer needs through: a) One major presentation/event each year b) Three minor presentations/events each year