Loading...
06/04/2012 - Packet lig Completeness TIGARD Review for Boards, Commissions and Committee Records CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Name of Board, Commission or Committee June 4,2012 Date of Meeting < 0-g4 ---;catLf2 — Signature Doreen Laughlin 11/6/14 Date 1E '"4 City ofTigard Revised Planning Commission Agenda TIGARD MEETING DATE: June 4, 2012; 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 7:01 p.m. 4. CONSIDER MINUTES 7:03 p.m. 5. WORKSHOP— DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN 7:07 p.m. 6. OTHER BUSINESS — 8:07 p.m. 7. ADJOURNMENT— 8:15 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA—JUNE 4, 2012 City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, OR 97223 I 503-639-4171 I www.tigard-or.gov I Page 1 oft 1,1 - II City of Tigard 0 SO TIGARD Memorandum To: Planning Commission From: Redevelopment Project Manager Sean Farrelly Re: Downtown Connectivity Plan Date: May 25, 2012 Since 2005, Downtown revitalization has been a priority for the City of Tigard. 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. To address this, the city produced,with stakeholder input, the Tigard Downtown Conceptual Connectivity Plan (Connectivity Plan). Connectivity Plan The intent of the Connectivity Plan is to establish a framework for improved multi-modal connectivity and circulation in Downtown Tigard. There are three objectives in the proposals for new Downtown streets: • Connectivity: Foster the creation of smaller block structures, consistent with the walkable urban village envisioned by the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. • Circulation: Create efficient routes into and around the Downtown. • Capacity: Create parallel streets to accommodate the demand created by new Downtown development. The plan was originally developed by a consultant team, led by SERA Architects,who worked with city staff and a technical advisory team of public agency representatives. City Council, the City Center Advisory Commission, and the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee reviewed and provided input to the plan. Implementation The Connectivity Plan itself will not be adopted, but will be implemented through amendments to the Tigard Development Code (TDC) and the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP). The amendments address the future connectivity improvements and the new downtown street cross sections called for in the Connectivity Plan. The intent of these proposed amendments is to provide the city with some tools for 1 implementing its vision for downtown Tigard while recognizing that improvements will likely be done incrementally over 10 to 20 years or longer as individual properties redevelop. The proposed language also aims to provide some flexibility for the city and property owners in terms of when and where the cross sections and connectivity improvements apply. These proposed amendments will be brought to the Planning Commission at a public hearing to be held later this summer. The Planning Commission was last briefed on the plan in March 2011. Since then, staff has engaged Angelo Planning Group to develop proposed language; worked with the City Center Advisory Commission; and held small group meetings with potentially affected property owners. A public open house will be held in the next several weeks. Making a recommendation on this plan is a 2012 goal of the Planning Commission. Connectivity Improvements The future street connections shown in the Connectivity Plan are relatively general. In order to implement the Connectivity Plan, the alignments have been further refined. Wherever possible, alignments have been adjusted to minimize the impacts to property owners, while still achieving the desired connections. Attachment 3 shows the proposed locations of new streets superimposed on an aerial map of Downtown. The width of the proposed future streets would be based on the new downtown cross section designs, shown in Attachment 1. Detailed maps showing the future streets would be added to the TSP so that it is clear where future streets are expected to go and how much right-of-way is needed. Unless a future street is also added to the city's Capital Improvement Program, it will likely only get built when there is new development or major redevelopment (e.g., redevelopment valued at more than 60% of total current value) on an affected property. At the time of development, applicants will be required to dedicate right-of-way and construct the portion of the street that is on their property. In some circumstances, they might be able to dedicate a public easement instead of right-of-way. In all cases, the city will work to ensure that the required improvements are "roughly proportional" to the impacts of the development. For smaller projects (e.g. redevelopment valued at less than 60% of total current value), the applicant will only be required to keep the future alignment clear of buildings. Surface parking, landscaping, temporary structures, driveways and similar types of development could be allowed within the areas where new connections are planned. The applicant could also be asked to sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District (LID) to help pay for the identified street or alley improvement. Because these future streets aren't fully designed as yet, there will also need to be an adjustment process that provides some flexibility for property owners and the city. For example, this would be important when application of the connectivity standards would preclude reasonable economic use of the site or would result in an adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands,bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. 2 New Downtown Street Cross Sections Currently the TSP includes a map showing the street classification (e.g., arterial, collector, etc.) and TDC Chapter 18.810 describes all of the cross sections, showing the required width of travel lanes, on-street parking, sidewalks, etc. As part of the Connectivity Plan project, the special street cross sections (Attachment 1), which provide an enhanced pedestrian environment, were designed for the downtown. To implement these special cross sections,a new street classification map for the downtown will need to be added to the TSP and the new cross sections will need to be added to Chapter 18.810. These cross sections apply to existing streets as well as future street connections and will be applied when the city improves a street or when a private developer has to make full- or half-street improvements as a part of their development. The new street classifications and cross sections with the recommended right-of-way widths, sidewalk, vehicle and bike lanes were developed based on the present and potential contexts of the streets i.e. the narrowest streets are proposed for areas that are likely to develop with primarily residential uses. Plan and Code Amendments Proposed amendments will likely affect the TSP as well a number of chapters in the TDC: • Amendments to the Transportation System Plan to add background and figures. • Amendments to 18.370 to address adjustments to the connectivity requirements. • Amendments to 18.610 to add purpose, applicability and connectivity standards. • Amendments to 18.810 to add new downtown cross-sections. Attachment 1: Proposed Cross Sections Attachment 2: Downtown Street Character Classifications Attachment 3: Proposed New Downtown Streets- Street Character Classifications (aerial) 3 Attachment 1: Proposed Cross Sections Table 18.810.1 (proposed) Minimum Widths for Street Characteristics Type of Street Right- Paved Number Min. On- Bike Sidewalk Landscape Median of- Width of Lane street Lane Width Strip Width Way Lanes Width Parking Width Width Width Width (exclusive of curb) Hall Boulevard - 94' 64' 3 11' 8' 6' 11' 4' 14' Downtown — Upper Downtown Mixed 66'-70' 46' 2 10' 8' 5' 6-8' 4' N/A Use 1 — Downtown Collector Downtown Mixed 58'-62' 38' 2 11' 8' N/A 6-8' 4' N/A Use 2— Downtown Neighborhood Downtown Mixed 62'-74' 38' 2 11' 8' N/A 6-10' 6'—8' N/A Use 3— Upper Burnham Downtown Mixed 68'-72' 48' 2 10' 8' N/A 6-8' 4' 12' Use 4— Lower Burnham Downtown — 52'-56' 32' 1 18' 7' N/A 6-8' 4' N/A Urban Residential Downtown - 20' 20' 1 20' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Alley r: , q 1 N. Lit _ . . j,1 iL 15 �'_ A 15 8 6' 11 14 11' 6` 6" 16' 4 ROW Hall Boulevard - Downtown—Upper 1 Y nil liW air ID'-17' B' 5' 10' 10' 5' 0' 10'_13' 66-ta'ROW Downtown Mixed Use 1—Downtown Collector h 11 mved use resident al 10'-17 9' 11' 11' S. 10"-12' mixed u.residentlal 58'-62'POW Downtown Mixed Use 2—Downtown Neighborhood . - IIIIIL s • WON i i M -- mm ft i 13'-70' 1 8' 1 11' 11' 1 8' 13'-1B' 67-74'110W Downtown Mixed Use 3—Upper Burnham 2 Id _ oll i .. ` ,,. ,,,. .',. : t;.'.. .'''-..: m IN: 711-II%11 it t L-- ''l - .._'--.,'::**--- .'s 111.11.11111111 Downtown Mixed Use 4—Lower Burnham 01111 , "7. 6 I: ,- 4' % Ps_ a 61164L IF + �' "� 1114, ill D. Y; y `y - . reslaental IU-17 7' 18' I 7' Id-I Z' residential Ra'-Sir R 0 Downtown—Urban Residential 1111 t IPERNEARE WES 20'ROW Downtown-Alley 3 Proposed New Downtown Streets - Street Character Classifications . .: ...,: mil ....:47, \.: ,,,,,<.,„.,,,,:. ' 44' ''' la%ir . "'slip 000 1 tip El . , , :„., , .. . Ws:. s s' 14kk 1 Iii' i ik N. 41k0b* '' ' 1 l 1W ,.---le , - Illp , -,• i littolihi 4 4 . ,. .... ., ,, ,; ,„, _, D 44 4 I P.-/. 44• 41 I V* ' ,- l',..' •- ,\:. ,.= . . • 1 . .,. - __3_-,:___,_ .....„:" , ,, .,, N ,< � ¢ ♦ / ..`tet* : n , , .... „st \ / ,7_ II >, e . 4k . , , , , - w\V.7„. \ , . i'•_ :,- .`r Ai; s„ • ,ksk - / , , 1 , . . : . '''' - ..\-„.„,,i7-_, ,.,..- 4 .. fi '',,,k, , „. _ 1 , �9: ,., , , . , .,. ..\A - • . , , • 7 ,:., , \,, ov, ... i. w. ,•,- th. ...t... . .,... 4,),),, , ..• \., . , ' . \ \- d ' : '44'4 .4'.e; -** -s ,),. 1%. , ., ::014,44,. 1-1 mall I,___ ;,• ' � •, ' � � :; '�,,ori'"� ''\' , O♦�♦�♦♦ ♦♦j♦j♦♦♦j♦ • ,IP.♦♦ ♦44*♦I1 Alk \.,, .4.. / S' ' ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� ♦♦r 44. . , , : les 2. 440i ' ,, ',\„/„.., , ;\ .,,„,•,,,,„...„.,..,..,..,,„.,..„.„.. „,"...!.,„„.,.:.?,.:, ��♦i �$♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦. ,,.‘ • ( , . , . 41„„„ , . �' ate♦♦j♦yA♦♦�♦♦ '�•�♦♦♦♦♦� <{♦®♦♦♦i, 4 ,,. _ .,„, �♦♦♦♦♦�♦♦®�4Pc ♦�♦� ♦♦♦♦♦�4.. I4_.4 ♦ *k• *��►... I .6. �, 1 ‘17,——7” 14( ,,, 4 ',44lik iy s , \ ' •. ..\ 44* fir. ' IV • .., ';,;(. ‘r 414. . \ i . !! , i , , ' s..'4% ., / \ ..' ., , . ,., , • .\,• ' 4 , , rte �1 I ,' 1 A// .411F 11Character �s ■ LIB!�►:�1 le n� 1 pNg l• i- no NI ►� d b; 6 :7 Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) ,�_M i _ ,�,,,a 1 . . ■ Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) •Urban Residential (52'-56') _ , eV — — - Alley (20') , ,” 1 �� om alir �� e � Approx. ROW width - Proposed Streets ' � Existing Streets " - Existing bike / ped trails Taxlots Z5 Block subject to bike/ped connectivity requirements * . i. SII I I Wwa > 0 z y FFA � BHT. SG ‘,- � t PP � ovc' co M G�' r cg• v • • °•o I OA., ne tit d" II •,tip • 9 i•tic,')16 #*0 T I //I/ O�0 c0 4k/, 9 0G i, 4,4, II ,9 ti�s i. II' PJB •♦ ♦ \ ♦• �� 1.♦ ♦ \41 Downtown Street Character Classifications* - Upper Hall Boulevard - Main Street Green Street Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Downtown Mixed Use 3 (Upper Burnham) - Downtown Mixed Use 4 (Lower Burnham) Urban Residential Alley *Dashed lines indicate proposed streets Other Streets Railroads N 0 250 500 1,000 Feet muumuu I 1 1 I I I -I I I CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes June 4, 2012 CALL TO ORDER President Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:02 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 Doherty Commissioner Fitzgerald Commissioner Muldoon Commissioner Rogers Commissioner Ryan Commissioner Schmidt Commissioner Shavey Alt. Commissioner Armstrong Absent: Alt. Commissioner Miller Staff Present: Susan Hartnett, Assistant Community Development Director; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant; Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager Others Present: Cathy Corliss, Principal,Angelo Planning Group COMMUNICATIONS President Walsh attended a neighborhood meeting for the next phase of the Fields bridge project. He gave a brief rundown of that meeting. Based on what he'd heard at the meeting, he believes the project will be approved. He noted that Mr. Field's had passed on and that the estate of Mr. Field's had given a very,very generous donation—almost the entire estate - to charity, the Oregon Community Foundation, to support education and the arts. The benefactor of any development project done on the bridge will be that charity. Walsh noted that it's just a bridge project, there's no second phase to it. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\060412-Workshop Downtown Connectivity Plan\tpc 060412 minutes.docx Page 1 of 3 CONSIDER MINUTES May 7, 2012 Meeting Minutes: President Walsh asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the May 7 minutes; there being none, Walsh declared the minutes approved as submitted. WORKSHOP —DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Manager, introduced Cathy Corliss as a principal at the Angelo Planning Group. He said he was there to talk about the Downtown Connectivity Plan. He noted that he wanted to take this time to reacquaint the commissioners with this project that's been on the "back burner" for some time due to other council priorities. He reminded them that it is one of the Planning Commission's goals for 2012 to make a recommendation on this to City Council. He said he would refresh their memory on what's been done in the past and what is being worked on presently—also what will be coming up in the future. He went over a PowerPoint presentation (Exhibit A). Farrelly noted that there are limited connections into and around the Downtown area, mainly due to the barriers of connectivity such as the viaduct, the rail crossing, and Fanno Creek. He noted this plan will address that and that this plan is based on previous plans such as the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, the Tigard Downtown Vision. The objectives are threefold: connectivity, circulation, and capacity. The process to date includes: Working with the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) who, early on, had put together a statement of principles of what they'd like to see out of the Connectivity Plan. The plan has remained pretty true to those principles. A Technical Advisory Committee made up of different jurisdictions such as ODOT, TriMet and Washington County. An Open House. The CCAC intently reviewed this over several meetings. City Council, Planning Commission, and the Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee had workshops on this. Property owners that could be affected by this plan had been contacted and staff received some excellent feedback and had some frank discussions. As a result of those meetings, they "tweaked" some of the proposed streets. Farrelly went over the seven categories of streets and alley classifications. He gave some street character examples. Cathy Corliss from Angelo Planning Group continued the presentation by talking about the two key elements that needed to be addressed: new connections and new cross-sections. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\060412-Workshop Downtown Connectivity Plan\tpc 060412 minutes.docx Page 2 of 3 There was a question from the commission about non-conformity. Ms. Corliss noted they don't want to create non-conformity amongst adjacent property owners. On the flip side— in order to get these connections to eventually happen, you're creating for that property owner, eventually, more visibility—more public street frontage which for most retail, and for a lot of uses,is a positive thing; triggering redevelopment on both sides that will eventually add value for both property owners. Ms. Corliss said they would do some more research on that and come back to that subject later. Ms. Corliss went over the new cross-sections examples — current and future. She also spoke about potential amendments. The potential amendments, as they're laid out now,would add background,principles and figures to the Transportation System Plan. The TDC 18.370 would add adjustments to the connectivity requirements — and that would be fairly full bodied. The TDC 18.610 is the downtown standards and that placeholder would be filled in with purpose, applicability and connectivity standards. TDC 18.810 would have to be amended to add new downtown cross-sections. She said there would be a packet of amendments that all work together to accomplish what's going to happen - as opposed to just a single new chapter that does this. At this point Farrelly went over the next steps. One of which would include additional outreach to property owners. This would happen fairly soon (within the next few weeks). Then in the late summer they are planning on scheduling public hearings with the Planning Commission for the Development Code and Transportation System Plan amendments. Staff will be asking them to make a recommendation to City Council at that time. Sean concluded his presentation and said that he would send links to the actual connectivity plan - mainly for the new commissioners — to help get them up to speed on this. One of the commissioners asked a question about how this can happen "incrementally." Farrelly and Ms. Corliss explained that there are several options and solutions the city has to help with this. There were some general questions by some of the commissioners regarding the map of future streets they'd seen in the presentation. OTHER BUSINESS - None ADJOURNMENT President Walsh adjourned the meeting at 8:04 p.m. Doreen Laughlin,Planning Commission Secretary ATTEST: President Dave Walsh I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\060412-Workshop Downtown Connectivity Plan\tpc 060412 minutes.docx Page 3 of 3 CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done TIGARD Downtown Connectivity Plan Planning Commission Workshop I June 4, 2012 - LEWIS LOMrrh kE y O o _ i PIHSt i .r & m ! F 3, FF t NGELA _, 19 E Study Area • %\x..c...„....s..,..„.....„..„ c-v,tp 1...i VW. , )00:00 i ce"FR . �FRC�L fryp . - - �Ro — Area: ,-r s Tigard Downtown Urban N.�F � Renewal District (193 acres) {: .41 . . / WESI Commuter b a Rail Station 'rzye t5 Ni, � Existing conditions : Q PG " ` ., ., f Limited connections ti and connectivity t. -.%, *o _7:1711.11 _. e 1 \a Downtown Study Area ®urban rem.'didnd lstudyarea Eovntovm Tigard Chelation PI a-i Project 12.21.W —.. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan +,=L � : 4r f c` L' a" ,r';_ - Foundation ' >� ` ,� Documents T `y Gam " ! .'"%\ \ ' /_ _ .'�s, I ._, a_ A . e mar ..moi® .,, A� �� ., + , �. : � � � M1 _ . ''',.TRAIL /%,\ N •' '•,N• . \ r .0, `yw s4,,, • Y � ,, p :,..').:•;',,'. i Tigard Downtown tiP *`"••, ` T Future Vision: �.,, 4/ — - • I yp y \ .. —a visual refinement %,, of the TDIP M. 'x it,XPi Vii• y... 'r •.;, aril_ A. �,r , t- V a /� ' - `s °Pa ` r� '�'A y.�° X60 V. nam . ,,� r* o0 • -,j•-q, , o Roe dway. 41111111, State GREEN GORRIBOR f'Ja • •,� IJ 4 URBAN GREEK - - • i', l 111 l l 111 1 1 1 1 -Itie t ..Ni.1' .,*ry 'u'l ~��' RESIBENTI0.L RESIBEN TIAL - ` �- HIGH OLI ME rMIN STREET CNICI FLEX H )B. 1._ 4, Railroad F. $ DMEDIUM ENSITY BENSITY EMP NT RETAIL EMPLOVMENTREGk3NAL RETAIL STREE TSCAPE ' Trail 001, ENHANCEMENTS Conceptual Connectivity Plan Objectives • Connectivity: Foster the creation of smaller block structures, consistent with the walkable urban village envisioned by the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan . • Circulation : Create efficient routes into and around the Downtown . • Capacity: Create parallel streets to accommodate the demand created by new Downtown development. Process to date • CCAC Principles • Technical Advisory Committee • Open House • CCAC review over several meetings • City Council, Planning Commission, and Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee workshops • Property owners meetings iu W aN C�lP Proposed Street • ar 004 6c Classifications a,,,,cT 0t44 P .one In «• • hi ■ r,4y..''hp ',1� I Cdr ice. , `.0. �''A P y yr t d d'G + P,; N.4 t \ s Downtown Street Character Classifications* -Upper Hall Boulevard w ib Main Street Green Street Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) -Downtown Mixed Use 3(Upper Burnham) -Downtown Mixed Use 4 (Lower Burnham) Urban Residential - Alley a N 0 250 509 1,000 Feet Dashed fines indicate proposed streets . Other Streets =1111111H Railroads Proposed New Streets ,�, t �� -NPJ� ,..;,/,\,, ,,,.. . r C �' _; ti, ., �,�, ; .._wok �, a I. 11' l i .,,..' ..,,„ ,i, .S.S.,.- ,P'44. ,( Z_ 1 r9 ','-'Y �O Y 4, ( A` .�' - gip, I.• ,... �". ,.,� • j A.,‘,40. 'r/'e i'...,\ \ N. 'Z'-' / '''.‘; . . .S • L'' • a d `^ f 'tot/ •*> ....-s, : . d . � it r CharacterSpe {V t t,.-,1111"11 ;x f.. • �,'\ \\ Downtown Mixed Use 1(Collector) wuLL-� }t y`y \` Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) x ,\ Urban Residential(52'-56') - 3 . ; \\ ——_Alley(20') \ \/ � �`\\\\ySE Approx.ROW width-Proposed Streets \\ Existing Streets / Existing bike/ped trails /` \ Taxlots \\ 12.Block subject to Like/ped connectivity requirements \\ "Y iT- 11 Street Character Examples _ it • ____ ._ . I z 1. Fg is 1 e B 1t 14' tt 6' s Is Mil 4d iimit 111i 1.1111111 • f .4..--4,0I) rr •4 f�� � r ,, 1"051116111.121 19'-12' 7' 18' 7' 10'-12' f6slU6Ilttai 52'-56'ROW Urban Residential Implementation of the Plan • Two elements — new connections and new cross-sections • New code requirements for implementing vision : — Recognize that improvements will likely be done incrementally over 50 years or longer as individual properties redevelop — Provide as much flexibility as possible while still ensuring that connections get made ConnectivityImprovements Detailed maps showing A the future streets would +; # . , - need to be added to th \IL•en _: ' - • , :1,1 \\\"1 ''e TSP so that it is clear ti where future streets are _ a expected to o and how �T much right-of-way is '• - 1,10 .1. 4 u ca�� _ ., rA\1\\\\*\\\*, -- .. , .____,_____,...1 . .1 . R i needed .1A. 1 inch=150 le tY - y Feet J. - 0 59 100= 206 •- {. .� � .. , 6. l_ -.- 0 1 \ ConnectivityImprovements • New Development and Major Redevelopment — Dedicate right-of-way or a public easement — Construct a portion of the street • Smaller Projects — Redevelopment valued at less than 60% of total current value — Keep the future alignment clear of buildings — Sign non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District (LID) • Must be "roughly proportional" • Allow alternative alignment or design — Allow reasonable economic use of the site — Avoid adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands New Cross-Sections • Special street classifications and cross sections with enhanced streetscape design — For existing streets as well as future street connections — Applied when the city improves a street or when a private developer has to make full- or half-street improvements as a part of their development New Cross-Sections Current Future • Scoffins Street is a Collector • Scoffins Street is Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) i s ti c.e'i I Tic . cS>, M 44 • • to e Figure 18.810.2 Collector Sample Cross Sections 11 � in i P 66r _ 41 'S.6-8 5.5 55110 1111' b'81;e 55' 5-5'.6 PM 1-,s2' 1 Law 58'-62'R W _ r 12'NBaIaN5 -^ rte} -5'4-8..5 6'dlkP, 711u 7CY.e 11' 0@kg 5,5' 4�' F _ RIW 7U'-76'. r a166 • _ - 9Lane70574'RAN eel 0 � g� 1:e 12'Mee4aN 0-, firs 70 ROW G+3 �,6'�6'B1�e. ll' lY' iUmlao 11' 11' 6BNa SS:' 15W 92'-95 5 Lame 92'-98'RMI Potential Amendments — Transportation System Plan to add background and figures — TDC 18.370 to add adjustments to the connectivity requirements — TDC 18.610 to add purpose, applicability and connectivity standards — TDC 18.810 to add new downtown cross-sections Next Steps • Additional outreach to property owners • Late summer: Planning Commission and Council public hearings and adoption of Transportation System Plan and Development Code amendments. Questions/Discussion Contact: Sean Farrelly sean@tigard-or.gov • 503-718-2420 jigafc . -t a :40 .4IkAlt.it � mixed use rrsldeOtlal 10'-12 8 11' 11' 8' 10 -12' mixed use r2sldentaI 58-82'ROW Website: www.tigard-or.gov/downtown_tigard/behind_the_scenes/circulation_plan