The URL can be used to link to this page

10/15/2012 - Packet 1111 `' City of Tigard TSD Planning Commission Agenda MEETING DATE: October 15, 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. BRIEFING—RIVER TERRACE COMMUNITY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN 7:05 p.m. 6. PUBLIC HEARING— (DCA) 2012-00001 PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS 7c20p.m. REQUEST: Amend Chapter 18.730.050.D of the Community Development Code to allow, in the R-12 Zone,bay windows and pop outs with floor area to project into required side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c) the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: R-12. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380, 18.390, 18.510, and 18.730; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 9,Economic Development;Goal 10,Housing;and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 9 and 10. 7. PUBLIC HEARING- CPA2012-00001/DCA2012-00002 7:5°Pan. TIGARD DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS REQUEST: To amend the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan to add background and figures and to amend the Tigard Development Code (Title 18) Chapters 18.370, 18.610 and 18.810 to implement new street connections. The complete text of the currently proposed amendments can be viewed on the city's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/connectivity LOCATION: Downtown District. ZONE: MU-CBD. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use - Central Business District. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Citizen Involvement; 2, Land Use Planning; 9, Economic Development; 11, Public Facilities and Services; 12, Transportation; 13, Energy Conservation; and 15, Special Planning Areas: Downtown; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 11, 12, and 13; METRO's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 6; METRO's Regional Transportation Functional Plan Titles 1,2, and 5. 8. OTHER BUSINESS —9:5op.m. 8. ADJOURNMENT—lo:oop.m. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA— OCTOBER 15, 2012 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 DRAFT 10/8/12 River Terrace Community Plan Creating a community of great neighborhoods I. Project Overview The City of Tigard is now kicking off a community planning effort in River Terrace. This process will develop specific proposals for future land uses and public improvements in the River Terrace area. It will provide tailored policies and a long-range physical development guide for elected officials and citizens engaged in community development. Elements of the community plan are: Land Use (zoning and regulations) _ Transportation Public Facilities and Services Parks and Trails Natural Resources Infrastructure Financing Plan Figure 1. Components of We want to create a plan that reflects community values and has the River Terrace community support. We encourage you to become involved and contribute to the decision-making process. Background Tigard will be responsible for preparing a community plan for a portion of the area that was included in the West Bull Mt. Concept Plan (WBMCP) completed r by Washington County in 2010. The area includes .—� � I the recent River Terrace annexation (Area 64), and I 'I k' urban growth boundary expansion areas 63 and Roy Rogers West (see map). The difference between the community planning effort and the West Bull Mountain Concept Plan is _ that the WBMCP established the broad vision and blueprint for developing a future community, while the River Terrace Community Plan will implement, to the extent practical, the WBMCP and consist of specific regulatory land-use maps, public facility and transportation master plans, infrastructure financing mechanisms, and codes and regulations. In other words, the WBMCP alone does not have legislative land use authority, and the RTCP, once adopted by Tigard City Council, will allow urbanization to occur. II. Process The RTCP is expected to take 18 to 24 months to complete and get through the legislative adoption process. There will be a variety of public involvement opportunities available to the DRAFT 10/8/12 community. This includes a series of community open houses throughout the process, as well as a citizen advisory committee and technical advisory committee. In addition to land use, the City Council will need to approve a River Terrace financial plan which will help pay for the construction of required new infrastructure and its operations and maintenance. This may include changes to development charges for parks, storm water management, sanitary sewers, water, and transportation improvements. It will also be important to address whether or not other special assessments will be needed for land use and building permits, as well as utility rates to ultimately recoup the investment the city makes in completing the community plan. Schedule General Timeframe-River Terrace Community Plan 2012 2013 2014 Task 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Public Involvement/TAC/SWG Adopt WBMCP * 0 Goal S Natural Resources Parks Master Plan&SDC Update Water Master Plan Update Sanitary Sewer Plan Update Stormwater Master Plan Update Comp Plan/Zoning Maps and Regulations Transportation System Plan Update Public Facility Plan Update Infrastructure Financing Strategy Community Meeting Stakeholder Working Group Meeting } City Council Hearing IJI Technical Advisory Committee Meeting * Planning Commission Hearing Project Phases + Project Kickoff Council acceptance/adoption of the WBMCP CCI approval of the Public Involvement Plan Get the word out Launch Stakeholder Working Group and Technical Advisory Committee + Launch Tasks Assessment and Collaboration Plan Preparation ❖ Adoption Process DRAFT 10/8/12 The following components of the Public Facility Plan will be accepted by City Council in advance of the entire plan being adopted: ■ Parks Master Plan and SDC Update ■ Water Master Plan Update ■ Sanitary Sewer Plan Update ■ Stormwater Master Plan Update The Goal 5 Natural Resources, Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Maps and regulations, Transportation System Plan Update, Public Facility Plan Update, and Infrastructure Financing strategy will be adopted by Tigard City Council III. Public Involvement Public Involvement Plan Requirements The public involvement plan seeks to achieve the goals outlined in the Tigard Comprehensive Plan and to include a broad cross section of the community, consistent with federal requirements for Title VI communities. Tigard Comprehensive Plan The Public Involvement Plan will implement the Tigard Comprehensive Plan Citizen Involvement Goals, which are as follows: Goal 1.1: Provide Citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity 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. Specifically the Plan will ensure that citizens and other stakeholders can participate, communicate and receive information about the Tigard HCT Corridor Land Use Plan. Communication Principles Early identification of key messages will contribute to initial and ongoing project communications.The project management team will refine and coordinate messaging throughout the project. The project team will make every effort to provide timely information and answer questions from the public. Interaction and engagement will improve the quality of planning River Terrace. Establish and maintain productive partnerships with individuals and organizations affected by the plan. Some concerns will not be able to be fully addressed during this process and there will be challenges. Continued cooperation among agencies, citizens, and other jurisdictions will be required to resolve issues as the project advances. DRAFT 10/8/12 Changes will not occur overnight.There will be ongoing opportunities for citizens to influence this process. Maintain a record of public input and ensure that input is considered during the planning process. Key players ❖ Project Management Team - ❖ Stakeholder Working Group- An advisory committee comprised of community representatives including residents, property owners, service providers, and developers to advise the PMT throughout the process. ❖ Technical Advisory Committee -The TAC will include stakeholder agencies, including but not limited to ODOT, Department of Land Conservation and Development,TriMet, Metro, the City of Tigard, Washington County (etc.). The TAC will provide technical review, ensure coordination among agencies and other planning efforts, and ensure compliance with state and regional plans, policies, and standards. ❖ City Council and Planning Commission Stakeholders Key stakeholders in the River Terrace Community Plan fall into four categories: Property owners and developers in the area Property owners, businesses and residents in the area surrounding River Terrace including in the City of Tigard, Bull Mountain,the future expansion area and the rural element. Advocacy groups with an interest in planning,transportation, environmental issues or land development Institutional partners,such as Metro and Washington County, and jurisdictional service providers such as the Tigard Tualatin School District and Clean Water Services. Public Involvement/Communication Activities Deliverable/Description j arget Audience(s) Delivery Method Opportunities for Participation: 1. Stakeholder Working Group Q Q Q ❖ Property Owners Meetings scheduled meetings:This committee will act ❖ Residents throughout the as an advisory body to staff and ❖ Service providers process will provide a venue for citizen ❖ Developers involvement opportunities in planning for River Terrace 2. Community Meetings:The City of Q Q Property Owners Meetings scheduled Tigard will host a series of Residents throughout the meetings to engage project Service providers process stakeholders near the project area Developers 3. Project Elements Online Open Q Property Owners Online Engagement DRAFT 10/8/12 House ❖ Residents Tool Developers 4. Comment Period:The 0 Q Q All stakeholders Online comment opportunities for public comment form will be advertised in advance. Such opportunities include SWG Time allowed at meetings, online comment forms, scheduled meetings the open house, etc. Opportunities for Communication 5. Community Briefings and Outside Q ❖ Property owners Meetings scheduled Events: City staff will offer ❖ Residents throughout presentations to interested ❖ Business owners assessment and community groups and key ❖ Advocacy groups collaboration and stakeholders at their regular draft plan meetings. development 6. City Council/Planning Commission Q 0 Q ❖ Residents Presentations at briefings:Tigard City Council and ❖ Businesses Planning Commission Planning Commission will be ❖ Property Owners and City Council briefed on project progress in • work sessions at key intervals. Advocacy groups • Members will also be invited to Agency Partners participate in events, and will receive project materials Opportunities for Information: _ 7. Website/webpage:Timely II 0 II ❖ All stakeholders City of Tigard website information will be posted/updated on the City of Tigard's website. Website updates may be announced to interested stakeholders through email communications 8. Information material/display(s): Q D Q ❖ All stakeholders Delivery method will Project information will be made depend on the type available in multiple formats: of informational maps,flyers,factsheets, mail material/display(s) distribution, posters, customer counter handouts, project displays, etc. 9. Community Development 0 0 ll ❖ All Stakeholders Email Listsery Listserv: Information will be created and distributed periodically to interested parties and other subscribers through email. Frequency and content of messages will be adapted to project activities. 10. Neighborhood Networks/County Q E Q ❖ Residents Press Releases DRAFT 10/8/12 CPOs: Provide updates to the ❖ Property owners Neighborhood Network web administrators and County CPO Coordinators for distribution. 11. News media outreach:The 2 2 Q ❖ All stakeholders Press releases and Communications Team will Cityscape Newsletter prepare stories about the articles program for The Times, Oregonian, Cityscape Newsletter, and other local media, to announce the project, extend event invitations, provide timely information, and highlight project milestones/accomplishments. City of Tigard PLEASE PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD LOGO IN THE LEGAL NOTICE SECTION OF THE TIGARD TIMES, THE FOLLOWING: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission at a Public Hearing on Monday October 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM at the Tigard Civic Center-Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon. Public oral or written testimony is invited. The public hearing on this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060.E. The Planning Commission's review is for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council on the request. The Council will then hold a public hearing on the request prior to making a decision. Further information may be obtained from the City of Tigard Planning Division (Staff contact: Gary Pagenstecher) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon 97223,by calling 503-718-2440 or by e-mail to garyp@tigard-or.gov. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2012-00001 - PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS - REQUEST: Amend Chapter 18.730.050.D of the Community Development Code to allow, in the R-12 Zone, bay windows and pop outs with floor area to project into required side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c) the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: R-12. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380, 18.390, 18.510, and 18.730; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 9, Economic Development; Goal 10, Housing; and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2, 9 and 10. TT PUBLISH DATE: September 27,2012 (THERE IS NO MAP TO BE PUBLISHED WITH THIS LEGAL AD. THANK YOU.) PLEASE SIGN IN HERE Tigard Planning Commission TIGARD gPageg -.\ .. Y Agenda Item # of Date of Hearin Case Number(s) K)C-.CA a b a -- Le:-_,c:2O \ Case Name C C d' Q.c ,gi p r\.S \\"..\-\'0 e_8, y dS Locatione_)--- -3\1;\ ,;�& If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): pponent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: \,jW 0 '-f)VA �j Name: Address: /J I C Y( Address: City, State, Zip: ((�� '/ 1 City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: l'27 6 .b 3t^-) A2 -1-- 1.-j-&--- �k%' Address: - 1 1 144(4' eg U City, State, Zip: NC-0104'3 c L c1.7 C C- ') City, State Zi.: Name: 0 C 'c o.h �" ct>c) 1` ame: Address: 12-31 9-•/{, /f('AI( +3 it/ Address: City, Stag, Zip: z---11‘ -4 efe g 7 2-2-3 City, State, Zip: Name: / ° .� Name: Address:g 00S !J \ ( O _ Address: City,State, Zip:( ,.td( ?Va? City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Agenda Item: Hearing Date: October 15,2012 Time: 7:00 PM STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION 111111 FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON T t G n R SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY CASE NAME: PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS CASE NO.: Development Code Amendment (DCA) DCA2012-00001 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting an amendment to Chapter 18.730.050.D of the Community Development Code to allow, in the R-12 Zone, bay windows and projections with floor area to extend into required side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c) the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. APPLICANT: Ryan O'Brien 1862 NE Estate Drive Hillsboro, OR 97124 ZONES: R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet.A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. LOCATION: City—wide on land zoned R-12. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380, 18.390, 18.510, and 18.730; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 9, Economic Development;Goal 10,Housing;and Statewide Planning Goals 1,2,9 and 10. SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find in favor of the proposed text amendment,as amended by staff, allowing projections with floor area into required interior side yards subject to certain limitations, and with any alterations as determined through the public hearing process, and make a final recommendation to the Tigard City Council. PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2012-00001 10/15/12 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 1 OF 6 SECTION III. PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION The applicant proposes to allow certain projections into required side yards in addition to those already allowed under the Tigard Development Code. Currently, projections such as roof eves, chimney chases, and porches are allowed to project into required side yards with limited depth while preserving a minimum three-foot clear side yard. The proposed "pop-outs" are distinguished from the projections currently allowed because they include floor area, limited to one foot in depth while also preserving a minimum three-foot clear side yard. The additional projections would be applicable to properties zoned R-12, only. Recent subdivisions (White Oak Village, Solera, and Everett Terrace) have created narrow lots approximately 25 feet wide that meet the 3,050 square foot minimum lot size for the zone. However, narrow lots may create narrow house design problems that can be alleviated when pop-outs expand the width of floor plans at critical areas, such as upstairs baths and downstairs living rooms. In support of this amendment, the applicant sites market preference for the single-family detached housing type on narrow lots and improved aesthetics and functionality of walls that include pop outs. The applicant states that the proposed code amendment would support affordable in-fill housing through efficient use of land in the R-12 zone. The application materials include examples in Tigard and Portland of single family dwellings with pop-outs on narrow lots (Exhibits B through E). SECTION IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE Tigard Development Code Section 18.380.020, Legislative Amendments to this Title and Map, states that legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. The proposed text amendment would apply to all R-12 zoned lands within the City. Therefore, the amendment will be reviewed under the Type IV legislative procedure as set forth in the chapter. This procedure requires public hearings by both the Planning Commission and City Council. Section 18.390.060.G establishes standard decision-making procedures for reviewing Type IV applications. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1) The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; 2) Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3) Any applicable METRO regulations; 4) Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and 5) Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. Findings and conclusions are provided below for the applicable listed factors on which the recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be 3ased. • The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under ORS Chapter 197 Statewide Planning Goal 1—Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. Statewide Planning Goal 2—Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. Statewide Planning Goal 9—Economic Development: This goal seeks to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health,welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. Statewide Planning Goal 10 --To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2012-00001 10/15/12 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 2 OF 6 Buildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried and plans shall encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density. FINDING: The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) has acknowledged the City's Comprehensive Plan as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. The proposed text amendment's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan's Citizen Involvement, Land Use Planning, Economic Development, and Housing goals and policies are discussed in this report, below. Based on the findings below, staff finds that the proposed code amendment is consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals. • Applicable Comprehensive Plan Policies Comprehensive Plan Goal 1: Citizen Involvement Goal 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. This goal has been met by complying with the Tigard Development Code notice requirements set forth in Section 18.390. The City mailed notice of the Planning Commission hearing to interested citizens on September 25, 2012. A notice was published in the Tigard Times newspaper on September 27, 2012 at least 10 days prior to the hearing. After the Planning Commission public hearing, additional notice will be published prior to the City Council hearing. Two public hearings are held (one before the Planning Commission and the second before the City Council) at which opportunity for public input is provided. This goal is met. Comprehensive Plan Goal 2: Land Use Planning Goal 2.1: Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program. Policy 2: The City's land use regulations, related plans, and implementing actions shall be consistent with and implement its Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment to the city's development code is precipitated by changes in the housing market that support affordable single-family detached housing on narrow lots. The proposed amendment would update the implementing regulations of the Tigard Development Code and, as shown in this section, is consistent with the applicable provisions of Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. This policy is met. Comprehensive Plan Goal 9: Economic Development Goal 9.1: Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy. Policy 3: The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities,provided that required infrastructure is made available. The proposed code amendment would expand the Exceptions to Development Standards section of the code (18.730) to allow pop outs into required yards improving the aesthetics and functionality of the single family detached housing type on narrow lots in the R-12 zone. The applicant suggests there is increased demand for this product type as affordable in-fill housing. The proposal wou_d not affect infrastructure. This policy is met. Goal 10.1: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policy 1: The City shall adopt and maintain land use policies, codes, and standards that provide opportunities to develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. The proposed code amendment would apply to all existing housing types permitted in the R-12 zone. However, its greatest utility would be to support infill development on narrow lots with single-family detached PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DC k2012-00001 10/15/12 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 3 OF 6 houses. The effect on the development of R-12 zoned properties may be to increase detached housing over attached housing, while not precluding the latter. According to the applicant, detached housing on narrow lots meets the preference in the housing market for detached housing and keeps the housing type affordable. This policy is met. Goal 10.2: Maintain a high level of residential livability. Policy 1: The City shall adopt measures to protect and enhance the quality and integrity of its residential neighborhoods. As shown in the applicant's exhibits B through E, the architectural interest of dwellings with projections could enhance the quality of residential buildings in R-12 zones. However, the reduction of side yards to accommodate projections on narrow lots may adversely affect adjacent established homes. Limiting applicability of the proposed code amendment to interior side yards would ensure protection of existing development. This policy is met. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, staff finds that with the suggested staff changes, the proposed code amendment is consistent with the applicable goals and policies in Tigard's Comprehensive Plan. • Applicable Provisions of the City's Implementing Ordinances Chapter 18.510- Residential Zoning Districts 18.510.010 Purpose A. Preserve neighborhood livability. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in residential zoning districts is to protect the livability of existing and future residential neighborhoods, by encouraging primarily residential development with compatible nonresidential development—schools, churches, parks and recreation facilities, day care centers, neighborhood commercial uses and other services—at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scale. B. Encourage construction of affordable housing. Another purpose of these regulations is to create the environment in which construction of a full range of owner-occupied and rental housing at affordable prices is encouraged. This can be accomplished by providing residential zoning districts of varying densities and developing flexible design and development standards to encourage innovation and reduce housing costs. The applicant anticipates growth of infill housing in the R-12 zone through future subdivisions with the minimum 25 foot frontage (18.810.060.B) creating narrow lots for single family detached housing. The proposed code amendment could support this vision by improving the aesthetics and functionality of detached housing on narrow lots. Tigard is dominated by existing neighborhoods developed with low density detached single family housing. The proposed code amendment supports compatible single family detached development in abutting R-12 zones, consistent with the purposes of the residential zoning district. 18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. According the city's 2011 Buildable Lands Inventory, there are 30 lots over 10,000 square feet in size totaling 35.46 acres (Exhibit H). According to the applicant, the development potential of these infill properties is sufficient to warrant an application for the proposed additional exception to development standards allowing projections with floor area into required side yards. Chapter 18.730 - Exceptions to Development Standards The purpose of this chapter is to present exceptions to the height and setback standards which apply in various zoning districts as detailed in Chapters 18.510, 18.520 and 18.530. Flexible and/or more stringent setback standards are designed to allow for the maximum use of land and to allow for a varied building layout pattern while ensuring there will be adequate open space,light, air and distance between buildings to protect public health and safety. PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2012-00001 10/15/12 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 4 OF 6 The proposed development code amendment provides for added flexibility in building elevation design to improve aesthetics and functionality of narrow house designs for narrow lots in the R-12 zone. A minimum three-foot setback is specified, consistent with the 2011 Oregon Residential Specialty Code which requires a minimum fire separation distance of three feet from the property line. 18.730.050- Miscellaneous Requirements and Exceptions • This section includes requirements and exceptions for non-conforming front setbacks, storage in front yards, projections into required yards, lot area for flag lots, and front yard determinations. The proposed code amendment would add an additional exception to the Projections into Required Yards subsection, as shown below. FINDING: As shown in the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE DCA2012-00001 PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT Explanation of Formatting These text amendments employ the following formatting: Str-iliethr-etigh - Text to be deleted [Bold,Underline and Italicl — Text to be added Chapter 18.730 EXCEPTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 18.730.050 Miscellaneous Requirements and Exceptions D.Projections into required yards. 1. Cornices, eaves,belt courses, sills,canopies or similar architectural features may extend or project into a required yard not more than 36 inches provided the width of such yard is not reduced to less than three feet. 2. Fireplace chimneys may project into a required front, side or rear yard not more than three feet provided the width of such yard is not reduced to less than three feet. 3. Open porches, decks or balconies not more than 36 inches in height and not covered by a roof or canopy, may extend or project into a required rear or side yard provided such natural yard area is not reduced to less than three feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties. Porches may extend into a required front yard not more than 36 inches. 4. Unroofed landings and stairs may project into required front or rear yards only. 5. In the R-12 Zone, bay windows and pop outs with floor area may project into required side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c)the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2012-00001 10/15/12 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 5 OF 6 SECTION V. STAFF ANALYSIS As demonstrated in the application and the analysis above, the proposed amendment complies with the applicable state planning goals, City Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, and the city's implementing ordinances. Developers are interested in the proposed code amendment because it would allow a more desirable, affordable and higher quality single-family detached product for infill developments within Tigard. The code amendment anticipates narrow lot subdivisions in the R-12 zone while maintaining the detached character of the majority of Tigard's neighborhoods. Recent subdivisions (Solera and Everett Terrace) located at SW 96th Avenue and SW Greenburg Road are examples of this subdivision type. Development exceptions allowing projections into required yards is established in the existing code. However, the proposed amendment would dramatically expand the potential impact of those projections from minor architectural features to up to 30%of the side elevation. Whereas these impacts may be acceptable to buyers of new homes on narrow lots, the impact to existing residents on adjacent properties may be perceived as more adverse. To limit potential adverse impacts,pop outs should be limited to yards interior to the subdivision. The applicant argues that projections improve the aesthetics and functionality of detached dwellings on narrow lots and would support affordable in-fill housing through efficient use of land in the R-12 zone. The purpose of the Exceptions to Development Standards is to provide more flexible setback standards designed to allow for the maximum use of land and to allow for a varied building layout pattern while ensuring there will be adequate open space, light, air and distance between buildings to protect public health and safety. The 2011 Oregon Residential Specialty Code requires a minimum fire separation distance of three feet from the property line. The proposed code amendment would limit projections with floor area into required yards to this minimum. Staff Recommendation: S.In the R-12 Zone, bay windows and pop-outs projections with floor area may project into required interior side and street side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c) the width of the approved interior side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL CITY STAFF & OUTSIDE AGENCY COMMENTS The City of Tigard Development Engineering Division reviewed the proposal and cautioned that potential conflicts with projections that extend into easements would not be supported. The City of Tigard Building Division reviewed the proposal and identified the UBC provision requiring a minimum 3-foot setback for walls and 2-foot setback for eves (if constructed with 1-hour rated materials). DLCD was notified of the proposed code text amendment but provided no comment. October 4, 2012 PREPARED ary P, genstecher DATE Associate Planner +/7 October 4,2012 APPROVED B' ': Tom McGuire DATE Interim Community Development Director PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2012-00001 10/15/12 PUBLIC HEARING,STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 6 OF 6 CITY of I IGARO DEVELOPMENT CODE 18 730.05U Miscellaneous Requirements and Exceptions A. When abutting properties have non-conforming front setbacks. if there are dwellings on both abutting lots with front yard depths less than the required depth for the zone, the depth of the front yard for the intervening lot need not exceed the average depth of the front yards of the abuhirg lots. B. When one abuttine property has a nonconforming front setback. If there is a dwelling on one abutting lot with a from yard of less depth than the required depth for the zone,the front yard for the lot need not exceed a depth one-half way between the depth of the abutting lot and the required front yard depth. C. Storage in front yard. Boats, trailers, croppers, camper bodies, house trailers, recreation vehicles or commercial vehicles in excess of 3/4 ton capacity may be stored in a required front yard in a residential zone subject.to the following: 1. No such unit shall be parked in a visual clearance area of a corner lot or in the visual clearance area of a driveway which would obstruct vision from an adjacent driveway or street; 2. No such unit shall be used for dwelling purposes except that one camper, house trailer or recreational vehicle may be used for sleeping purposes only by friends, relatives or visitors on land entirely owned by or leased to the host person for a period not to exceed 14 days in one calendar year, provided that such unit shall not be connected to any utility, other than temporary electricity hookups and provided that the host person shall receive no compensation for such occupancy or use; 3. Any such unit parked in the front yard shall have current state license plates or registration and must be kept in mobile condition. D. Projections into required yards. 1. Cornices, eaves, belt courses, sills, canopies or similar architectural features may extend or project into a required yard not more than 36 inches provided the width of such yard is not reduced to less than three feet. 2. Fireplace chimneys may project into a required front, side or rear yard not more than three feet provided the width of such yard is not reduced to less than three feet. 3. Open porches, decks or balconies not more than 36 inches in height and not covered by a roof or canopy, may ex tend or project into a required rear or side yard provided such natural yard area is not reduced to less than three feet and the deck is screened from abutting properties. Porches may extend into a required front yard not more than 36 inches. 4. Unroofed landings and stairs may project into required front or rear yards only. 5. Add this sub-section. In the R-12 zone, pop outs and bay windows with living area may project into side yards by one foot provided the pop outs or bay windows do not exceed 12 feet in length or contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage and provided the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. EXHIBIT "A" 100'-0" _ L .I 1 o io I II . --E J J , 1 r---;\ . (A '1.)1 1..- r,:))' c. ).)') , ,)) j A J) C,---E-.), "------) _„.--. , - ..-_-___)--=9- I - .-( A .,,,,, , 1 1 I 6.-:: " I 1,,.7,,,,.: rill 1 r,1 M., I I: .._.D. ...!' 1 'I. VI 1 II III c l// ( 8,_s„ , It a._0,. 4._6.. a'-s",a s1-1 " 4 a 5 a v ,v 1 '!.. :Milli ,-- I ".'::).,..,. il I 44170 3 III .�, a:i. :71 L�E ...4 it 1 li : I I- I .„, i i • 40,1 w1 II - I I 27-0" 24'_0" 24'-0" ,IL 25,_0„ a.; n : CH 1 I I �' ' = I4 nllll I iIii: malts" {_ ❑IV ii0 ' 1� 1 0 iv HI 0= rr�r r E MON Mai Iia1iiIIifF a 1 Rm.n I �! i=i(iriiii"' , i I fly i I0 I o INH -I amu - tib= • nn -III ND L_1 MI illl...: — 7 - .....,.....1 LIE.Ei•A—__ i it-5'- mm 410 "B" .., 4= 5/05.10.0. 5/0 x 5/0 . via.. 3/0 x 5/0 3/0 x.5/0 II -I ,..,. [ 2 2 LIVING 4, 4 - MASTER#1 /0 1 1211 x 11/6 .n Li .." 2/6 UP 1 @.' 2/4 '''' F DINING -0 - . @-. 02 E-- 0 . -----„,„ a./:4.,§• Iii:kiP' l 2/4 .,' ..-- M.OTH. r === :T 0 H I fr _ IIII"e nallika C9 © 2/4 ff, _ . . _ , w.i.c. ,— O \ .1 DN ME --------,-'-.'''\ i , W.I.C. II; to 2.6 Ivkva k \ , (31050V01-. 2/4 .--j \ GARAGE ._ ,.._<it_i c..„,..to t......, 4., . D I , 1 lr'l BT°H.n4n 12 . .,„ I Fl- l',-3 \ '-' T ill c4 .____ •H ' i6-2/12 ia ,. 6 \ - 2/0 -,,---\ 2/6 @ ..',..' 3/0 '"? En =/ 8/0 O.H.D. 50 A 1- MASTER#2 '9 1 -.1:. 14/1 x 11/4 . , F. .,„....../.---'" ..,y) n0 0 310 x 5/0 SH 3/0 x 5/0 5 H 8-0 11,3" t. 4,6' 10.-6" 1 50I I [ ' 15-0 7-1--- MAIN FLOOR PLAN 2 UPPER FLOOR PLAN 1/4"=1'-o" D2 1/4"=1-0" -, / .0--SO i \P MINIM -J 1 :2G 0 I G 6 e !? u... ci) = Z ri ", 7- 1.1..1 N'" 1 1 1 1 . -.ff 1 ' .1.• Z , EMI co 2 ..... , EXHIBIT "C" RIDGE.33.-0. iI IHilIEllii t I ti Iii ,,,,i i,'',1,YffilH.LIVAliWi46i4A.u.11,[1.,,u_yibilh,A 1,1i,, :. 1-1440-1H444W44#74'A'.!2V11-14r#,PL_LP '4 202 5. ' kcrflY1-+,41--Hlttr-11[746,1.711aiciiTti,,,,-,IT i;_1_11 ti.114111A , '''fji Ilill#11'tj'ilir-k IE 4' '41INTriirA Ili&i ItMl . itli.,•1:11..SR:3,,,ik 1,1"''' : ''411,-Iy-A, .11..!l'',I,6E1 D?v6,/ _ — _ — : , I STYLE m RA.=22,2 3,8. SSIDING g : V*L.filirli!' r. : -'-' . Ili wildel CYM1 I 1 . -- •.- ,Fin ?1 J 77 Tp, 19AAT : • . , . :,: ,,,„: '4N ffj _•,•_, o. co `[- n:C3 CD_. CT1 I Cr) r I rr rr- III 1r c j R -9 I riii 1 C) I : r-).„........_ 1 1 SIDING FF CO 1,1 FT1 rT1 ep k m , 1--- .=MI-370 , ›- 1 ,,,, . , i_i LEJ L1 . _ ... i k .,..,.... .... . .. , • : ,--•=•— + I k ; . __A i — 1 : i 1.--i , '' Ailb GRADE--.0ILT — • REFERENCE '. , . . . . --,. - I o 1\D NUR t : IND I 1 FRONT ELEVATION 0 01 1/4"=1.-0" , Cf) CD „ (...n CO .,..k• c:-.) co ).>• : 0 IS _, 73 0 0 CJ1 71 CR. Ft ,•,,\L._, , 's s: ---, • -< : b --o ...___.. ,•:, ,1 IL flu 1- EJLti .„HE I 1 EMI 1 E .. EE 111111101ti::14 ISOs_si COMP ",it'l;Hi i i' ,i it . IMAM,,I,HI,II I I,11 ROOFING , I HI, I i.,.I,MI IPLI I ,- I I ritarg Ii I'',' I ':',II • ti 1,1 01:,,,I I•I 4,14. ,,,,4-1,13i EE l'i Al ''IPM H. „..., r'f-eij . Ai,i AL. '" ' '' •' •'LE • ,11 , 1 , ,p ip,,',/.ii JA.p 11 El illi E !Lip k‘i :; ,," 1",IIFISI!. 4"'I N...f„'!,'Y_r?Y1-1 ...,... 1 > I iii'aiii,;.'1' ';t 6:0'11.ii,IT,I,IV I,I'1,11, '1.'i'i.ir,,,,Toieiii,1 I ,,,,e,,,,,•,„ uurfr- ; .,. -7-01-FITR7u,,,14,, I , SHAKE „„„,,i•i E i,i juu,:_,11_,, -•-•-, IL.111.4.4,V,it,„t,ti: „IiiHt,,I I `. nommommoommonor ' \E - !A WIL!f ! j 1,4Linj - -!!__L\EL• : il GI . . . . . . . . . ....... . 1 nfh'' 1 1 I ':1.11.-[51,,, • .:, . . . . . . . . . . . Id ; . . . . . . . . . . . . .. i , MI , ; wil,,m . el • . . ... ... 1"-- 'MITI Lip 1, E-/ ' • --1 • . . . . . . -' • - -IF I 0 „ LI .,...- - 4 . . . . •-• • .. . .. . I Pi -- ._ ?il ' 'j' .....:..1.n1—< -9.-I-•-•:: ,R4 _ : , - 11 1 1 - I -- . . • 2 5.0 2' „ 1 IIII I E..... 3--I.' 7• .„..-..:-....„..„:...-„,-,„:„. — -,1',....„,.,...„„....:. , 3 REAR ELEVATION D1 ibv=I-0" • 12 91 1111111111 . al 1. . . , i . ... , , 1 , ,1 I AP .... SIDING 11 d /'BUILT COLUMNS — I FACADE:103 SF FACADE:169 SF GLAZING:36 SF GLAZING:56 SF 34% 30% 2 LEFT ELEVATION D1 var_1:.o:, 12 19 COMP • ROOFING II LAP SIDING I i I I III- 1 ll . .I I 1 COLUMNS U` FACADE:163 SF FACADE.169 SF GLAZING:50 SF GLAZING:56 SF 30% 30% 4 RIGHT ELEVATION C\IcpcN x— ........ Cr) c, -..4'iari• ........ LO_ –__ • - , ... — . "-('' --Li_ _ ... .. , , . \ 1 - ,... ... . ------- .J--a I--1 . 4 • ,-----....__ • .• ......!' , .' . ,:.".4..„„..... ii: lt..-...,. v, ,-', ....,...... .. • - __ , . , • •.... _. . . • _ • _ , ... ,.. ., Pc,.' .A.-i 4' ' •'' .9' " .\\.. - .-• , -\ - ' /,„1, `- 1-,..I.F.. --,,''-.4. _ - •„,,, : .. ; ,.44...i.,41,16 _-- r— ___ _ ,._. , , _ . \*. f•--"--------------:-11---'' _ . . ... . . .. ; %"• - i .._ _ , .., . z ... , • r/t 'V. '''" ._, ---:- - '--.-----..----.;.--S------- . -- V ;0- . ,_._ _1 _ - ..-• . . .- _ --- -- 7--,•__. F._ _ ,.. ..:*. ,-, •-.•‘I -'7.. ' 0 k MAO - 1333 I , , • ..,,•: ,„ 3 • • . .. . • . ' • :‘; ,''' I it •, • • Ir 0..1 : ' IU .'. ' " ,•1:-^•, '', '.Y "•.- •'••', • . J , , .4 /AA --;.'4',..•tti.,.4..:1', . . 14 4 • ..! 1,gi 1 4., ..,,.• ,,,,,,,:,..! .... , . .:.„. • ,, .. 4 ' A.'f•4-..I j4 1 yt7,t14;.4,,-1,,j',........t1.; • ''.. '1 V L 1 vill i $ . • - , - I ' '17.3 id.''.','.... • ‘`,'' : '. ,r• 4 lk,, I Ft-,Wg: -';.S.--....,• . . A 4 ' 41 I '...44‘..4.',14 4._,„ ,.. 4 1, °l'ii', /.', '.' .' . •1 I i ... • I -,...— ti‘l.s tA, ''' ' ,.'/- •,: , -2.. .,. • : v.,...4, ...1...: , VA:1 - r. I ,. 1.k N.N. ..z.f", 1 .• . '',. . c . . . . _ . . ---..,,+••"--,,,,, , •• --5•411. •- -, ••••t/ • •:(. - • , . .,. .•i • ., ....-...7~ 5 -, •,.--'-r, „.,_ •c• e.,,tft,..; ..4*1 . ,„,,„ , ., 7 • ' •. 4'4 4 i 'clit . 1,r " •! .• ''.•i'lt ri.,-.yr. 4 '"'L - . '...., di ,4, •JA'',' , , "i•0,6 -4' '11.4 ''' ••(e.t. ' ' .. I' /M XI . 'A'.:;•* ,.. ..,,,- .,, ,..4. ,1' .,,44.0't., 41 , • : r , . 03 . '. - . '. ..,'• ; ' J.. , : .,4 ' ....t,..• ,... '' '''... ''' -''' ' .. 'lit^ • 1, v • • -• ill I - ----—--_____ -• 4 - ',:t..*'4- -' .14At.- ' '' ' .' -;-.1'44'''. ' '-; _ .'•,- . • ., '' , .-- - . . Ns i -• CI . • • . ,',-).- ' .' • — ' ,.'• ., ... ' ...• , stit',0,-tri' ,.. . . • • . •,t . • • , i• . ,. , . .. i' n .• ., bi ,' •-•Lt fot,:iLy_41'.,.. . .____ .. _ • _ _ _ CN N— ______ --------------------er------------- CN 2/ vc,) . - 1 .. -.,._ .........i , . . -;-- - 40aWiiiiik. ---4:11 ----,--.:_-- --s:---__, - ,•,•_„-. •,,, - IL. / . ,----- ---_-----z.z. . •"---7k mint- i.-;.- --:..- 1 L Mii. Mail - , , MN. Mall - a ._ , I ab, 1 MEL •I ___ AM— Ma- — 1 JOISIL INIIIL ____. -- Mae_ 11111110Bills,alas,, . -etc •--- EINNMA-- - - __ n---- -- ' 4161 7. I 111 1 .•,, . - Al I - W Ji1t . ii .....t .'"M .,....;.c.,., 4, .,• I 11171117. - s ii ' -4•-!:' - A‘,... ,h".7'-' _,•,'.,.< _ r • I :I , , .4, It S, 1 ,,,,:. 1 • e 41--*.,A(. 1 i :o;.,t :".k. • 1 , ,. ....•A,'7 .,,- ' • • 4 h... . v , 01... .... : .., , 1 • • • .... i ... — — ' 4 ti . 4 ,- • s ' 7 • .- ,.• z' V..•A'c:',4,"...14 ft.:: •d1 . .... _ . .. .,.. • i y CNI / -R O ' � . `�, co s Ai/ In i 'lanai yr ,. . '' :kelt,s.,_.._...1_, I,_.:-... _ __ -in'1:711:fj-- -'--2.-' ,'. _ .� - r ..... . .11 00 :41111L • ► • . x ,..._ 4 ..._7.4.1: . _:... ...„. •J • •,,,,, .., �" el 11.• ' . aC',. . ,10,„ .„:„ 1 . ., b'Y �� , ,.., ., ,. •. ,-... , . :, .'',; ' ' . 1.1,&4'Rrimm.°14.. , .4 t .'r ,..x, . .t. _. __,.._ _ . . , ... . ....4.5:.41 . _ ow _ ,.. ,,....: }` r 1 N E I .. ,.,_ , O. ,.. I I I I I I i . --� . \ \ • a I ,,, : L. EN r • J — r I+; �5 �.. ,. 77 --—-1'"M. .. -; -.':'I ' !-- ''' i11 !1f1 II1 : i ' 1 ii 1J x:4 rill _ .• r+'� • 4;41 'lill re.: yt a..,.„.„......„....• r ...„..,.... . : , ,. , , , . , .0,, ,, ,, .. _ , _ .... ,,,,.: , ..,:. , • se - t.sie. . .ate i 1 _- i '4IJNew.t,:4_ - —_______ .. M. 4......... , , ,__.-., -----;----- -`= 0 — . - _ 1 Li 1 . - _ .. _ - -. , __ \--_-.,--: • .,-,-•,--..----__-z----7---7- --- - . _ __.„._..„_____,,._,, ..,__ _ El . _ _ ''' J • .._ I \ •• • ---.. / . . . III MR 41 _ . is f'T i I , _,... \. I ERE NM r 1 II I-74_,..r-- 4— r . .. •• • 1 .., ow a , , y. . . ,_... .., I ' ' • 1. I 1 , • 411C-Ar. "" i. :, - --- ---------- : ____ ,/ 0.---"'' ..' - :-: " --•- . - ---- - ' •-ii ." ..,,,,.,,,, --...1.4- • ____---------7---:-------- .,, . , __„ i 11-03,..•`•;;_'....- , •,..., ... .. , . P ...: ,r,_ „ •-1._ „ ,, , .. . iii ... _ 1 , -- (.,:1:-_-„,0•1 - .1. II N. . .. .,,...f.,.. .. '-:-)., . -1 ",•:' '' ••4 1 I • I I 0..L. • .• ,I 1 r . r .... ,, 2...!ril 0 , -.l'' :- 1 '.'.• .1.te.''' ,,'' "nr il --1 4ff ____ --44, •.2:- I _., . :, . , . 1. 1 1lIhII ! VI rj '1..".1 , 4, •P.;'. ' I ' .' '7r. e, ..,' "?•,...1.4S t Y '.• 1 1, '• i 1 -.I , 4.,,.f,\.:e .':i'.,,,,-.:O_‘1,1.• . ' ••-%4X ",i y. .. "-.4',..., Al•' • • -- -'. . •• — — . r ..... -.11111.1110&•.- - -...'- ---' , ...-..- ...- . • - ... • -. . • i . - • :' • . • . ,.:. 1 - - ' - 1 1\' ,t.'.t N.- 0 CSI . ... -- ` ...._, • o • \y r0 .„? CO 11 1 .1: . � '1 � !, ..... ,,„,,,,„ , .r _-- .404 11._ - . __ , ...._____-__ , . , .... _ , .., .. .. .,.. _....... ,. . _ _ , • , ,, . . . ..„ ., . I''1. ;, ''.r/ i __ : :i.:Tir11.11111111111- I- , , N .. , ..,•:„, 1 . s .ii.:Iiimiliiiii 1 ,s, 1 • I ,dillitfti . ro ,r. 1 , 4-0......--0--..---.. rp-iff •11 ,'.. ",:p4 i'.,,,' ,.'''''.,, 6 :..�. . . — r. ,. _ I ., . 1K•.•.‘.-•'..i,.' s. j i fi r;• k iA ?.1.1 1 '..\- n_ *..,. .•,.-AdV. ., •fry; „ . ti :Ir'/i ce..'i .4 _ . - - - • ..,.___......- 1.1.1* ' air' , - , r" s . F ----=:- 15'-0' IMIN.3'o'HIGH RAILING WHEN L (E)4-0+t- GRADE EXCEEDS 30"BELOW DECK SURFACE DECK 152/x10/0, G. 1T-0' ( 18'0' 1.-0a U 15'-0" p-0• t5'-0". 1 'I 1 6'-91 'i j 1 .1, - 415x5/0 X/O 5/D x 618 SGD I ,,,l' 3/0x5/051 30x5/0SH W/110 TRANSOM W/1/0 TRANSOM 1 241. I-- --- --- -- — — – 1. 1 MASTER BEDROOM I GAS 1.111 14/1 x1118 ROOMFAMILY ROOINSERT 14/0x 12/S IN-COFFERED A'^D I CEILING L — _– y(I .. _, 218 , N.I r v4 - O G �\ o IT =a II X ° � � DINING ROOM o M.BTH. M iw 11/ax 11/4 o. �� ® iv CRAW F • , ACCESS pi -2/0 711 O m 2/4 I l o 1 1 _ — — _ W.I.C. m ` ., I �1 " ill Dw. z4 FD R.x I 1 N-' Z S'ilito • E TA 2/ g "' S 0 ( v8 KITCHEN �� LNDRY. 9®I 1D/8x1313all Y. Nil, ,) 25 . SHELF AND 1 m 20 m J ROD v4 3 10 o p GI ry L� Y = a� 2/r q 5/0 BYPASS ! N REF. # ve -. 11 a a ,9 ® CARELESS , i 2/ UR.I WA 3r9 c BEDROOM 3 t5/2x colo / n'-01/2" g. k FURNACE AND E-51/2^ W TO BE IN n m C HEATED SPUD 4... 5 /5 INSULATED DDOORSa _ OS I �4 GARAGE Y a 911 x 10/0 , e ry w l ' I 2/8lL. 0 ,a Q 310 ( 8,01 . BEDROOM 2 G 9 910 x 14/1 8/057/00.H.D. m m 3/0 x510S,, 3/0x5/0 SH ® n , , EUILT UPJ tU.6' 4'-61 COLUMN TYP, / '1 10'-0" 15-0' t 'I MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 2 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN D2 1/4"'1.-O" D2 1/4„s 1'0EXHIBIT "E" —______e_ 32'-3 1,2'VAX RIDGE IjD 1[IlrUTUL,11J.1.1 J u J. ��jj11 II/1111 II! l u IIIII:11 1 �J f-�'-r I r l�j n I i n1 IfTT[(n r'1 :1 I �{L cOMP-Ni111Vii 7I �I iil lit'I',i'ill in�1;i l 11/IL ROOFING -L P 1 Il II 1 I l 11 I�I 11 iu I 1s-B• I I1 II IIII %t I r in III In JI �J T it 1 1 , 1r >4r1r 11 I 1� t n1 i. i. 'I 1 1T i; f INQn!,, 1 ' 11 111: 11 +- 2 __.- _r _ __ _— �T II 3 .N/IGE FALSE i Xxi II 1 ICT ii I I p 1 ® -1 1 II I T (� ■� 1 um 1 1P �fj 11 III I II1_ DORMER OPTION, I_ I1 flip„A If Wii(G x 210 WINDOW i SHAKE 0 GABLE ( I i 12 - I i I I TYP. _ Iiu Q 1 . I 1� II III i (LIII 11111 i �II I� it 1 (I Ilt 1t I 1 1 11 ,,,,,,i1::,,,,,,,, I 11 ( II l l► I I.I4;�,I -I I i ill I i l ,i, IITIIII III i!fii IIII 11.1 1 1I IIII - 20-9518'FINISHFLOOR IS n�'I 1ppr1 u n l 1 1 iAIfLj\ ( ATTIC LSP SIDTMF-� --- /\� i��,\..._ --� 1 , v_,% v1 �� t TRIM PACKAGE PER i \ ,, OWNER OPTION A. — -_ 1 _________a_Ii'-101/2'FINISH FLOOR 210 [s 00HLUU1 0� i m zBUILT UP COLUMNS \\ no-on L_inri, I TYP L1 ii N` p IIIIMIlli 1 1 pi Ti ism c II - II 11 I �� '—I Pi \ri 'i II° LOFT w 1 I 1 A 14/1 x 192 if,0 — � i �J _ 1 \ i'-E E/S FINISH FLOOR ii e, 0'-0'FINAL GRADE(REF-) ., O n 1 FRONT ELEVATION Q D1 114.=7.0.. m 2/4 i v 1 ,i 1 i:(11 Ii�Ii 11 A X1111 u 1 1 1 I�,0 If „,I,',;(,',”III ',pi 1,1 ( 1 I_]111 it ILI .11 VIII I I I,i I , 1 LLL I in :_lTil 1,il�nnit[ 1111111 111®I 101111 I �1( L :',111.11„11,!1!1!!"1,11 I. RIM,I II 1,1 1 l W._Til Nit;11 i1 !"II 1 'A II I ll II111II �� I II.N1 i v II l _ I ]:,,,t,"," ROOF III.�i 111�m l I III 1 , ROOFING I i -.I II 11;1111II II II III IfI I111� ,lf� u n ,Ipi 111 1 1 II 1ll,1 1p I 1111E 111 11111 1 i .1111111 IIj11LII 1 I .11 1 11.1.110611166111111',,u i i I i t l I ' _ j 0(i 1 111 111 1111111 I n i 11 I Il l 1 r I II III I II C ,l II 1 '11 1 1 1 I- i u Iinu 11 .I I � Ilu ! 1111111,',Y1',l )nu IH1 I l 1111' V� III II I tl 11;1111i, 'll I 0[ 1 III I�7�11111 1 1111.1 1 Ir iii I II II II ii 11 Tlttu111 iin - 11111 lu,f li Ii Igi1lll)i q,1111, ,II11 11 11,1II illII II,III ill,i 1111 TT n II 111, 11,111 ,I,IIIIUIrl III liIII111® rl ATTIC 7 ry 1. T LAP 5101NG I -I �J TYP. /N / \ - -ice ( I IG 12 BELLY BAND 12 /.4 \ ( 1 /f..l • I1 I I 1 11 I ,1 1 1 1111 1 \1 1 E' 1 I-1 II l ill ' 1 3 LOFT FLOOR PLAN D2 1/4.=1.-o" 3 REAR ELEVATION D1 v4°=r-o^ ELEVATION NOTE'. ELEVATIONS ARE FOR REFREN 1 ONLY TO SHOW TYPICAL SUING OPTIONS.ACNAL 0,DING AND TRIM OPTIONS PER BUIL GER OPTION. ROOFING 12 2x OVERFRP5EO FALSE f _. T IJL fi I 11��1Il jI• __._ — __ -_ 15 OASTCN.APIGNI •II(1li rf Amor �I! �Ii --II I��-'L 1LI T - 1 I IQ Dow EI ■ 3 tq �(;�I L._ ��1�" -— ' -� A, -i f- _ ,1-P�i L y li g N r _" L_. 1 l ALL 11 TLFI [ i \ ~ __� yi ��1 i J' il<IilrL _ - ,0 1L1111,,11 W _ —_ — mL T \ rCI,It L._ i... _ - __ -_1 LAP SIDING- -.__ _._ -__.` I III i ill SEL'f SANG __ ..- -- _ ,1 1 y� — -- —- Jl 11 _Jl 1 fl� ___.-_ LIL�[ 1 t i t f i Trillif L mi--"[Lli... 1..1,1i-U0,,,,,P 001 1_ - - _ _ – — — 1 2 RIGHT ELEVATION _— • 12 Is - 11 2 UVERFRAMEO FALSE ROCKING� Mil 1 J L ) t-LL_r.:IA ,1,1 OCEANS,{OPTION). --_ \ _ —... � tJ ''. ,.j Ili 1 J_1L-11.lJLJ L_L� T _j_ I li /J{ppp L_ J N LJ'll Iil II 1 --T __, „ tl ...___—,'„„,---10,7,I.iL I J _ I Ir L_ fll _1LIy-JI a_ 'I IL �LL1-- Tl • ,-r: LL ,7-77170 7 ,,,,4„4,n,0, • 000 i u Fuln 1 - - .. LAP SUNG _ —- ___ —. _-- _ — - BANG _ _.—_— - I I -'- ._ - _- - _... - f 1 1 1 11 / / 1 II, ;,I SII — - _ — LEFT ELEVATION D1 ua^=1,0" t- ,, / /-• •/ •.; . s , . . . . .... .' i ...'I. . -S • . ... . . . . . ' ' -' -- - iste .,,ii.;--,..-1....,....=_... .. • , ' . , ....., ... . .' ...'• i:e,. . . - . 1—nT---r---7777 .i.4, .- . • Aiiii.ii - '---I--r •_-77-,: • ',#- • i - .i 11 ft.'."°-" ar;:, '.,.•;140 -4 . , .4, ._ - ..••• %,1 .,--- ' 7— 1 1 , III i A • , , II ., • ; rrn-Tr-77. NM VINE --"___--L. • ?dimwit, -, i--H1----Li-1--7—T - 1111111 RION i........._------.71-,.... ;.- .--Lr. 1 I• ,,.: • ., . x , , iNkt'am - ,_ , . . 1 _ , ' • '' '\ , ',,,L1V ',:- -,,,.... ,! ' . • ._• ._. ___r___ 11 ij:•' - • . t,• . N, , NI, 1 1 i 1111\. ----- - •,1 • . ri is, \.• \ , „ ,• . 1 • • • '-'"""7"-:,.• 1 . , • NO , _. , _ , . PARKING '''' .,--•• , f .- • ,.._ ,- •,... , : . , . - • Ns SOE 1 '' 4' , , . 11 • OF SEM , ; ,'. • 6 . 'PI , ,-..1.--t___. ' I -' ‘• 44 . 1 i - ._ 4, - -- -•- , 411 Mini! IMMO _ I 1 , I 1114k1.'' 4 - I ., . 1), . • . 1? - 7 :--- ir ._- . 1 ,,-.4 , 1 , . . i v.,... •: . , . - . V- ...r.1 • ..- .. I , ........m..7.- ' LAW I . . . . , . .. 7- . v vilialtirC7' .... AP'• - • ._, . = i ___ ... • ,, 03 J . ...,, 1.11110111111111.11111111111111111'1 .., 'N ,/ . , _ . UM Liv4 , ____ .k.___ .._.„ _ .._.. i . . .-=...„_, . _. Li ' 110,7111Trrrot- _ ' .. , ..--- I • . : .. Dr: 1 _ us - ___, • „...„ _ 1 _ _„.„ REIN • . , , 1 . . 1 ,. . , 1;1 11 . .• - 11 -% . -11111111111114444t. El _ . .., ....,..... f.,. : . . ... .._____ • •''' :i4v* ' 0, II -__, ,......, - -..... ....., _ --.._i , • '40,••• ,,/,,,.. ', I • .i ii` 1 ,''-''': ' . ft$1:',:,`: i ' I I E --1-------- ----7-------------....„:„:„. , 1 \ . , , I, 1., '. , ); ,k., '• ; • ' e . , ,-,— .-4.,,, ' rc: --,4.. . ; • !III tliii• I'''.-- *'.4*-'------- • . 1, ::;- , : : Ii ':' i `, ..' il . •) .. , , . , l',.:1: . :, , • .4 ___. . ...1 -..1 t'7' • . . . 1.1 ...... .. . - nk- Of4 410Nalii I . - - r" )P , - o - - . --- - • :T t, -- -- — — 1 i , –__:'_‘—.. P '•':.-_-.. - '. '1 ,' 1 ,, II • - - i . ._, •, •• • i. .. } , • . .. ! .• - -- ,___,--.1,, , • _ . 1 •. ,-,..•-.-: „.. ; '' . . , '.. ,,, •••••• •• .J. • ..,, _i_ji- , – — -- — — -1,..-'',' t.0.5. ii,,-,,,,,, . ="." , ". r''..* -...'''''....--2-1-.J-:- .. '''.0:1... : .-A.74.,;:. ., .,,-,-;!,,•:. - ..., . . .. • . . . .... .. .... .... .. . , .... .. , . _ _____ _. ., ... ...,..... _ _ _ _ __.-_ _ -,.., A _____ ___ __, ___________ ___ CITY OF H L_SBO O --i,11111114. Hillsboro Planning Department DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ANDDESIGN GUIDELINES C � Adopted by the City Council and the Planning Commission pursuant to Subdivision Ordinance No, 2808 Article VI Adopted by the City Council through Resolution No. 2219 duly 16, 2007 Effective: August 16, 2007 C. Setback Variation Standards. The setback variation requirements of this section are intended to encourage a wider range of structural design, setbacks, and housing choices within new development, and provide developers with flexibility in response to varying site conditions. The following standards shall apply on single family residential subdivisions or Planned Unit Developments of eight or more lots, outside areas designated Station Community Planning Area on the Comprehensive Plan Map. These requirements are not intended to apply to townhouse or multi-family residential development. 1. At least 40 percent of the lots in the subdivision or PUD shall have front yard setbacks less than the specified distance in the applicable zone. This reduced setback shall apply only to the residence portion of the structure which may not be reduced below 75% of the specified setback. Application of the reduction is restricted as follows: a. Side street setbacks on corner lots in subdivisions which allow reduced setbacks shall not be further reduced; b. Front yard setback of the garage portion of the structure shall not be reduced below 19 feet; c. Adequate angles of repose are maintained for public and private utilities. 2. Side yard setbacks in all zones may be reduced to allow load-bearing architectural projections such as, but not limited to: bay windows; oriel windows; and alcoves. Such projections may extend up to four feet into the required setback, provided that: a. A minimum three-foot setback is provided from the projection to the property line; b. Architectural projections on adjacent structures are not aligned opposite one another; c. The length of the architectural projection is not more than 25 percent of the length of the wall from which it projects; and d. Adequate angles of repose are maintained for public and private utilities. EXHIBIT "G" __ BLI January 1,2011 1 --- , - - h Zoning Lots Acres r ;. t t !• ( I j j �i 1 - • _ 1 . Buildable CC 0 0 • I I -.. _ ' C-G 24 39.45 �.� $ t - ! / t - Ii t 1 T C-N 0 0 i J ; ~.; • :.\ i �. r l - 1 .-. ' _ry r -t ! (,i- Lands C-P 9 8.89 _- • 1 _ `. -I i''",. i \, ^I r % I-H 0 0 I -7-• ! )! -t - - 1• ! �' I In`Tentor�T 7 • I-L 10 7 86 t t :.I i''' ,} - ; --- Q -- 1 _ January 11 I-P 9 45.08 .- r 1 I _.. t - j - ; r b {� T O�\ _ I a 1 T 1 ?�� i ,. _,. , ; =1 1 I .y _ _ i MU-CBD 3 0.64 L I ---' - f i \ \ _.1 3 i t w MUC 3 2.47 ) r t _ is - MUE 39 19.93 --. 1...,,/ 1- _I- •• I_.I - I _-1.• _, C t C� _, t t. _ i, l _ it\ o Tigan MUE-1 11 10.81 I - • l - ® ,_ �. 120. MUE-2 1 1.24 I ) ;F m = • I^ '� , q+y `- OLegOn MUR-1 9 3.17 • \ t f I-1 j " I. t^.. .i --C-' ' ; ,.tea 1 _ - Q a: 7 MUR-2 2 0.76 '.I i :-E I ' - \ Z1 V Y 1 • _L 6 N P R-1 2 2.39 / f 1 i,1 \ .. .t p , l ,' t=" = ,,,o• ' R 2 2 0.99 `� !• ' All axc i ti�� ' q.,-, I ( Legend f14)17EM R-3.5 30 22.66 - •- _ - y �`�, an y - � _ 0.' 2011 Buildable Lands R4.5 239 152.83 �'j - • l - a` f O i t' , f - �� j Tigard Local Wetland Inventory R-7 178 77.82 mo; i_ t. ca s ® q a -- ® r CWS Vegetated Corridor R-12 58 38.57 ; \ lru� I, a 1f� ?1 I ` ' 1 q-4s: ,., �� FEMA 100 rFlood Iain /J r R-25 142 43.84 _. �` q,a, 21 R�0 0 0 ! _ ' �`. j_i f • Slope of 25%or Greater Total 771 479.40 _ t ; • _ 1 r Y 11110‘.. - - - \ , I_ �. ! ~t , _1 / \' aye' - -- Water {. _ \ Stream r 1 I I • amigo . _- - _ Tigard C ty Limits I / I rC -•- `-0 Zoning Classisfications '. ,I 1 �' „. ,.. „ ,.� c I_I-nn ,_ • r. I 3`, i\,`\ t_ 1 1.. _,..--2, t i .�1'ty .o<ad `s C-C Community Commercial -. _ --- _ _ S _ I,, ,, �• l - "� -- - C-G General Commercial U $ I - C-N Neighborhood Commercial •- •!-• I I --- , f weed • - i - C-P Professional Commercial •-._.' _!-.} ! , t -. .,_. �w, -.- - I-H Heavy Industrial _ -,� - -- I ' • •- I-L Light Industrial \.-\'.I•,i" 1'� '` q:,vrn Yr _ ial Park L. t -; ` • - _. MUC MxedtrUse Commerical �`t - r r. m � ' - - / - Q. MUC-1 Mixed Use Commerical 1 •' - ' I •� 1 q.a x `kJ'• -- „ �' IN (�, MU-CBD Mixed Use Central Business District „c. . i - _u _ _ I �' q�s `lp�n 1, MUE Mixed Use Employment •"' --i l , ' - -\ - ` i. a �p,a, 't•--.• i - ~� V MUE-1 Mixed U__ee Emplolyment 1 } , ! l ' �_'l' - -- thik.... MUE-2 Mixed Use Employment 2 - ;' , .` t } _ A� �y MUR-1 Mixed Use Residential 1 r'- 5MUR-2 Mixed Use Residential 2 ! `r I - µ ^ R-1 30.000 Sq Fl Min Lot Size 1 i --•- v 0 Sq Fl Min Lot Size q>s i-- '' f , -'" \ - 00 Sq Ft Min Lot Size R 2 20,0 r 1 r , c I 'a __ r R3.5 100 __ i ,,, _ -• _ _ r --, L: q. ^-•• , '\ - ., R4.5 7,500 Sq Ft Min Lot Size -... .. -. 1 . .._ I ,.', .^. R.} - _.L I --- ;` 1 R-7 5,000 Sq Fl Min Lot Size -�,.� : `" t , i _ `q'"_ ... -. I - . - R-12 3,050 Min S Ft Min Lot Size 111! - t- .. 1 r J i NZ �� ""'Yis - -.• - __ _,_ R-25 1,480 Sq Ft Min Lot Size I - I -- -" "'- -':-:-..,..1�.. 'r - -_- k ~i I - R-40 40 Units Per Acre -' ':-_.. .'_�" '� - '; ' c.-1 _ q];.. - • ti... _ �` ,t r. -- (PD) Planned Development Overlay v - ._ t I v\ I • .. .i' - - i i n-16 _._ f _1 - - - 1 -_1 '-i' i (HD) Historic District Overlay i WA-CNTY Washington County \ I \ __ I ' w a r ,;q KO l „• I I --y_1-. i;i ,\ , The inventory presented is based on specific assumptions ed over a our year enod.The tory • ' ' .j ' '\ - - --7- - ` 1all 1 should not be co. and was nsidered ed antexhaustive list of what is/is of • ".. f ' ; - P^L!' -• available for development,but a static representation based • ,.,., --• '7,'''''.i. ,•- \ N-�'-'- 1g. ,.1-• on the available data.Inclusion does not mean a property will II: \ •A. ,__,. ; °� • nrlaol, ,,�•III _ �' - develop or confers a mandate to do so.as exclusion does not `\•' ` '. `( /i t �.q i 1�•- .. •t 1 _ _ _ prevent a property from developing in the future.For purposes P P - , ' - I 1_. 1 - - ! I of this inventory,buildable lands were identified as property I �•; • -j 1 - -- \ I ,; 1 • - I , , , outside of Title 3 lands that are: i - -- ''_i - q+s ,ti•� \ I I 1,Fully vacant undeveloped,privately-owned parcels , __-__ , 1 ---- I !. .! ':/'''P'- 4,z.. -n _ I �I 2.Partially vacant.developed,privately-owned parcels T -l am.-- , - i i- [ .,; .-__ with 1/4 acre or more of the parcel vacant I - :- - FM - _ • ' , air V( -`i • rta woi I- Edi ;•'1_I .. D V �.•H Q IVI _ "The information represented on this map is current as of I , f�i l I _-_ _ �- - a,o 4 January amendments occur to a to blhe content of the map. ns a� I ! j 1 - Srate \4 a -1X At.1---": • - ..._ ` t - ..t • • ) 0 0.25 0.5 hides r • • t 1► R1�.rdrtt nrr73;iiis \ , r I 1 ._ ', \, `"Y�Jjre�Ci�1G'�i cx -i • _ ;, - I i '• • .�! ;. 1 it_ _. ft VI -ime .--�_• I , s,. '" '� i.' ' 1 I DATA SOURCES: '�fli _ ;•K�• IQPr! 1 „lil P. a , y • , - y Metro Tigard r - �rti • \._ - _ __.-_ I .. WastunptonCounty I�.� ' s.. "'7 ' t ' j .�� ,r_..74,... < �� f i I 1l. I ' i. 'F. ..,^. ��. ,` -•_I I :I 'A a;ae.,o CPI'Homo" ��.,.r „� -. • V Iti Q W `�'�, jj y� Q Q ``,� DISCLAIMER: t a • ,:. s, unu � I _. _ t • ..-.- .. ^.' -- rn,aroad wxeerweao- several TIGARD 1 1 I/ ' 1 y �.' i -_I - anawsea The eN cannot uer u �` • T LL ' _. .-_ - -L_I I t _ re.rwn3,br6y kr oiy erten TMmkrt. tJt25 SW Hall e,va r Koch. Tigard,Oregon 9:223 EXHIBIT �'- .�� 'i ! -? ..eve.any net .n. r weals 503.838 fit L L H 7! v. r�- • 1 _ -..+ , _ _ appreciated www!,gena-or goy • _ _ _ - - Fe Lcco,nn 5 hf_v,.r ,..s J a. r_ i. _ _ .. -.r..,_ • .,__�. 'Y rid � Ky °I"rigard �' by ®Tand L se Per t Application s PRE-APP. HEr Y. giaArit File# Other Case# Date By Receipt# Fee Date Complete TYPE OF PE's ah 'IT YOU E APPLYING FOR ❑Adjustment/Variance(II) ®Historic Overlay(II or III) ❑Site Development Review(II) ® Comprehensive Plan Amendment(IV) ❑Home Occupation(II) ®Subdivision(II or III) Ej Conditional Use(III) ®Minor Land Partition(II) ®Zone Change(III) XDevelopment Code Amendment(IV) 0 Planned Development(III) ® Zone Change Annexation(IV) ®Downtown Design Review(II,III) ❑Sensitive Lands Review(II or III) NOTE: FOR REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS,PLEASE REFER TO YOUR PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE NOTES LOCATION WHERE PROPOSED ACTIVITY WILL OCCUR(Address if available) N/A TAX MAPS&TAX LOT NOS. TOTAL SITE SIZE ZONING CLASSIFICATION APPLICANI* MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP PHONE NO. _ FAX NO. eO 700 PRIMARY CONTACT PERSON PHONE NO. E-MAIL} (PCP{ 112— -P-O r1 ( R, PROPERTY OWNER/DEED HOLDER(Attach list if more than one) 7A MAILING ADDRESS/CITY/STATE/ZIP PHONE NO. FAX NO. *When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owners must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. PROPOSAL SUMMARY(Please be specific) D 0 3F---c-r <d N / r > C�5 r 6-6- -PCU E_t—opM (2_0'0E' 1 c, 0NI. . oe` — L ( ND(,_&i rj PSP omoi'1 To G'.- 5 ( fit 4 s Foy (c) ({ City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard,OR 97223 I 503-718-2421 I www.tiifard-or.Rov I Pape 1 oft THE APPLIC T S L CERTIFY T T: * If the application is granted, the applicant shall exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application,map be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application,including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application(s). SIGNA,. 7• ut.../S OF EACH joch0. ' „ELLOF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY REQUI' D. Owner's ignature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date Applicant/Agent/Representative's Signature Date City of Tigard I 13125 SW Hall Blvd..Tigard, OR 97223 I 503-718-2421 I www.tip-ard-or.o-ov I haeme 2 nf 2 City of Tigard Land Use Application APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL SUBMITTALS. ALL ITEMS MUST BE SUBMITTED AT ONE TIME. • This form is required to complete your submittal. The applicant must check the box next to the item verifying that the information is present. Staff will check off the items at intake. • Three (3) copies of all materials are required for the initial review process. The balance of the copies will be requested once your submittal is deemed substantially complete. • Each packet must be collated. • Plans are required to be a minimum of 24"x 36"or 22"x 34". • Plans must be FOLDED, rolled plans are not accepted. Applicant Staff Documents, Copies and Fees Required Completed Master"Land Use Permit"Application with property owner's signature or name of agent and letter of authorization Tide transfer instrument or grant deed >{ Written summary of proposal Narrative demonstrating compliance with all applicable development standards and approval criteria (as specified in the Pre-Application Conference notes) . / Documentary evidence of Neighborhood Meeting: Neighborhood Meeting Affidavits of (VA- Posting&Mailing Notice,Minutes, Sign-in Sheets it Service Provider Letter Impact Study per Section 18.390.040.B.2(e) °y{ Copy of the Pre-Application Conference notes Filing Fee (see fee schedule) N/ Preliminary Sight Distance Certification Preliminary Storm Calculations (( Arborist Report E t Traffic Report(if Required) Maps or Plans (Plans must be at least 24"x 36") Architectural Drawings (elevations & floor plans) l Existing Conditions Map if Landscape Plan I( Preliminary Grading/Erosion Control Plan t( Preliminary Partition/Lot Line Adjustment Plan t` Preliminary Storm Drainage Plan Preliminary Utilities Plan Public Improvements/Streets Plan Site Development Plan Subdivision Preliminary Plat Map Et Topography Map tt Tree Preservation/Mitigation Plan Vicinity Map Once your application has been deemed substantially complete you will be notified by the Planning Division in the form of a completeness letter indicating that you will need to provide the following: Two (2) sets of stamped, addressed#10 envelopes for all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject property (the 2 sets must remain separated for the purpose of 2 mailings). Mailing envelopes shall be standard legal-size (#10), addressed with 1"X 4"labels (please see envelope submittal requirements). Property owner mailing lists must be prepared by the City for a minimal fee (please see request for 500'property owner mailing list form). I:\CVRPLN\iMasters\Submittal Requirements Check List.doc (updated:21-January-10) PRE-APPLICATION NOTES City of Tigard April 17, 2012 STAFF PRESENT: Gary Pagenstecher APPLICANT: Ryan O'Brien PROPERTY LOCATION: NA TAX MAP/ LOT #: NA PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: To amend the development code text in Chapter 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards, to allow additional projections into required yards under 18.730.050.D. The proposed text change would be as follows: "5. In the 1G12 zone, prop outs and bay windows with living area may project into side yards by one foot provided the pop outs or bay windows do not exceed 12 feet in length or contain over 30% of that dwelling unit's side elevation square footage and provided the width of such side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet." COMP PIAN DESIGNATION:Medium Density Residential ZONING: R-12 NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting is not required for a CDC text change. NARRATIVE Include a narrative that responds to the applicable review criteria. The narrative must contain the text of the applicable review criteria, findings of fact relative to each criterion, and a conclusion as to whether the criterion has been met. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERLA.: Zoning Map and Text Amendments 18.380.020 A. Legislative amendments. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. Type IV Decision Making Procedure 18.390.060 Based on the information provided, the text amendment request will be a Type IV Process, with a public hearing before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council to either approve the request as proposed, modify the request, or deny the request. A subsequent hearing (or hearings) is then held by the City Council for a decision. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; [Goals 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 9, Economic Development; Goal 10, .Housing] 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; [Goal: 1, Public Involvement; Goal 2, Land Use Planning; Goal 9.1, Policy 3, Economic Development; Goals 10.1 and 10.2 Housing]; and 5. Any applicable provisions of the city's implementing ordinances [TDC 18.380, Zoning Map and Text Amendments; 18.390, Decision Making Procedures; 18.510, Residential Zoning Districts; and 18.730, Exceptions to Development Standards]. Application Fees for Zoning Text Amendment (Legislative): $3,787 Decision timeline is approximately 3 months from receipt of a complete application. The 120- day rule is not applicable to legislative changes. PREPARED BY: 2 , Gary Pagenstecher Associate Planner Planning & Land Design LLC Cell: 503-780-4061 1862 NE Estate Drive Office: 503-846-1095 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 Email: ryanobrien1@frontier.com TO: City of Tigard FROM: Ryan O'Brien, Planning Consultant DATE: 8-1-12 SUBJECT: Amendment to the Tigard Community Development Code We request an amendment to Section 18.730.050 (Miscellaneous Requirements and Exceptions) to the Tigard Development Code by adding Section 18.730.050.D.5 to allow one foot bay windows and pop outs with living floor area in the side yard, but not less than 3 feet from the side property line. This code addition would only apply to land zoned R-12. If the approved interior side yard is 5 feet, then the bay windows or pop outs would have a 4 foot setback. If the approved interior side yards are 4 feet, the bay windows and pop outs would have a 3 foot setback. Pop outs and bay windows would also be allowed along exterior side yards and street side yards. The existing Tigard code Section18.730.050 with the proposed Section to be added is attached as Exhibit "A". The added Section 18.730.050.D.5 would read as follows: In the R-12 zone, pop outs and bay windows with living area may project into side yards by one foot provided the pop outs or bay windows do not exceed 12 feet in length or contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage and provided the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. The houses in the Solera Subdivision north of Greenburg Road, on the east side of 96`h Avenue, were developed with one foot pop outs and bay windows which increases the architectural character of the houses and created better interior floor plans. Pop outs and bay windows are necessary for upstair bathrooms, down stair dining rooms and side elevations of the corner lots to create more attractive elevations and because of the limited width of a 25 foot lot. This amendment is limited to the R-12 zone only b in order to encourage in-fill housing. Many future lots in the in the R-12 zone may be 25 feet in width which is the minimum frontage requirement in the R-12 zone. If a 4 foot side yard is proposed with a subdivision, then the pop outs could be 3 feet from the side property line at the interior and 9 feet from the side property line for corner lots. An existing lot in the R-12 zone would have 4 foot setbacks for pop outs without requesting 4 foot interior side yards. The setback of pop outs on a corner lots would be 9 feet. These options are a great advantage for in-fill housing. 1 Many of the older lots in the City of Portland are zoned R-2 with dimensions of 25 by 100 feet. In order to provide architectural variety and to increase the living area of the units, the City of Portland allows pop outs and bay windows on 30% of the square footage of the side elevations. Portland also allows 3 foot interior side yards when lots are created by a subdivision or partition. These code requirements have been very effective. Pop outs are allowed to project one foot into the side yards, including the street side yards. This allows architectural variety and eliminates the long blank walls along corner lots. It also creates architectural variety for interior side elevations and more interesting interior house floor plans. The Washington County code allows 8 street side yards and 3 foot interior side yards in the R-15 zone. The building code is used for the interior side yards. This proposed amendment to the Tigard Development Code will increase infill on land zoned R-12 zone and allow construction of more efficient detached houses. Home builders want to develop infill lots and home owners prefer to buy narrow detached houses compared to attached houses. As mentioned above, these codes have been very successful in the City of Portland and Washington County which has produced a significant amount of affordable and attractive housing units. This proposed addition to the City of Tigard code will create better housing opportunities and encourage in-fill housing construction on vacant R-12 zoned land. Exhibits attached to this application are as follows: "A" - Existing code and the proposed addition to Section 18.730.050 for the City of Tigard Development Code "B" - Elevations and site plans for 2 story houses with bay windows and pop outs on 24 to 25 foot wide lots without garages in a 5 lot subdivision located on a street corner in the City of Portland "C" - Elevations, floor plans and a site plan for a 3 story house with 2 master bedrooms, bay widows and pop outs on a 25 foot wide lot in the City of Portland. "D" - Photos of houses shown by Exhibit "C" "E" - Elevations, floor plans and a site plan for a 3 story house with 3 bedrooms, bay widows and pop outs on a 25 foot wide lot in the Solera Subdivision located in the City of Tigard on north of SW Greenberg Road and east of SW 96th Avenue. "F" - Photos of houses shown by Exhibit "E" "G" - City of Hillsboro Guidelines for projections into required yards "H" - City of Tigard buildable lands inventory for R-12 zoning 2 APPLICABLE ��U REQUIREMENTS ...-~=.~....-.~..-.~ . ~. TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE Chapter 18.380 - ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS Sections: 18.380.010 Purpose 18.380.020 Legislative Amendments to this Title and Map 18.380.030 Quasi-Judicial Amendments and Procedures to this Title and Map 18.380.040 Record of Amendments Chapter 18.390 - DECISION MAKING PROCEDURES Sections: 18.390.010 Purpose 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures 18.390.060 Type IV Procedure 18.390.070 Special Procedures 18.390.080 General Provisions 18.390.010 Purpose Chapter 18.510 - RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 18.510.010 Purpose 18.510.020 List of Zoning Districts 18.510.030 Uses 18.510.040 Minimum and Maximum Densities 18.510.050 Development Standards 18.510.060 Accessory Structures 18.510.010 Purpose Chapter 18.730 - EXCEPTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Sections: 18.730.010 Purpose 18.730.020 Exceptions to Building Height Limitations 18.730.030 Zero Lot Line Setback Standards 18.730.040 Additional Setback Requirements 18.730.050 Miscellaneous Requirements and Exceptions 18.730.010 Purpose TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOAL 1 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT GOAL 2 LAND USE PLANNING GOAL 9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL 10 HOUSING METRO TITLE 7: HOUSING CHOICE LCDC GOALS GOAL 1 - CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT GOAL 2 - LAND USE PLANNING GOAL 9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL 10 HOUSING 3 TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE 18.380.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to set forth the standards and process governing legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to this title and the zoning district map. These will be referred to as zoning map and text amendments. It is recognized that such amendments may be necessary from time to time to reflect changing community conditions, needs and desires; to correct mistakes; and/or to address changes in the law. 18.380.020 Legislative Amendments to this Title and Map A. Legislative amendments. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type IV procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G. COMMENT: This application will be processed as a Type IV amendment. Chapter 18.390 DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES Sections: 18.390.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a series of standard decision- making procedures that will enable the City, the applicant, and all interested parties to reasonably review applications and participate in the local decision-making process in a timely and effective way. Each permit or action set forth in Chapters 18.320 - 18.385 have been assigned a specific procedure type. COMMENT: Public hearing will occur at the Planning Commission and the City Council to allow all interested parties to participate in the decision making process. 18.390.020 Description of Decision-Making Procedures A. General. All development permit applications shall be decided by using one of the following procedure types. B. Types defined. There are four types of decision-making procedures, as follows: 4. Type IV Procedure. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy. Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council. COMMENT: Since this is a proposed amendment to the Tigard development code, it will be processed as a Type IV application even though it is proposed by an individual and not Tigard staff, the Planning Commission or the City Council. 4 18.390.060 Type IV Procedure A. Pre-Application conference. A pre-application conference is required for all Type IV actions. The requirements and procedures for a preapplication conference are described in Section 18.390.080.C. COMMENT: A pre-application was conducted by the City staff and the notes are attached. B. Timing of requests. The Director shall receive proposed Type IV actions twice yearly. A completed application shall be submitted not more than 75 days and not less than 45 days before the first commission meeting in April and October. The Director may waive any of the above periods. COMMENT: The Director has waived this 6 month limitation because it only involves one specific issue with an addition to the code for the R-12 zone. C. Application requirements. 1. Application forms. Type IV applications shall be made on forms provided by the Director as provided by Section 18.390.080.E.1. 2. Submittal information. The application shall: a. Contain the information requested on the form; b. Address the appropriate criteria in sufficient detail for review and action; c. Be accompanied by the required fee; and d. Be accompanied by 18 copies of the narrative. COMMENT: All of the above information has been provided with this application. D. Notice of hearing. 1. Required hearings. Two hearings, one before the Commission and one before the Council, are required for all Type IV actions, except annexations where only a hearing by the City Council is required. 2. Notification requirements. Notice of the public hearings for the request shall be given by the Director in the following manner: a. At least 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing date, notice shall be sent to: (1) The applicant; 5 (2) Any affected governmental agency; (3) Any City-recognized neighborhood group whose boundaries include the site; and (4) Any person who requests notice in writing and pays a fee established by Council resolution. b. At least 10 business days prior to the scheduled public hearing date, notice shall be given in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. c. The Director shall: (1) For each mailing of notice, cause an affidavit of mailing to be filed and made a part of the record as provided by Subsection D.2.a; and (2) For each published notice, cause an affidavit of publication to be filed and made part of the record as provided by Subsection D.2.b. 3. Content of notice. The notice given to persons entitled to mailed or published notice pursuant to this section shall include the following information: a. The number and title of the file containing the application and the address and telephone number of the Director's office where additional information can be obtained; b. A description of the location of the proposal reasonably calculated to give notice as to the location of the affected geographic area; c. A description of the substance of the proposal in sufficient detail for people to determine that a change is contemplated and the place where all relevant materials and information may be obtained or reviewed; d. The time(s), place(s), and date(s) of the public hearing(s); a statement that public oral or written testimony is invited; and a statement that the hearing will be held under this title and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060.E; COMMENT: The required hearings will be schedule and the notices prepare and mailed in accordance with the above requirements. 6 G. Decision-making considerations. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances COMMENT: All of these code are addressed with this application Chapter 18.510 - RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 18.510.010 Purpose A. Preserve neighborhood livability. One of the major purposes of the regulations governing development in residential zoning districts is to protect the livability of existing and future residential neighborhoods, by encouraging primarily residential development with compatible nonresidential development—schools, churches, parks and recreation facilities, day care centers, neighborhood commercial uses and other services—at appropriate locations and at an appropriate scale. B. Encourage construction of affordable housing. Another purpose of these regulations is to create the environment in which construction of a full range of owner-occupied and rental housing at affordable prices is encouraged. This can be accomplished by providing residential zoning districts of varying densities and developing flexible design and development standards to encourage innovation and reduce housing costs. COMMENT: This addition to the code will have a positive effect on existing neighborhoods. It will help provide affordable housing and more usable living area for narrow houses on 25 foot wide lots, the minimum street frontage requirement for lots in the R-12 Zone. More creative and attractive housing will be developed in the R-12 Zone and this addition to the code will encourage single family detached, owner occupied housing. The limited impact from reduced setbacks will be significantly less compared to development of attached housing in neighborhoods where only single family detached houses exist. The attached Exhibit "G" are the design guideline for the city of Hillsboro which allows 4 foot projections of bay windows and alcoves into all yards up to 25% of the length of the wall, but the yard cannot be less than 3 feet. 7 TABLE 18.510.2 - (Cont'd.) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES _ R-12 STANDARD MF DU* SF DU** Minimum Lot Size - Detached unit 3,050 sq.ft.per unit 3,050 sq.ft. per unit - Attached unit - Duplexes -Boarding,lodging,rooming house Average Lot Width None None Minimum Setbacks - Front yard 20 ft. 15 ft. - Side facing street on corner,Sc through lots 20 ft. 10 ft. - Side yard 10 ft. 5 ft. [1] - Rear yard 20 ft. 15 ft. - Side or rear yard abutting more restrictive zoning district 30 ft. 30 ft. -Distance between property line and garage entrance 20 ft. 20 ft. Maximum Height 35 ft. 35 ft. Maximum Lot Coverage [2] 80% 80% Minimum Landscape Requirement 20% 20% [1] Except this shall not apply to attached units on the lot line on which the units are attached. [2] Lot coverage includes all buildings and impervious surfaces. * Multiple-family dwelling unit ** Single-family dwelling unit 18.510.020.F. R-12: Medium-Density Residential District. The R-12 zoning district is designed to accommodate a full range of housing types at a minimum lot size of 3,050 square feet. A wide range of civic and institutional uses are also permitted conditionally. COMMENT: As indicated by Table 18.510.2 above, the one foot pop outs and bay windows will benefit both single family attached and detached housing. The side yard is 10 feet for attached housing and 5 feet for detached housing in the R-12 zone. Section 18.510.020.F indicates the R-12 zone is intended to provide a full range of housing types which implies flexibility in design and appearance. The architectural and livability benefits for the house owner of lots in the R-12 zone are described on pages 1 and 2 of this report. 8 Chapter 18.730 - EXCEPTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Section: 18.730.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to present exceptions to the height and setback standards which apply in various zoning districts as detailed in Chapters 18.510, 18.520 and 18.530. Flexible and/or more stringent setback standards are designed to allow for the maximum use of land and to allow for a varied building layout pattern while ensuring there will be adequate open space, light, air and distance between buildings to protect public health and safety. COMMENT: The city provides for exceptions to allow 4 foot interior side yards in the R-12 zone. The code amendment will allow the pop outs and bay windows on both interior and exterior side yards. This will greatly help house construction and provide architectural variety which will benefit both the owners of the house to be constructed and the neighborhood. TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOAL 1 - CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT "To develop a citizen involvement program that ensures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process." Goal 1 requires the local citizen involvement program "clearly define procedures by which the general public will be involved in the ongoing land-use process." These actions include methods to involve citizens in land use issues; promoting successful two-way communication and feedback between the City and its citizens; means by which citizens may affect outcomes; clarity and availability of technical information; and financial support and other resources for citizen involvement efforts. All of these actions align with the community's vision where citizens are informed about how to access public services and understand their responsibility to participate as members of the community. GOAL 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process. COMMENT: This will occur with the public hearing process. GOAL 2 - LAND USE PLANNING "To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions." 9 Policy 6. The City shall promote the development and maintenance of a range of land use types which are of sufficient economic value to fund needed services and advance the community's social and fiscal stability. Policy 12. The City shall provide a wide range of tools, such as planned development, design standards, and conservation easements that encourage results such as: A. High quality and innovative design and construction; B. Land use compatibility; C. Protection of natural resources; D. Preservation of open space; and E. Regulatory flexibility necessary for projects to adapt to site conditions Policy 24. The City shall establish design standards to promote quality urban development and to enhance the community's value, livability, and attractiveness. COMMENT: The public hearing and Tigard staff review of this code addition will comply with Goal 2. In accordance with Policy 6, this code addition will encourage more owner occupied and attractive single family detached housing with higher economic values compared to the current code. Higher values and additional in-fill housing will help pay for city services. Small scale in-fill housing will generally be developed on improved streets with existing utilities. This code addition also provides regulatory flexibility as indicted in Sub-Section "E" above. GOAL 9 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT "To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens." Policy 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available. COMMENT: This code amendment provides flexibility in accordance with the above Policy 3. The benefit to the Tigard economic vitality has already been explained in this report. 10 GOAL 10 - HOUSING "To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state." Some of the factors that local governments can influence are the supply of available residential land; the availability of public services; development regulations (density and design), and support for low and moderate income housing. In the Portland metropolitan region, only land included in the Metro Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), an invisible line that separates rural areas from suburban, can be developed at residential densities requiring urban services. At the local level, each state and regional jurisdiction must inventory its buildable land, which is defined as vacant and re-developable land suitable for residential use, to determine housing capacity. Tigard maintains a buildable lands inventory (BLI) that tracks available residential land. Two state and Metro requirements help determine housing capacities on buildable land within the Portland Metropolitan Area — the state Metropolitan Housing Rule and Title 1 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan (Functional Plan). Both focus on increasing jurisdictions' housing capacity in order to use land within the UGB efficiently. COMMENT: This code amendment will help provide more housing opportunities in the City of Tigard and increase the supply of land for development of R-12 zoned property by providing more flexible housing design and low and moderate income housing opportunities. The supply of buildable land in the Metro UGB is limited and every city should attempt to maximize land already included in the UGB and especially in-fill property where public infrastructure already exist, such as roads, utilities, schools and parks. Exhibit "H" is a map showing the Tigard Buildable Lands Inventory date 1-1-12. The R- 12 zoned Land is highlighted in red. A total of 58 lots and 38.57 acres are identified as buildable. However, additional land will be available from small partitions, removal of older houses on larger lots combinations of lots which are not identified on this map. With this code change, additional buildable land will become available for infill development. GOAL 10.1: Provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents. Policies: 1. The City shall adopt and maintain land use policies, codes, and standards that provide opportunities to develop a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of Tigard's present and future residents. 2. The City's land use program shall be consistent with applicable state and federal laws. 11 3. The City shall support housing affordability, special-needs housing, ownership opportunities, and housing rehabilitation through programs administered by the state, Washington County, nonprofit agencies, and Metro. 4. The City shall adopt and maintain land use regulations that provide opportunities to develop housing for persons with special needs. The scale, design, intensity, and operation of these housing types shall be compatible with other land uses and located in proximity to supporting community services and activities. RECOMMENDED ACTION MEASURES: i. Update the City's Buildable Land Inventory regularly to monitor the rate of development and the availability of residential land. ii. Monitor regional and local housing trends and periodically review and update the City's land use policies and regulations accordingly to provide the range of housing development opportunities needed by Tigard's residents. COMMENT: This code addition will provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of current and future City residents as already mentioned in this report. The attached Exhibits "B", "C" and "D" are floor plans, site plans, building elevations and photos of actual projects already built in the City of Portland. These plans and photos show significant architectural variety. This type of house design has been used extensively in the City of Portland and it has been very successful. The lots are 24 to 25 feet in width and generally 100 feet in depth. Because of the architectural variety, the house values have increased and the sales rate is much higher compared to other areas in the Portland metropolitan area. Exhibits "E" and "F" are floor plans, building elevation and photos of houses in the Solera Subdivision located in the City of Tigard on the north side of Greenburg Road on the east side of 96th Avenue. This project has been very successful and the home owners are very happy with the interior floor plans and the exterior elevations. GOAL10.2: Maintain a high level of residential livability Policy 5. The City shall encourage housing that supports sustainable development patterns by promoting the efficient use of land. COMMENTS: This code addition will promote more efficient use of land in the R-12 zone and maintain a high level of residential livability. The interior floor plans and the exterior elevations of the houses will be better as demonstrated by Exhibits "B" to "F". In fact, the city should probably promote this type of house design. This code addition will make it much easier for home builders to have certainty with their house plans rather than requesting setback adjustments for every project. Home builders really appreciate certainty and clear development standards. 12 RECOMMENDED MEASURES: i. Encourage future housing development on designated buildable lands in areas where public facilities and services can be most readily provided. ii. Develop infill design standards to ensure that new housing constructed within existing residential neighborhoods complements and is compatible with existing development . COMMENT: This code addition will promote more in-fill housing incompliance with the above Recommended Measures. One foot pop outs and bay windows will provide more compatibility with existing housing in the area and help offset the interior and exterior appearance of narrow houses 15 feet in width. METRO CODES METRO TITLE 7: HOUSING CHOICE 3.07.710 Intent The Regional Framework Plan calls for establishment of voluntary affordable housing production goals to be adopted by local governments and assistance from local governments on reports on progress towards increasing the supply of affordable housing. It is the intent of Title 7 to implement these policies of the Regional Framework Plan. COMMENT: Affordable housing will be encouraged with this code addition and help increase the supply of affordable and attractive housing. LCDC GOALS GOAL 1: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT OAR 660-015-0000(1) To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. GOAL 2: LAND USE PLANNING OAR 660-015-0000(2) PART I -- PLANNING To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. 13 GOAL 9: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OAR 660-015-0000(9) To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. GOAL 10: HOUSING OAR 660-015-0000(10) To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. COMMENT: All of these goals were addressed with the Goals and Policies of the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. 14 I --N4. 1 1-1 „3, \ , \,\, I % c;.0 44, 41. glIP VOI y, �h'q`,�`� Q410 VII y9Qy VN2',��)LL ...La/ ' 14 I. tA -\ \ , ,,- r--- � 1 ErCity of Tigard PLEASE PLACE UNDER CITY OF TIGARD LOGO IN THE LEGALS itidmb SECTION OF THE TIGARD TIMES, THE FOLLOWING: PUBLIC HEARING ITEM: The following will be considered by the Tigard Planning Commission on Monday October 15, 2012 at 7:00 PM at the Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,Tigard, Oregon. Both public oral and written testimony is invited.The public hearing on this matter will be held under Title 18 and rules of procedure adopted by the Council and available at City Hall or the rules of procedure set forth in Section 18.390.060.E. The Planning Commission's review is for the purpose of making a recommendation to the City Council on the request. The Council will then hold a public hearing on the request prior to making a decision. Further information may be obtained from the Community Development department (staff contact: Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager) at 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 97223, by calling 503-718-2420, or by e-mail to sean@a tigard-or.gov. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2012-00001/ DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2012-00002 -TIGARD DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS- REQUEST: To amend the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan to add background and figures and to amend the Tigard Development Code (Title 18) Chapters 18.370, 18.610 and 18.810 to implement new street connections. The complete text of the currently proposed amendments can be viewed on the city's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/connectivity LOCATION: Downtown District. ZONE: MU-CBD. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use - Central Business District. APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Citizen Involvement; 2, Land Use Planning; 9, Economic Development; 11, Public Facilities and Services; 12, Transportation; 13, Energy Conservation; and 15, Special Planning Areas: Downtown; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 11, 12, and 13;METRO's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 6;METRO's Regional Transportation Functional Plan Titles 1,2, and 5. TT PUBLISH DATE: September 27,2012 (PLEASE PUBLISH THE VICINITY MAP INCLUDED WITH THIS EMAIL WITH THIS LEGAL NOTICE. THANK YOU.) 1111 I PLEASE SIGN IN HERE ea Tigard Planning Commission TIGARD Agenda Item # ' Page of_2_ Date of Hearing\CI)— j—DO P.) Case Number(s) Q A - bt)DQ\ ) COC 4 azs Case Name Location If you would like to speak on this item, please CLEARLY PRINT your name, address, and zip code below: Proponent (FOR the proposal): Opp nent (AGAINST the proposal): Name: 4N N e: 112 j Address: \'2/74-35- 6:\,0 , 1. a'- Address: l v17 N 15-6 e 44-r City, State, Zire (2/2 01_ t.,/.-A22- City, State, Zip: L (le A/U 14 Name: Name: Rus S thjz Address: Address: po i oo City, State, Zip: City,State, Zip: , 4, 0-0- 9 706 2Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Name: Name: Address: Address: City, State, Zip: City, State, Zip: Agenda Item: Hearing Date: STAFF REPORT TO THE q PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TWA R D 120 DAYS = N/A SECTION I. APPLICATION SUMMARY FILE NAME: DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT CASE NOS: Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) CPA 2012-00001 Development Code Amendment (DCA) DCA 2012-00002 APPLICANT: City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Boulevard Tigard, OR 97223 PROPOSAL: To amend the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan and Tigard Development Code (Title 18) Chapters 18.370, 18.610 and 18.810 to implement the street connectivity and design standards recommended in the Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan. LOCATION: Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District ZONING: MU-CBD COMP PLAN: Mixed Use Central Business District APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Citizen Involvement; 2,Land Use Planning; 9, Economic Development; 11, Public Facilities and Services; 12, Transportation; 13, Energy Conservation; and 15, Special Planning Areas: Downtown; Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 6; Metro Regional Transportation Functional Plan Titles 1, 2, and 5; Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 660, Division 12; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 11, 12,and 13; SECTION II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that this request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendments meets the necessary approval criteria according to the findings found in Section IV of this report. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission RECOMMEND APPROVAL of CPA 2012-00001 and DCA 2012-00002. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 1 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 SECTION III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project History In 1996, the Metro 2040 Plan included Downtown Tigard, the historic center of Tigard, as a Town Center, one of 37 areas in the Portland Region identified as a focus for redevelopment, multi-modal transportation and concentrations of households and employment. The current local Downtown Tigard planning effort dates back to 2002. A group of citizens and business owners were inspired to work on ideas for Downtown to capitalize on the planned Commuter Rail station in Downtown. A more extensive planning process was made possible with a state Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant. Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) A Task Force of 24 citizens was formed to guide the plan's development. The planning process incorporated high levels of citizen involvement, including community dialogues, workshops, open house, and a public survey. The result of the planning process was the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP). The TDIP set forth a vision to create "a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes and uses natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work, play and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." Urban Renewal Plan An Urban Renewal Plan was developed to implement the TDIP. The tools provided by urban renewal, including Tax Increment Financing, are intended to attract private investment and facilitate the area's redevelopment. Tigard voters approved the use of Tax Increment Financing for the Urban Renewal District in the May 2006 election. Downtown Comprehensive Plan Chapter Chapter 15 of the Comprehensive Plan identifies Downtown Tigard as a "Special Planning Area" needing additional planning attention due to its unique circumstances and value to the community. It was adopted specifically to provide the goals,policies, and action measures to implement the vision of the TDIP and its goal of creating a vibrant and active urban village. The City has taken a number of steps toward that goal including the adoption of the Tigard Downtown District Development and Design Standards (Chapter 18.610). Key Comprehensive Plan findings related to transportation and connectivity include: • Block sizes are large for a downtown. • The Area is served by two major transportation corridors (Hwy 99W and Hall Blvd.) with heavy traffic levels. Many of the other Downtown streets lack complete sidewalks. In general, there are poor linkages to and within the Downtown. Addressing the connectivity and transportation issues is an important part of achieving that goal. More specifically, Goal 15.4 for Downtown is to "Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles, and transit." Through a series of planning projects, the City has been working to implement the goals,policies and recommended action measures identified in the Chapter 15. The Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, the Downtown Streetscape Design Plan and Tigard Downtown Future Vision all further these goals and policies, recognizing the need to improve connectivity and circulation within Downtown Tigard. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 2 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan The Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan (Connectivity Plan) seeks to actualize the concepts included in these plans, and is meant to complement the recently adopted Downtown Tigard Code Amendments. It has been informed further by the recently designed improvements to both Main and Burnham Streets. The Connectivity Plan was developed by a consultant team,led by SERA Architects,who collaborated with City staff and a technical advisory team of public agency representatives. The City Center Advisory Commission reviewed and provided input to the Plan. The intent of the Connectivity Plan is to establish a framework for improved multi-modal connectivity and circulation in Downtown Tigard. Objectives include: • 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 Connectivity Plan, which was completed in 2010, identified a number of future street connections through Downtown. However, the location of the alignments was left relatively general. In order to be implemented, the alignments have been further refined and detailed maps have been prepared. Wherever possible, alignments have been adjusted to minimize the impacts to property owners, while still achieving the desired connections. The width of the proposed future streets is based on the new downtown cross section designs. Most of the connectivity and circulation improvements envisioned are expected to be implemented over time as property owners seek to redevelop their land. A smaller number of key projects could be initiated by the city if they are needed to meet essential connectivity or other objectives. Amendments to the Tigard Development Code and City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan are needed to implement these improvements in the future. City of Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan The City of Tigard High Capacity Transit Land Use Plan was completed in May 2012 and approved by the City Council in August 2012. The plan identifies changes that would make possible station areas more supportive of high capacity transit. The concept plan for Downtown Tigard notes: "Given the heavy demand for traffic flow on OR Highway 99W/Pacific Highway and SW Hall Boulevard, the major transportation improvements for Downtown are focused on improving opportunities for local circulation. This includes smaller block sizes serving automobiles, pedestrians and bicycles..." The concept plan identified desired future street connections, which are similar to those identified in the Connectivity Plan, and recommends development of a circulation plan as a first implementation step. Process and Outreach The city has been working with downtown property and business owners to ensure that proposed implementation measures are fair and equitable for property owners in the planning area and the community overall. Over the last six months, city staff and consultants have conducted the following activities to develop strategies to implement the connectivity improvements: Connectivity Plan • Open House • City Center Advisory Commission review over several meetings • City Council, Planning Commission, and Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee workshops Implementation Project • Identified preliminary implementation strategies and refined proposed connectivity projects. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 3 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 • Met with study area property and business owners in March 2012 to review draft plans and implementation strategies for connectivity improvements and refined the proposed plans in response to meeting participants' comments and concerns. • Prepared a preliminary set of proposed amendments to the city's development code and Transportation System Plan (TSP) that will help the city implement the improvements in partnership with property owners and developers in the future. Proposed amendments to the TSP and development code included updated standards related to variances, downtown design and development standards, and street and utility standards. • Conducted a work session with the Tigard Planning Commission on June 4 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts. • Held a community open house on July 17, 2012 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts. • Conducted a work session with the Tigard City Council on September 18, 2012 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts. In addition, the city has continued to provide information to downtown property owners and other interested parties via the city's Web site, e-mail announcements to interested parties, and articles in local newsletters. Summary of the Draft Plan and Code Amendments This project includes amendments to both the Tigard Development Code (TDC) and City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP). The amendments address both future connectivity improvements and new downtown street cross sections. The intent of these proposed amendments is to provide the city with some tools for implementing the vision for downtown Tigard. The proposed code amendments also provide some flexibility for the city and property owners in terms of when and where the cross sections and connectivity improvements apply. Connectivity Improvements — these are future streets or bicycle/pedestrian facilities designed to provide more access through blocks. • 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. • Proposed code requirements for New Development and Major Redevelopment: o At the time of development, applicants are required to dedicate right-of-way and construct the portion of the street that is on their property. o In some circumstances, applicants can dedicate a public easement instead of right-of-way. • Proposed code requirements for Smaller Projects (redevelopment projects valued at less than 60% of total current value): o Applicants are only required to keep the future alignment clear of buildings. o Surface parking, landscaping, temporary structures, driveways and similar types of development are allowed within the areas where new connections are planned. o Applicants are asked to sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District (LID) to help pay for the identified street or alley improvement. • In all cases, the city will work to ensure that the required improvements are "roughly proportional" to the impacts of the development. • Alternative alignments or designs are allowed in some cases: o Because these future streets aren't fully designed as yet, an adjustment process provides some flexibility for property owners and the city. o For example, 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. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 4 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 • Detailed maps showing the future streets are being added to the TSP so that it is clear where future streets are expected to go and how much right-of-way is needed. New Downtown Street Cross Sections — these are drawings showing the required width of right-of-way, travel lanes,parking, sidewalks, landscaping, etc.for each street type or classification. • 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 Conceptual Connectivity Plan project, special street cross sections 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 is being added to the TSP and the new cross sections are being added to Chapter 18.810. • These cross sections apply to existing streets as well as future street connections and will be used 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 proposed amendments will 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 TSP included as Exhibit A). • Amendments to 18.370 to address adjustments to the connectivity requirements (amendments to TDC Chapter 18.370 included as Exhibit B). • Amendments to 18.610 to add purpose, applicability and connectivity standards amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 included as Exhibit C). • Amendments to 18.810 to add new downtown cross-sections amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 included as Exhibit D). SECTION IV. APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (TITLE 18) Chapter 18.380. ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS "18.380.020 Legislative Amendments to this Title and Map A. Legislative amendments. Legislative zoning map and text amendments shall be undertaken by means of a Type W procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.060G." The CPA and DCA would establish rules and regulations to be applied generally to all similarly affected properties throughout the City of Tigard. Therefore, the application is being processed as a Type IV procedure,which is a legislative amendment, as governed by Section 18.390.060.G. Chapter 18.390. DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES "18.390.B.4. Types defined. There are four types of decision-making procedures, as follows: ... 4. Type IV Procedure. Type IV procedures apply to legislative matters. Legislative matters involve the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy. Type IV matters are considered initially by the Planning Commission with final decisions made by the City Council." The CPA and DCA would result in the large-scale implementation of the city's connectivity goals and policies for downtown as detailed in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the application will be reviewed under the Type IV procedure as detailed in the Section 18.390.060.G. In accordance with this section, the DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 5 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 CPA and DCA will be initially considered by the Planning Commission with the final decision made by the City Council. "18.390.060.G. Decision-making considerations. The recommendation by the Commission and the decision by the Council shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. The Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted under Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197; 2. Any federal or state statutes or regulations found applicable; 3. Any applicable METRO regulations; 4. Any applicable comprehensive plan policies; and 5. Any applicable provisions of the City's implementing ordinances." The applicable decision-making considerations include the following: Applicable Statewide Planning Goals - Goals 1, 2, 9, 11, 12, and 13. Applicable federal and state of Oregon statutes — Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 660, Division 12. Applicable Metro regulations — Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 6 and Regional Transportation Functional Plan Tides 1, 2, and 5. Applicable Comprehensive Plan policies - Goals 1, Citizen Involvement; 2,Land Use Planning; 9, Economic Development; 11, Public Facilities and Services; 12, Transportation; 13, Energy Conservation; and 15,Downtown. Applicable city ordinances—TMC Chapters 18.380 and 18.390. CONCLUSION: The review criteria listed above are applicable to the CPA and DCA. The CPA and DCA are reviewed through the Type IV legislative procedure. The Planning Commission and Council will base their decisions on applicable federal, state, Metro, and local policies and regulations, which are enumerated and addressed in this staff report. Therefore, the applicable Tigard Development Code provisions are met. APPLICABLE CITY OF TIGARD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT "GOAL: 1.1 Provide citizens, affected agencies, and other jurisdictions the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process." The Connectivity Plan was developed by urban designers from SERA Architects, with technical assistance by Kittelson & Associates (traffic and transportation analysis) and Johnson Reid (market and real estate analysis), under contract with the City of Tigard. Guidance was provided by the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) and a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of staff from the City of Tigard, TriMet, Metro, and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Public input was gathered on draft alternatives of the plan at a public open house in July 2009. Following completion of the Connectivity Plan in 2010, the City began evaluating implementation alternatives. This effort included meetings with study area property and business owners in March 2012 to review draft plans and implementation strategies for connectivity improvements, a work session with the Tigard Planning Commission on June 4, 2012 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts, and a community open house on July 17, 2012 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts. Public hearing notices, consistent with Measure 56 requirements, were sent to 127 Downtown Tigard property owners on September 13, 2012. A request for comments was also provided to property owners, interested parties and affected agencies on September 10, 2012. A public hearing notice DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 6 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 was published in the Tigard Times on September 27, 2012. A public hearing notice was provided to interested parties and affected agencies on October 4, 2012. The Planning Commission will be considering the CPA and DCA through the public hearing process on October 15, 2012 and the City Council will further consider the amendments prior to adoption. The council hearing is tentatively scheduled for December 11,2012. The Downtown Connectivity Plan Code Amendments process demonstrates that citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions have been provided the opportunity to participate in all phases of the planning process consistent with this policy. "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." "POLICIES: 5. The City shall seek citizen participation and input through collaboration with community organizations, interest groups, and individuals in addition to City sponsored boards and committees." In addition to public meetings with the City Center Advisory Commission, Planning Commission, Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee, and City Council, where public feedback was welcomed, the city conducted two open houses and held five small group meetings with downtown property owners. Information about the project was posted on the city's website, which was regularly updated. Project information was also posted at community events. "6. The City shall provide opportunities for citizens to communicate to Council, boards and commissions, and staff regarding issues that concern them." The City Center Advisory Commission provided input and reviewed the Downtown Connectivity Plan over thirteen meetings. Citizen input was also requested at two Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee meetings and two Planning Commission workshops. In addition, two public open houses and five small group meetings with property owners were held. LAND USE PLANNING "GOAL: 2.1 Maintain an up-to-date Comprehensive Plan, implementing regulations and action plans as the legislative foundation of Tigard's land use planning program." "POLICIES: 1. The City's land use program shall establish a clear policy direction, comply with state and regional requirements, and serve its citizens' own interests." In 2008 the city completed its periodic review and update of its Comprehensive Plan,which has been acknowledged by Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development DLCD as consistent with Statewide Planning Goals. Chapter 15 of the Comprehensive Plan,which was initially adopted in April 24, 2007,identifies Downtown Tigard as a "Special Planning Area" needing additional planning attention due to its unique circumstances and value to the community. Through a series of planning projects, the City has been working to implement the goals,policies and recommended action measures identified in Chapter 15. The Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, and Tigard Downtown Future Vision all further these goals and policies,recognizing the need to improve connectivity and circulation within Downtown Tigard. The CPA and DCA have been guided by these planning DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 7 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 processes,which have established clear policy direction in compliance with state and regional requirements and serve citizen's interests, consistent with this policy. "2. The City's land use regulations, related plans, and implementing actions shall be consistent with and implement its Comprehensive Plan." As noted above, the Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, and Tigard Downtown Future Vision all further goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan in recognizing the need to improve connectivity and circulation within Downtown Tigard. The CPA and DCA implement the recommendations of these plans. Therefore, they are consistent with related plans and implement the Comprehensive Plan, as required by this policy. "3. The City shall coordinate the adoption, amendment, and implementation of its land use program with other potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies." Request for comments on the proposed CPA and DCA were sent to Metro — Land Use and Planning, Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Clean Water Services, ODOT Rail Division, Portland & Western Railroad, Southern Pacific Railroad and TriMet Transit Development. Representatives of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Metro, and TriMet were also members of the Technical Advisory Committee. DLCD was provided the opportunity to comment and coordinate the application for the Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendment process per ORS 197.610. Therefore, the city has coordinated the adoption, amendment and implementation of the CPA and DCA with potentially affected jurisdictions and agencies consistent with this policy. "4. The City's land use program shall promote the efficient use of land through the creation of incentives and redevelopment programs." The amendments rely largely on redevelopment to implement the desired connectivity improvements. The City's downtown is within an urban renewal area, which provides incentives for redevelopment; the amendments ensure that as redevelopment takes place, the needed connections are provided for. "5. The City shall promote intense urban level development in Metro-designated Centers and Corridors, and employment and industrial areas." Downtown Tigard is a Metro-designated "Town Center". The Connectivity Plan describes a vision for a complete system of streets and pathways that would significantly improve multi-modal access to, from, and within Downtown and organize development within a block structure better suited to intensive urban development. The proposed street and pathway network would create a fine-grained block structure that is characteristic of other successful downtowns throughout the region and the nation. The new grid will be pedestrian-friendly, universally accessible, and supportive of both the existing downtown-appropriate businesses and the type and scale of development the community desires to see here in the future. In addition, the street character classifications have been tailored to meet the future context of individual street segments. "7. The City's regulatory land use maps and development code shall implement the Comprehensive Plan by providing for needed urban land uses including: ... E) Overlay districts where natural resource protections or special planning and regulatory tools are warranted." The DCA includes amendments to Chapter 18.610: Tigard Downtown District Development and Design Standards, an existing overlay district applicable to the downtown area. The amendments to this overlay DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 8 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 district recognize the special nature of the downtown area and the need to provide for smaller block sizes and an enhanced pedestrian environment in this area. In addition, the CPA includes special street standards applicable only to the downtown area in recognition of the particular needs of this area. "8. The City shall require that appropriate public facilities are made available, or committed, prior to development approval and are constructed prior to, or concurrently with, development occupancy." The amendments to the DCA require that affected property owners dedicate right-of-way (or a public easement) and construct the portion of the street that is on their property when undertaking New Development or Major Redevelopment (e.g., redevelopment valued at more than 60% of total current value). For Smaller Projects (redevelopment projects valued at less than 60% of total current value), applicants are not required to construct the streets, but are required to design their site to allow for the future construction of the street by keeping the future alignment free of buildings and to sign a non- remonstrance to future Local Improvement District (LID) to help pay for the identified street or alley improvement. These amendments help ensure that the appropriate public facilities are provided, while ensuring that the required improvements are "roughly proportional" to the impacts of the development. "9. The City may, upon determining it is in the public interest, enter into development agreements to phase the provision of required public facilities and services and/or payment of impact fees and/or other arrangements that assure the integrity of the infrastructure system and public safety." The City will continue to have the option of entering into development agreements to allow the phasing of required improvements specified in the CPA and DCA. "10. The City shall institute fees and charges to ensure development pays for development related services and assumes the appropriate costs for impacts on the transportation and other public facility systems." The DCA requires that applicants for Smaller Projects sign a non-remonstrance agreement for formation of a future LID to pay for the identified street or alley improvement,which will facilitate the City's existing ability to form LIDs to ensure that development pays for development related services and appropriate costs for impacts on the transportation system. "12. The City shall provide a wide range of tools, such as planned development, design standards, and conservation easements that encourage results such as: ... B. Land use compatibility; E. Regulatory flexibility necessary for projects to adapt to site conditions." The proposal is compatible with the recently adopted zoning for Downtown. As noted in the Connectivity Plan, a complete system of streets and pathways would significantly improve multi-modal access to, from, and within Downtown and organize development within a block structure better suited to the desired level of urban development. In addition, the street character classifications have been tailored to meet the future context of individual street segments. Regulatory flexibility necessary for connectivity projects to adapt to site conditions is provided for in Section 18.370.020.C.12 (Adjustments to Downtown Connectivity Standards), included in Exhibit B. This section allows applicants to seek an adjustment to the Downtown Connectivity Standards (e.g., to modify a proposed alignment) if application of the Downtown Connectivity Standards would preclude all reasonable economic use of the site. "15. In addition to other Comprehensive Plan goals and policies deemed applicable, DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 9 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 amendments to Tigard's Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map shall be subject to the following specific criteria: A. Transportation and other public facilities and services shall be available, or committed to be made available, and of sufficient capacity to serve the land uses allowed by the proposed map designation;" The CPA and DCA do not amend allowed land uses, but are intended to help ensure that adequate transportation facilities are provided to serve the land uses currently allowed in the downtown area. "18. The Council may at any time, upon finding it is in the overall public interest, initiate legislative amendments to change the Comprehensive Plan text, Plan/Zoning Map(s) and/or the Community Development Code." In January 2010 City Council directed staff to implement the Downtown chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and the Connectivity Plan by undertaking an update of Tigard's downtown connectivity related code provisions. The CPA and DCA reflect City Council direction for implementation of the Connectivity Plan and Comprehensive Plan, which they have found to be in the overall public interest consistent with this policy. "20. The City shall periodically review and, if necessary, update its Comprehensive Plan and regulatory maps and implementing measures to ensure they are current and responsive to community needs, provide reliable information, and conform to applicable state law, administrative rules, and regional requirements." The CPA and DCA amendments were developed in response to community needs identified through the Connectivity Plan and downtown planning efforts. The City Center Advisory Commission reviewed and provided input to the Connectivity Plan and many other mechanisms for public input were provided throughout the downtown planning process (as described in Section III) to ensure community needs were well represented. The CPA and DCA are also intended to provide reliable information to property owners, developers, and the general public related to development and redevelopment within the downtown. The CPA and DCA conform to applicable state, administrative rules, and regional requirements as identified in the findings for this staff report. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. "21. The City shall require all development to conform to site design/development regulations." The DCA and CPA establish new development regulations for future connectivity improvements in Downtown Tigard. These regulations apply to development as follows: • New Development and Major Redevelopment: o At the time of development, applicants are required to dedicate right-of-way and construct the portion of the street that is on their property. • Smaller Projects (redevelopment projects valued at less than 60% of total current value): o Applicants are only be required to keep the future alignment clear of buildings. o Surface parking, landscaping, temporary structures, driveways and similar types of development are allowed within the areas where new connections are planned. o Applicants are asked to sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District (LID) to help pay for the identified street or alley improvement. • In all cases, the city will work to ensure that the required improvements are "roughly proportional" to the impacts of the development. • Alternative alignments or designs are allowed in some cases: o Because these future streets aren't fully designed as yet, an adjustment process provides some flexibility for property owners and the city. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 10 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 o For example, 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. • Detailed maps showing the future streets are being added to the TSP so that it is clear where future streets are expected to go and how much right-of-way is needed. The proposed new street cross-sections will replace the existing street cross-sections within Downtown. 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 Conceptual Connectivity Plan project, special street cross sections 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 is being added to the TSP and the new cross sections are being added to Chapter 18.810. • These cross sections apply to existing streets as well as future street connections and will be used 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. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. "23. The City shall require new development, including public infrastructure, to minimize conflicts by addressing the need for compatibility between it and adjacent existing and future land uses." The future alignments and designated cross-sections of the planned streets have been selected to minimize conflicts with existing and planned future land uses in Downtown Tigard and to provide for compatibility of the street network with the walkable, urban neighborhood envisioned in the various plans for the downtown. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. "24. The City shall establish design standards to promote quality urban development and to enhance the community's value,livability, and attractiveness." The CPA and DCA in Chapter 18.810 establish design standards for new streets and street improvements in Downtown Tigard. These standards are intended to enhance the downtown's value, livability, and attractiveness, consistent with this policy. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT "GOAL: 9.1 Develop and maintain a strong, diversified, and sustainable local economy." "POLICIES: 3. The City's land use and other regulatory practices shall be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, provided that required infrastructure is made available." The DCA in Chapter 18.370 includes provisions to allow adjustments to the connectivity requirements. For example, when application of the connectivity standards would preclude all reasonable economic use of the site. Therefore, the CPA and DCA have been designed to be flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities and allow the provision of required infrastructure, consistent with this policy,while concurrently supporting the city's goals and policies for Downtown Tigard. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 11 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 "4. The City shall address the public facility needs of business and economic development through identifying and programming needed public facilities and services within the Public Facility and Community Investment Plans." As part of implementation of the Connectivity Plan, the City will add certain key roadway connections to the CIP in order to address the public facility needs of Downtown businesses and community economic development, consistent with this policy. "5. The City shall promote well-designed and efficient development and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized industrial and commercial lands." The CPA and DCA are intended to produce smaller block sizes and enhanced connectivity in Downtown Tigard in order to support efficient development and redevelopment of commercial lands in the Downtown. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. "10. The City shall strongly support, as essential to the region's economic future, the development of efficient regional multi-modal transportation systems throughout the Portland Metropolitan area." The DCA and CPA are intended to enhance connectivity for all modes of transportation within and through Downtown Tigard. The planned connections will help provide an efficient multi-modal transportation system for the community, consistent with this policy. "GOAL: 9.3 Make Tigard a prosperous and desirable place to live and do business." "POLICIES: 2. The City shall adopt land use regulations and standards to ensure a well-designed and attractive urban environment that supports/protects public and private sector investments." The CPA and DCA in Chapter 18.810 establish design standards for new streets and street improvements in Downtown Tigard. These standards are intended to ensure a well-designed and attractive urban environment that supports/protects public and private sector investments, consistent with this policy. "3. The City shall commit to improving and maintaining the quality of community life (public safety, education, transportation, community design, housing, parks and recreation, etc.) to promote a vibrant and sustainable economy." During planning for Downtown Tigard and throughout the Connectivity Plan process, the community identified connectivity and walkability enhancements in the Downtown as a key component to improving and maintaining quality of community life and promoting a vibrant and sustainable economy in the Downtown. The CPA and DCA implement these goals to provide enhanced walkability and multi-modal connectivity as a way to improve and maintain the quality of community life and to promote a vibrant and sustainable economy, consistent with this policy. PUBLIC FACILITIES "GOAL: DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 12 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 11.1 Develop and maintain a stormwater system that protects development, water resources, and wildlife habitat." "POLICIES: 7. The City shall encourage low impact development practices and other measures that reduce the amount of, and/or treat, stormwater runoff at the source." The CPA and DCA include new street cross-section standards for Downtown Tigard. These new streets will meet Public Works and Clean Water Services standards for stormwater treatment. Therefore, the CPA and DCA encourage low impact development practices and other measures that reduce the amount of and/or treat stormwater at the source, consistent with this policy. TRANSPORTATION "GOAL: 12.1: Develop mutually supportive land use and transportation plans to enhance the livability of the community." "POLICIES: 1. The City shall plan for a transportation system that meets current community needs and anticipated growth and development." The new transportation connections planned for Downtown Tigard were identified during the Connectivity Plan process based on analysis of current community needs as well as the ability of the transportation system to serve anticipated growth and development. An analysis of projected future traffic volumes on existing and planned roadways was conducted as part of development of the Connectivity Plan (Exhibit E). This analysis showed that the planned connections will enable the transportation system Downtown to continue to meet the community's needs, consistent with this policy. "2. The City shall prioritize transportation projects according to community benefit, such as safety,performance, and accessibility, as well as the associated costs and impacts." The planned transportation connections identified in the Connectivity Plan were prioritized as part of the implementation effort that resulted in the CPA and DCA. The desired connections were prioritized based on the safety, performance, and/or accessibility benefits to the community relative to their impacts on Downtown property owners. The high priority projects have been identified for inclusion in the City's CIP; other projects will be built as development and redevelopment allow. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. "3. The City shall maintain and enhance transportation functionality by emphasizing multi- modal travel options for all types of land uses." The Connectivity Plan identified the need to reduce block sizes and provide enhanced connectivity throughout Downtown Tigard as a way to enhance transportation functionality for all modes of travel. The CPA and DCA implement this change by requiring new connections be constructed or, at a minimum, not obstructed upon redevelopment. The CPA and DCA also designate an area for provision of multi-use pathways to provide better non-motorized connectivity. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. "4. The City shall promote land uses and transportation investments that promote balanced transportation options." DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 13 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 The CPA and DCA will promote transportation investments that benefit both motorized and non- motorized modes, promoting balanced transportation options consistent with this policy. While the CPA and DCA do not affect the allowed land uses within Downtown Tigard, the smaller block sizes that are encouraged by the CPA and DCA will promote pedestrian-friendly land uses that are also highly accessible by other modes, consistent with this policy. "6. The City shall support land use patterns that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and preserve the function of the transportation system." By promoting development of a more walkable downtown through smaller block sizes and increased bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, the CPA and DCA support land use patterns that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and preserve the function of the transportation system, consistent with this policy. "7. The City shall strive to protect the natural environment from impacts derived from transportation facilities." The DCA in Chapter 18.370 includes provisions to allow adjustments to the connectivity requirements when their application would result in an adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands, bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees, in order to protect the natural environment from impacts of new roadways, consistent with this policy. "8. The City shall mitigate impacts to the natural environment associated with proposed transportation construction or reconstruction projects." The DCA in Chapter 18.370 includes provisions precluding adjustments that would result in an adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands, bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. Where impacts are unavoidable, the City's existing mitigation requirements would apply, consistent with this policy. "9. The City shall coordinate with private and public developers to provide access via a safe, efficient, and balanced transportation system." The CPA and DCA would provide a mechanism for the City to work with developers to provide additional access roads and multi-use paths within the Downtown in order to promote a safer, more efficient, and better balanced transportation system, consistent with this policy. "10. The City shall require all development to meet adopted transportation standards or provide appropriate mitigations." The CPA and DCA would establish new transportation standards within the Downtown that will need to be met at the time of development. Establishing transportation standards is consistent with this policy. "GOAL : 12.2 Develop and maintain a transportation system for the efficient movement of people and goods." "POLICIES: "2. The City shall manage the transportation system to support desired economic development activities." The CPA and DCA provide a mechanism for the City to manage the transportation system Downtown to encourage development of new roadway and multi-modal connections, enhanced streetscapes, improved DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 14 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 walkability, and more efficient traffic flow, which support the economic development of the Downtown, consistent with this policy. "3. The City shall design streets to encourage a reduction in trip length by improving arterial, collector, and local street connections." The Connectivity Plan identified the need to improve local and collector street connections within the downtown. The CPA and DCA implement this plan by requiring construction of new connections upon New Development or Major Redevelopment, and protect the ability to build the connections in the future for Smaller Projects. The planned street connections contained in the CPA and DCA will encourage a reduction in trip length for drivers going to or through the Downtown, consistent with this policy. "4. The City shall design arterial routes, highway access, and adjacent land uses in ways that facilitate the efficient movement of people, goods and services." The CPA and DCA include a proposed cross-section for Upper Hall Boulevard, an arterial route, which provides two travel lanes for vehicles, a center turn lane, bicycle lanes, sidewalks buffered from traffic by a landscape strip, and on-street parking. This cross-section facilitates the efficient movement of people, goods, and services, while maintaining an attractive and pedestrian-friendly streetscape appropriate to the Downtown, consistent with this policy. "6. The City shall develop and maintain an efficient arterial grid system that provides access within the City, and serves through traffic in the City." The CPA and DCA do not include any modifications to the existing arterial grid system other than a new cross-section for Upper Hall Boulevard. However, the proposed new connections in the local and collector street grids contained in the CPA and DCA will improve the efficiency of the arterial grid system by providing alternate routes for local traffic and freeing up capacity on the arterial grid system for access to the City and through traffic. "8. The City recognizes freight movement as being a priority of the transportation system." The CPA and DCA do not include any modifications to the existing truck routes other than a new cross- section for Upper Hall Boulevard. However, the proposed new connections in the local and collector street grids contained in the CPA and DCA will improve the efficiency of the arterial grid system by providing alternate routes for local traffic and freeing up capacity on the arterial grid system for freight access to the City and through traffic. "9. The City shall require the provision of appropriate parking in balance with other transportation modes." The CPA and DCA do not affect required private off-street parking; however, by providing for the construction of new streets, all of which provide on-street parking, and by including on-street parking in many of the new street cross-sections for the Downtown, the CPA and DCA support the provision of public on-street parking appropriate to a downtown setting, while still maintaining a pedestrian-friendly environment. "10. The City shall strive to increase non-single occupant vehicle mode shares through vehicle trip reduction strategies, such as those outlined in the Regional Transportation Plan." The Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Transportation Framework Plan are addressed under the METRO policies section of this report. "11. The City shall design the transportation system to provide connectivity between Metro DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 15 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 designated centers, corridors, employment and industrial areas." Downtown Tigard is a Metro-designated "Town Center". The Connectivity Plan describes a vision for a complete system of streets and pathways that would significantly improve multi-modal access to, from, and within Downtown. The CPA and DCA implement this vision, consistent with this policy. "GOAL: 12.3 Provide an accessible, multi-modal transportation system that meets the mobility needs of the community." "POLICIES: 3. The City shall design and construct transportation facilities to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act." The CPA and DCA include new cross-sections for streets in the Downtown. These cross-sections, with the exception of the alley, provide for sidewalks that exceed the minimum standards set by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). ADA compliant ramps are also planned for all intersections. "4. The City shall support and prioritize bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements for transportation disadvantaged populations who may be dependent on travel modes other than private automobile." The CPA and DCA implement the City's vision for a complete system of streets and pathways that would significantly improve multi-modal access to, from, and within Downtown. With the Tigard Transit Center located Downtown, central to the proposed new street and pathway connections, improvements in walkability will improve the convenience of accessing the Downtown by transit. The reduced block sizes will make walking more appealing, and new multi-use paths will provide safe connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. Therefore, the CPA and DCA support pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements for transportation disadvantaged populations, consistent with this policy. 5. The City shall develop and maintain neighborhood and local connections to provide efficient circulation in and out of the neighborhoods. The CPA and DCA are intended to provide a more robust network of neighborhood and local street connections within the Downtown neighborhood to provide more efficient circulation within and around the Downtown, consistent with this policy. 6. The City shall require development adjacent to transit routes to provide direct pedestrian accessibility. The CPA and DCA would establish new transportation standards within the Downtown that will need to be met at the time of development. The new standards provide for greater pedestrian accessibility, consistent with this policy. 7. The City shall develop and implement public street standards that recognize the multi- purpose nature of the street right-of-way. The CPA and DCA include updated street cross-section designs for Downtown streets. These cross- sections (with the exception of the alley) provide many uses for the street right-of-way, with space for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles, including on-street parking to serve Downtown businesses. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. 8. The City shall design all projects on Tigard city streets to encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 16 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 The CPA and DCA implement plans for a Downtown with pedestrian-friendly block sizes, additional off- street pathway connections, and street cross-sections that are safe and attractive for pedestrians and bicyclists, all of which will encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, consistent with this policy. 9. The City shall require sidewalks to be constructed in conjunction with private development and consistent with adopted plans. The CPA and DCA require that the new street and pathway connections, including sidewalks where applicable, be constructed in conjunction with private development for New Development and Major Redevelopment (e.g., redevelopment valued at more than 60% of total current value). For Smaller Projects (redevelopment projects valued at less than 60% of total current value), applicants are not required to construct the streets,but are required to design their site to allow for the future construction of the street by keeping the future alignment free of buildings. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. 10. The City shall require and/or facilitate the construction of off-street trails to develop pedestrian and bicycle connections that cannot be provided by a street. The DCA in Section 18.610.025.D includes requirements for New Development and Major Redevelopment (e.g., redevelopment valued at more than 60% of total current value) within a designated area to provide off-street trails at designated intervals due to the difficulty of constructing new streets through the area. Therefore, the DCA is consistent with this policy. 11. The City shall require appropriate access to bicycle and pedestrian facilities for all schools, parks,public facilities, and commercial areas. The CPA and DCA are intended to provide a more robust network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, within the Downtown, providing improved circulation and access to schools, public facilities and commercial areas, consistent with this policy. "GOAL: 12.4 Maintain and improve transportation system safety." "POLICIES: 1. The City shall consider the intended uses of a street during the design to promote safety, efficiency, and multi-modal needs." The CPA and DCA include new street cross-sections for the Downtown that were developed in consideration of the intended uses of the existing and proposed new streets. The cross-sections and proposed new alignments are designed to promote safety and efficiency for all modes, consistent with this policy. "2. The City shall coordinate with appropriate agencies to provide safe, secure, connected, and desirable pedestrian, bicycle, and public transit facilities." Request for comments on the proposed CPA and DCA were sent to Metro — Land Use and Planning, Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Clean Water Services, ODOT Rail Division, Portland & Western Railroad, Southern Pacific Railroad and TriMet Transit Development. Representatives of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Metro, and TriMet were also members of the Technical Advisory Committee. DLCD was provided the opportunity to comment and coordinate the DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 17 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 application for the Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendment process per ORS 197.610. Therefore, the city has coordinated with appropriate agencies to implement the planned transportation facilities, consistent with this policy. 9. The City shall require new transportation facilities to meet adopted lighting standards. The CPA and DCA include new street cross-sections for the Downtown were developed in consideration of the intended uses of the existing and proposed new streets. The cross-sections provide ample space to locate street lights in accordance with the adopted lighting standards, consistent with this policy. "GOAL: 12.5 Coordinate planning, development, operation, and maintenance of the transportation system with appropriate agencies." "POLICIES: 1. The City shall coordinate and cooperate with adjacent agencies and service providers— including Metro, TriMet, ODOT, Washington County, and neighboring cities—when appropriate, to develop transportation projects which benefit the region as a whole, in addition to the City of Tigard." Request for comments on the proposed CPA and DCA were sent to Metro — Land Use and Planning, Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, Clean Water Services, ODOT Rail Division, Portland & Western Railroad, Southern Pacific Railroad and TriMet Transit Development. Representatives of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Metro, and TriMet were also members of the Technical Advisory Committee. Therefore, the city has coordinated with appropriate agencies and service providers to implement the planned transportation facilities, which will provide benefits for through traffic as well as local travel, consistent with this policy. "GOAL: 12.6 Fund an equitable, balanced, and sustainable transportation system that promotes the well-being of the community." "POLICIES: 3. The City shall seek opportunities for transportation investments that support transportation goals of efficiency, multi-modal access, and safety." The City has identified key connections from the Connectivity Plan for inclusion in the City's CIP. These key connections represent opportunities for transportation investments that support efficiency, multi- modal access, and safety, consistent with this policy. ENERGY "GOAL: 13.1: Reduce energy consumption." "POLICIES: 1. The City shall promote the reduction of energy consumption associated with vehicle miles traveled through: A. land use patterns that reduce dependency on the automobile; DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 18 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 B. public transit that is reliable, connected, and efficient; and C. bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that is safe and well connected." By promoting development of a more walkable downtown through smaller block sizes and increased bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, the CPA and DCA support land use patterns that reduce dependency on the automobile and provide bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure that is safe and well connected. The connectivity improvements in the vicinity of the Tigard Transit Center also support public transit that is reliable, connected and efficient. Therefore,the CPA and DCA are consistent with this policy. SPECIAL PLANNING AREAS: DOWNTOWN "GOAL: 15.1 The City will promote the creation of a vibrant and active urban village at the heart of the community that is pedestrian oriented, accessible by many modes of transportation, recognizes natural resources as an asset, and features a combination of uses that enable people to live,work,play, and shop in an environment that is uniquely Tigard." The CP and DCA support a more walkable downtown through smaller block sizes and increased bicycle and pedestrian connectivity. The connectivity improvements in the vicinity of the Tigard Transit Center also support public transit that is reliable, connected and efficient. By doing so, the CPA and DCA support the goal of creating a vibrant and active urban village that is pedestrian oriented and accessible by many modes of transportation. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with this goal. "GOAL: 15.2 Facilitate the development of an urban village." "Policies: 1. New zoning, design standards, and design guidelines shall be developed and used to ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown as the "heart" of Tigard,while being flexible enough to encourage development." The CPA and DCA establish design standards for new streets and street improvements in Downtown Tigard. These standards are intended to ensure the quality and attractiveness of the Downtown. The DCA in Chapter 18.370 includes provisions to allow adjustments to the connectivity requirements in certain circumstances in order to be flexible enough to encourage development, consistent with this policy. "4. Existing nonconforming uses shall be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion." The CPA and DCA will not create any non-conforming uses; however, they will create non-conforming sites that will be allowed to continue, subject to a threshold of allowed expansion (redevelopment valued at more than 60% of total current value), consistent with this policy. "5. Downtown design, development and provision of service shall emphasize public safety, accessibility, and attractiveness as primary objectives." The new street cross-sections and proposed street and pathway connections implemented by the CPA and DCA emphasize accessibility, safety, and attractiveness, consistent with this policy. "7. New zoning and design guidelines on Main Street will emphasize a "traditional Main Street" character." DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 19 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 The CPA and DCA include a placeholder for the Main Street street design, since this design is being developed through other planning processes and will be adopted separately. "GOAL: 15.3 Develop and Improve the Open Space System and Integrate Natural Features into downtown." "POLICIES: 1. Natural resource functions and values shall be integrated into downtown urban design." The new street cross-sections contained in the CPA and DCA include street trees on all street types except for the alley, and will meet Public Works and Clean Water Services standards for stormwater treatment, integrating the natural resource functions of tree cover and stormwater management into Downtown urban design, consistent with this policy. "GOAL: 15.4 Develop comprehensive street and circulation improvements for pedestrians, automobiles, bicycles, and transit." "POLICIES: 1. The downtown shall be served by a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike, and pedestrian facilities." The CPA and DCA implement the City's vision for a complete system of streets and pathways that would significantly improve multi-modal access to, from, and within Downtown. With the Tigard Transit Center located Downtown, central to the proposed new street and pathway connections, improvements in walkability will improve the convenience of accessing the Downtown by transit. The reduced block sizes will make walking more appealing, and new multi-use paths will provide safe connections for pedestrians and bicyclists. Therefore, the CPA and DCA support development of a complete array of multi-modal transportation services including auto, transit, bike, and pedestrian facilities, consistent with this policy. "4. Recognizing the critical transportation relationships between the downtown and surrounding transportation system, especially bus and Commuter Rail, Highway 99W, Highway 217 and Interstate 5, the City shall address the downtown's transportation needs in its Transportation System Plan and identify relevant capital projects and transportation management efforts." The CPA modifies the City's TSP to include the new proposed street connections and the updated street cross-sections. In addition, the City will identify priority street connections for inclusion on the CIP. 5. Streetscape and public area design shall focus on creating a pedestrian friendly environment without the visual dominance by automobile-oriented uses." The CPA and DCA include new street and pathway connections that will reduce block sizes to improve walkability, and new cross-sections to create a pedestrian-friendly streetscape, consistent with this policy. "6. The City shall require a sufficient, but not excessive, amount of parking to provide for downtown land uses.Joint parking arrangements shall be encouraged." The CPA and DCA do not affect required private off-street parking; however, by providing for the construction of new streets, all of which provide on-street parking, and by including on-street parking in many of the new street cross-sections for the Downtown, the CPA and DCA support the provision of DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 20 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 public on-street parking appropriate to a downtown setting, while still maintaining a pedestrian-friendly environment. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the CPA and DCA are consistent with the applicable goals and policies contained in the City of Tigard Comprehensive Plan. APPLICABLE METRO URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONAL PLAN TITLES Title 6: Central City, Regional Centers,Town Centers and Station Communities 3.07.610 Purpose The Regional Framework Plan identifies Centers, Corridors, Main Streets and Station Communities throughout the region and recognizes them as the principal centers of urban life in the region. Title 6 calls for actions and investments by cities and counties, complemented by regional investments, to enhance this role. A regional investment is an investment in a new high- capacity transit line or designated a regional investment in a grant or funding program administered by Metro or subject to Metro's approval. Downtown Tigard is a designated Town Center. The CPA and DCA would support the Town Center by enhancing multi-modal connectivity, walkability, and access to transit. The planned transportation facilities included in the CPA and DCA would be financed locally or through development, and are not regional investments subject to the requirements of Title 6. APPLICABLE METRO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION FUNCTIONAL PLAN (RTFP) TITLES Title 5: Amendment of Comprehensive Plans 3.08.510 Amendments of City and County Comprehensive and Transportation System Plans A. When a city or county proposes to amend its comprehensive plan or its components, it shall consider the strategies in subsection 3.08.220A as part of the analysis required by OAR 660-012-0060. The prior planning processes that led to the development of the CPA and DCA included consideration of a variety of alternatives to meet the transportation needs identified above. All of the strategies listed in subsection 3.08.220A have been considered through these processes, consistent with this policy. The CPA and DCA primarily implement "5. Connectivity improvements to provide parallel arterials, collectors or local streets that include pedestrian and bicycle facilities... in order to provide alternative routes and encourage walking, biking and access to transit". However, other strategies include safety improvements are recommended at the intersection of Hall and Scoffins/Hunziker to realign an off-set intersection, bicycle and pedestrian system improvements on all new streets as well as for a block where new street connections are not appropriate, and traffic calming street designs including narrow travel lanes, on-street parking, and street trees. C. If a city or county proposes a transportation project that is not included in the RTP and will result in a significant increase in SOV capacity or exceeds the planned function or capacity of a facility designated in the RTP, it shall demonstrate consistency with the following in its project analysis: 1. The strategies set forth in subsection 3.08.220A (1) through (5); 2. Complete street designs adopted pursuant to subsection 3.08.110A and as set forth in Creating Livable Streets: Street Design Guidelines for 2040 (2nd Edition, 2002) or similar resources consistent with regional street design policies; and DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 21 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 3. Green street designs adopted pursuant to subsection 3.08.110A and as set forth in Green Streets: Innovative Solutions for Stormwater and Street Crossings (2002) and Trees for Green Streets: An Illustrated Guide (2002) or similar resources consistent with federal regulations for stream protection. The CPA and DCA include new planned streets in Downtown Tigard, which is a designated regional pedestrian district in the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The new streets would create a modest increase in SOV capacity, but would also support RTP policies related to the Regional Pedestrian Network Vision,including: "2. Build a well---connected network of pedestrian facilities that serves all ages and abilities "3. Create walkable downtowns, centers,main streets and station communities "4. Improve pedestrian access to transit" The connectivity improvements and enhanced street designs will make the pedestrian district more walkable and support pedestrian access to the Tigard Transit Center. In addition, as noted above, consideration of the strategies set forth in subsection 3.08.220A has occurred as part of the planning processes that preceded the CPA and DCA, and the majority of the strategies have been incorporated into the CPA and DCA. The new streets designs are complete streets and will meet Public Works and Clean Water Services standards for stormwater treatment, consistent with this policy. E. This section does not apply to city or county transportation projects that are financed locally and would be undertaken on local facilities. The new planned streets would be local facilities and would be financed locally, either through the City's CIP or through development. The new street designs are all on local facilities, with the exception of Hall Boulevard, which is an ODOT facility. Any improvements on Hall Boulevard will be carefully coordinated with ODOT. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the CPA and DCA are consistent with the applicable Metro regulations. STATE STATUTES OR REGULATIONS Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) Chapter 660,Division 12 (Transportation Planning) 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 22 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. The CPA and DCA establish new functional classifications specific to Downtown Tigard that apply to both existing and planned transportation facilities; therefore, the CPA and DCA would significantly affect existing and planned transportation facilities under subsections (a) and (b) above. (2) If a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, then the local government must ensure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one or a combination of the remedies listed in (a) through (e) below, unless the amendment meets the balancing test in subsection (2)(e) of this section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) of this rule. A local government using subsection (2)(e), section (3), section (10) or section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional motor vehicle traffic congestion may result and that other facility providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for motor vehicles in response to this congestion. (a) Adopting measures that demonstrate allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and performance standards of the transportation facility. (b) Amending the TSP or comprehensive plan to provide transportation facilities, improvements or services adequate to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; such amendments shall include a funding plan or mechanism consistent with section (4) or include an amendment to the transportation finance plan so that the facility, improvement, or service will be provided by the end of the planning period. (c) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity or performance standards of the transportation facility. (d) Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development agreement or similar funding method, including, but not limited to, transportation system management measures or minor transportation improvements. Local governments shall, as part of the amendment, specify when measures or improvements provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided. (e) Providing improvements that would benefit modes other than the significantly affected mode, improvements to facilities other than the significantly affected facility, or improvements at other locations, if the provider of the significantly affected facility provides a written statement that the system-wide benefits are sufficient to balance the significant effect, even though the improvements would not result in consistency for all performance standards. A traffic analysis was conducted by Kittelson and Associates as part of the development of Circulation Plan. The future year for the available traffic analysis is beyond the horizon of the City's adopted TSP (which uses 2035 as the future year); however, the analysis found that the character classifications for the downtown street network are appropriate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes in Downtown Tigard through 2050. The traffic analysis identified one potential capacity issue with the proposed local street network, where a planned local street would intersect Hall Boulevard, becoming an extension of the existing Garden Place. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 23 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 The analysis found that traffic operations at this intersection would exceed the available planning-level capacity by approximately 15%in 2050. However, the planned local street alignments were refined slightly in preparation for adoption; one of the refinements addressed the potentially problematic intersection. The proposed alignment would now be offset from the existing Garden Place intersection with Hall Boulevard. It is assumed that the new local street would have limited (likely right-in/right-out) access onto Hall. This would remove the congestion issue at the intersection. Therefore, the allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and performance standards of the affected transportation facilities. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the CPA and DCA support (or do not conflict) with state or federal regulations. All affected agencies have been notified of the recommended amendments and have been given the opportunity to comment. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS Statewide Planning Goal 1, Citizen Involvement, outlines the citizen involvement requirements for adoption of, and changes to the Comprehensive Plans and implementing documents. As described in the Background Information, the city has provided Tigard citizens, affected agencies and other jurisdictions multiple and varied opportunities to participate in all phases of the planning process to enhance connectivity in Downtown Tigard. Over the last six months, city staff and consultants have conducted the following activities to develop strategies to implement the connectivity improvements: Connectivity Plan • Open House • City Center Advisory Commission review over several meetings • City Council, Planning Commission, and Tigard Transportation Advisory Committee workshops Implementation Project • Identified preliminary implementation strategies and refined proposed connectivity projects. • Met with study area property and business owners in March 2012 to review draft plans and implementation strategies for connectivity improvements and refined the proposed plans in response to meeting participants' comments and concerns. • Prepared a preliminary set of proposed amendments to the city's development code and Transportation System Plan (TSP) that will help the city implement the improvements in partnership with property owners and developers in the future. Proposed amendments to the TSP and development code included updated standards related to variances, downtown design and development standards, and street and utility standards. • Conducted a work session with the Tigard Planning Commission on June 4 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts. • Held a community open house on July 17, 2012 to review a summary of proposed code amendment concepts. In addition, the city has continued to provide information to downtown property owners and other interested parties via the city's Web site, e-mail announcements to interested parties, and articles in local newsletters. The recommended amendments will be further considered through the public hearing process at the Planning Commission and will be considered by City Council prior to adoption. Citizen involvement opportunities utilized to create the CPA and DCA have been consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 1. Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use Planning, establishes a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 24 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 In 2008 the city completed its periodic review and update of its Comprehensive Plan,which has been acknowledged by Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development DLCD as consistent with Statewide Planning Goals. Chapter 15 of the Comprehensive Plan,which was initially adopted in April 24, 2007,identifies Downtown Tigard as a "Special Planning Area" needing additional planning attention due to its unique circumstances and value to the community. Through a series of planning projects, the City has been working to implement the goals,policies and recommended action measures identified in Chapter 15. The Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, and Tigard Downtown Future Vision all further these goals and policies,recognizing the need to improve connectivity and circulation within Downtown Tigard. The CPA and DCA have been guided by these planning processes,which have established clear policy direction in compliance with state and regional requirements and serve citizen's interests. The CPA and DCA are being processed as a Type IV procedure, which requires any applicable Statewide Planning Goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, METRO regulations, Comprehensive Plan policies and city's implementing ordinances, be addressed as part of the decision-making process. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report. Therefore, the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goal 9, Economic Development, requires provision of adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to public health,welfare and prosperity. During planning for Downtown Tigard and throughout the Connectivity Plan process, the community identified connectivity and walkability enhancements in the Downtown as a key component to promoting a vibrant and sustainable economy in the Downtown. The CPA and DCA have been designed implement these objectives while being flexible and adaptive to promote economic development opportunities, consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9. Statewide Planning Goal 11, Public Facilities/Services, requires planning and development of a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. The CPA and DCA provide a framework for the extension of new streets through Downtown Tigard, providing an orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with and supportive of Statewide Planning Goal 11. Statewide Planning Goal 12, Transportation, requires provision of a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. The City's existing TSP complies with Goal 12. The CPA and DCA implement plans for additional access roads and multi-use paths within the Downtown in order to promote a safer, more efficient, and better balanced transportation system, consistent with, and supportive of Statewide Planning Goal 12. Goal 12 is implemented by OAR Chapter 660, Division 12,which is addressed above. Statewide Planning Goal 13, Energy Conservation, requires land and uses developed on the land to be managed and controlled to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles. By promoting development of a more walkable downtown through smaller block sizes and increased bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, the CPA and DCA support land use patterns that reduce energy consumption due to vehicle travel. In addition, the planned street connections contained in the CPA and DCA will encourage a reduction in trip length for drivers going to or through the Downtown, further DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 25 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 reducing energy consumption from automobiles traveling within and through Tigard. Therefore, the CPA and DCA are consistent with, and supportive of Statewide Planning Goal 13. Inapplicable Statewide Planning Goals include Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) and Goal 4 (Forest Lands) because they address rural land outside the Metro Urban Growth Boundary; Goals 5 (Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces), 6 (Air, Water and Land Resources Quality, and 7 (Areas Subject to Natural Hazards) because the amendments to not affect existing resource lists or protections for identified resources; Goal 8 (Recreational Needs), because the amendments do not address recreational resources; Goal 10 (Housing), because the amendments to not affect housing policy; Goal 14 (Urbanization) because the Downtown is entirely within the Urban Growth Boundary; Goal 15 (Willamette River Greenway), because the Willamette River does not flow through Tigard; and Goals 16 (Estuarine Resources), 17 (Coastal Shorelines), 18 (Beaches and Dunes), and 19 (Ocean Resources), because they relate to Oregon's coastal resources. CONCLUSION_ Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the recommended amendments are consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. SECTION V. CITIZEN COMMENTS Five comments were received in response to the Measure 56 notice and request for comments to property owners. One was strongly supportive, two were neutral, and two stated concerns. These comments are attached in Exhibit F for Planning Commission review and will be provided to City Council when received during their portion of the legislative adoption process. All comments are available in the project record. In addition, eight citizens contacted staff by phone or in person regarding the code amendments. The comments consisted of clarifying questions in regard to how the amendments would affect their property. SECTION VI.AGENCY COMMENTS Metro—Land Use and Planning,Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation, Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Clean Water Services, ODOT Rail Division, and Southern Pacific Transportation were given the opportunity to review this proposal and submitted no comments or objections. Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue and TriMet reviewed the proposal and provided comments supporting the amendments,which are attached in Exhibit F and are available in the project record. Oregon Department of Transportation reviewed the proposal and provided comments which are discussed below: 1. The TSP and amendments show that a corridor plan is needed for Hall Blvd to determine the final cross section. While ODOT supports the need for the corridor plan, due to limited resources there is unlikely to be State funding available for the corridor plan. We recommend that if this is a city priority that the city identify a funding source for this planning effort. Staff Response: The city may prioritize this study in the future with the city's next TSP Update. 2. The Tigard HCT Land Use Plan developed a Downtown Concept Plan. The TSP amendments should reflect the recommendations from the HCT plan and explain how the two efforts are related. Particularly how this should include showing the connections between the old downtown and the expanded downtown that is included in the HCT plan i.e. Tigard Triangle. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 26 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Staff Response: The HCT Land Use Plan includes concepts which don't directly result in any policy changes such as amendments to the TSP or Development Code. The HCT Land Use Plan concepts (including transportation projects) are being integrated into the SW Corridor Plan effort; these are being evaluated at several varying levels of detail to make up the Corridor Plan, including Transportation Plan and Transit Alternatives Analysis. Ultimately the final SW Corridor Plan elements will go back to agencies for formal amendments. 3. The TSP amendments focus on downtown street character types and planned street connections. We recommend that the City show connectivity planned for all modes for example including the trail alignments that are planned these should be included on the Connectivity Projects Detail Sheets and it is recommended to have a map showing all the planned connections for all modes on a single map this will help to understand all the connectivity that is planned for. Staff Response: The proposed amendments will implement the street connectivity plan as it relates to development. Trail alignments have been outlined in the Trail System Master Plan. An integrated map showing connectivity for all modes will be produced in the future, but it is not essential to be included in these code amendments. 4. As discussed on the phone earlier this week, we recommend that Figure 5-14 Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet Map 3 include a note explaining that the realignment of Tigard St to connect to Burnham St would be a city responsibility in coordination with a future OR 99W viaduct replacement project that requires ODOT approval. Although I haven't had an opportunity to check with the ODOT Bridge Section, it is unlikely that ODOT would be replacing the viaduct any time in the plan horizon unless there are structural issues that develop. From our conversation it sounded like you will be working on a new detail sheet for this project, please forward that to me for ODOT review and comment. Also, does the city plan to keep the planned trail alignment along Tigard St? Showing the trails on these detail sheets will help understanding the connectivity projects. Staff Response: The Burnham Street to Tigard Street connection will be reclassified on Map 3 as a concept, distinct from the other proposed streets, that is dependent on the speculative construction of a new OR 99W viaduct which is not expected within the plan year horizon. The Tigard Street trail is identified in the Trail System Master Plan. Portland and Western Railroad reviewed the proposal and provided comments recommending that the Ash Avenue crossing of the rail tracks be grade separated. Staff response: The Ash Avenue crossing has appeared as a project in the TSP for several years. The city envisions an at-grade crossing, but recognizes this will only be accomplished with the agreement of ODOT Rail Division and the railroad. PREPARED BY: Sean Farrelly DATE Redevelopment Project Manager REVIEWED BY: Tom McGuire DATE Acting Community Development Director DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 27 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A -DRAFT Amendments to 2035 Transportation System Plan Volume 1 of 3 EXHIBIT B -DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments EXHIBIT C -DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Development and Design Standards EXHIBIT D -DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards EXHIBIT E - Kittelson and Associates traffic analysis conducted as part of the development of the Downtown Conceptual Circulation Plan EXHIBIT F: Citizen comments F.1. Gary and Judy Craghead F.2. Fraternal Order of Eagles F.3 J. Ronald and Cecilia Thompson F.4. Abbas Nikzad F.5. Luella Paddack (e-mail) EXHIBIT G: Agency comments G.1. ODOT (e-mail) G.2. Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue G.3. Portland&Western Railroad G.4. TriMet (e-mail) DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT—Staff Report to the Planning Commission PAGE 28 OF 28 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 EXHIBIT A DRAFT Amendments to 2035 Transportation System Plan Volume 1 of 3 Proposed amendments are shown as follows: • Proposed new text is shown in double-underline. • Existing text proposed to be deleted is shown in strike through. Functional Classifications (page 48) The functional classification of a roadway defines the primary role in terms of providing mobility and access. An individual street's classification directs the design and management of the roadway, including right of way needs, the number of travel lanes and other cross-section elements, and access management standards. Figure 5-2 shows the functional classification for each roadway in Tigard. Within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District, the functional classification is further refined by the street character types shown on Figure 5-2A. The character types are implemented through special street design standards. In addition. Figure 5-2A identifies future roadways which are intended to provide an enhanced network of pedestrian-friendly streets in the Downtown area. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to 2035 Transportation System Plan Volume 1 of 3 PAGE 1 OF 4 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 5-2a a Q Downtown Street Character �4 Types �'• ��F‘cN s � .yF`�Rsr o fr`'''' �o eP M�c�,Cj sp ti4914' G *.s. o 9 • ♦♦ . G.+ Qac q,ii e F4, Py . C> :17<s, @G .titi • e▪ x - + \ r. \ a� N. Z2 \ \ Downtown Street Character Types* 47, Upper Hall Boulevard" as -Main Street Green Street Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) Downtown Mixed Use 2(Neighborhood) -Downtown Mixed Use 3(Upper Burnham) -Downtown Mixed Use 4(Lower Burnham) Urban Residential - Alley: Business 0 250 500 1,000 Feet I i 1 I I I I l *Dashed lines indicate proposed streets Other Streets Hall Boulevard is currently an ODOT facility. ODOT"s design standards may supersede these standards as long 1I1I,€11111111 Railroads as it is an ODOT facility. 1 N DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to 2035 Transportation System Plan Volume 1 of 3 PAGE 2 OF 4 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Street Design Standards(Cross Sections) (page 52) Roadways in Tigard are the primary means of mobility for residents, serving the majority of trips over multiple modes. Pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit, and motorists all use public roads for the vast majority of trips. Therefore, it is increasingly important to plan, design, and build new roadways in a manner that improves multi-modal access and mobility. The City of Tigard street design standards ensure that all new streets are constructed as "complete streets" and include facilities for pedestrians and bicycles and also provide drainage and landscaping where appropriate. Because they are reviewed and updated periodically, the City of Tigard's street design standards are located in the city's Community Development Code section 18.800 Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards. Special Areas:Downtown (page 95) The City of Tigard is committed to creating a downtown that is active, has a compact urban form, and provides multi-modal access and circulation. Public investments and planning activities for downtown are intended to provide a catalyst for economic development. Significant growth in downtown is planned for both employment and housing uses. Downtown is primarily located south of Pacific Highway between Hall Boulevard and Fanno Creek but also extends north of the Pacific Highway near Greenburg Road and Hall Boulevard. Pacific Highway and Hall Boulevard are the primary access routes to the downtown area. Pacific Highway currently experiences significant peak hour congestion and queuing which also impacts travel on Hall Boulevard. The Pacific Highway viaduct over the railroad tracks creates a grade separation between Pacific Highway and Main Street and limits both access and visibility to the Downtown from the highway. Downtown Tigard has a transit center which is served by TriMet Routes 12,45, 64, 76, and 78 connecting it to the Beaverton Transit Center, Sherwood, Lake Oswego, Tualatin, and downtown Portland. The Tigard Transit Center is also served by WES Commuter Rail. The existing transit service available to Downtown Tigard, combined with future plans to enhance WES service and provide high capacity transit along the Pacific Highway corridor, position Downtown to have transit service that can support increased employment and residential growth in the area despite existing congestion along Pacific Highway. Although Pacific Highway and Hall Boulevard have sidewalks and bicycle lanes (with the exception of a few gaps in the sidewalk system on Hall Boulevard),the lack of local and collector street connectivity and existing roadway geometry within the downtown area do not create a very desirable environment for pedestrians and bicyclists to travel within the downtown. At the broadest level, options for improving access to the downtown area fall into the following categories: • Improve local and collector roadway connectivity to and within Downtown. • Provide better facilities for alternative modes(transit,bicycles,pedestrians, etc.). • Enhance intersection capacity on Pacific Highway to increase the ability to cross and access Pacific Highway from Walnut Street, Greenburg Road, and Hall Boulevard. In order to address these issues the City prepared a Downtown Connectivity and Circulation Plan which identified a more complete system of streets and pathways to improve multi-modal access to, from and DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to 2035 Transportation System Plan Volume 1 of 3 PAGE 3 OF 4 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District. Through this effort the following transportation facility design principles were recognized as being of particular importance within the downtown: • Maximize efficiency and ease of access for all transportation modes and for emergency services. (This principle can be realized, in part, by determining appropriate access spacing and by avoiding off-set intersections.) • Enhance accessibility for people of all ages and abilities. (Strategies for achieving this objective include keeping block sizes relatively small and providing bike and pedestrian facilities.) • Create a network with a diversity of human-scaled street types that support urban places and integrate with blocks/buildings. • Link with city, regional, and national transportation networks. (Achieving this end requires careful integration of this plan with Tigard's TSP and with other local and regional planning efforts.) • Ensure the economic viability of the blocks that result from the implementation of the new street grid. In addition, a number of connectivity and circulation improvements, including new road and pathway connections within and adjacent to the downtown area were identified. These improvements are intended to foster creation of smaller block sizes, efficient routes into and within downtown, and new streets to accommodate and encourage downtown development as well as to solve some existing connectivity issues, such as access across railroad tracks Infrastructure Investment Figure 5-14 shows the additional multi-modal improvement projects related to the Downtown area which include Main Street streetscape improvements, a mixed-use trail along the rail corridor, and Ash Street extensions east across the railroad tracks and west and north to Pacific Highway. Specific project considerations can be found in Technical Memorandum#5 in the Volume 3 Technical Appendix. Connectivity Requirements In addition to the projects shown on Figure 5-14, the Downtown Connectivity and Circulation Plan identified a more complete system of streets and pathways to improve multi-modal access to, from and within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District. These improvements are shown on Figures 5-14A through 5-14I and are subject to the connectivity requirements below. If an alternate alignment is subsequently been approved by the City, the alternate alignment shall supersede the alignment shown on Maps 5-14B—Figure 5-14I. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to 2035 Transportation System Plan Volume 1 of 3 PAGE 4 OF 4 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 5-14A. Connectivity Projects Index Map ' \7" .'" ' \t-4$41- j_i Project Maps Index 4 /-_,I N Existing Streets *A/ ' IIIHHHHIIIIIII Railroads , Taxlots , . 4 4 ..,,,, .c ' C ,., P 1.'...*-.. ' •v/ 0 --.. j /0 �F�c�q `scow ,1 I(/ csT • _ S'j, ''oyy \ ki, 2 ISS r�''0 y `< / / \ ct-j vj ' II* '\ \ . y F, P5'f 11 ,7 '\\,t S.>.\\,/ . 5 ey '(> ' 4 ...* -—":\ /1/, , / / 5 \it 1p , ey 6 y \ / 7\ . <m . , o 8 - 1 a 1 I .. 4 01 -1;'' 0 250 500 1,000 Feet ,/\ , I , i 1 I I -I I I I Figure 5-14B. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 1 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area . Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :%i', Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots111 - Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. — .. , . , 4, ma ; I. 1 al MA►N S� or.0 ➢ ' F { G 1' 2 ,+,s*k lir 4111 f L. , Ai \ , *4 ;‘111, 1110 I q -.- 1 e ktlyI xs I iii r �2��, 0 _ --alk. }'-e j m KNOLL DR Q f i lj 1 y r -i' ,, .e 1.' T y 1 inch= 150 l c ' . .4 Feet- ^ " Ir 100 2Q0 - / \ I ' a Figure 5-14C. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 2 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area . Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :%i', Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots 0 Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. ID ` �AP � ♦ .,, , ♦ ♦ ' ♦ I sc 1- ry ♦ iP #.5,), { w, r y , • • Vii, • • .IS, • - , -- . ‘ ' . " /440 #` 40 „ O� ,., -, ,. 5 „if., ,. .,... i„, is" lik, . c�9�s� „a: i t 5 ♦♦ ' t•: % *.'le 4:4••••• ,,, , _ .„, . _ ::71:1:,, ,Is>4' 41.. :\\'''%‘, 4 0. • z of .414.•♦♦♦♦♦♦♦® ♦4y♦♦♦4A �♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�,.♦ .♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦: \\ Feet ♦♦♦♦” ♦ ♦♦�♦ '.211 } ' 1 ♦♦_♦♦:♦� Figure 5-14D. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 3 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area i Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :::,, Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots111 - - Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. m. ZS>'/ , ST 4* . 3 44, H l s;, 1416 4. , Ito q. „S- 7 - F<F 4e4444°_*\„ p - 1 N • y \ ,... . ,. ., •-.feet - X• 411 '. 11 F . ., 0 .. 50 100,. \ Figure 5-14E. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 4 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) • Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots111 - Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. ,1111 1 ' ",� scoffkit' y • %s I. r, t tP P. 44.V*i ll.%.•••oor4 •,x400". k IK� '`� 0000 ► ;000�► o�0000♦ -o000�•�ae ♦�0000♦ ♦000•41 <�,�o�o�o�oo�s..�o�o�o�o�o�oO.S y*00000s ♦oo.►sosos 11 ,w �L00000000a ® st* 4, � . � oosos000�, ,�os00000� ss000000s®.� . ..�oo �►000♦ 4 t 4;•%p$ j)jtj ) 0000s"00000wo�� si000000000o,�,�ss�s�►. ***, o 1 •4.4:.. `�. �o•� •, r*oo1a �o.�►�o ,oos ,00000�oo_oo + 0000♦�o.oor `+0000�♦♦osoo �►!s00000s�oow�.�o�o�oast ♦000000♦ 00000s� 1► `eAlI0000• ��►osor,00♦ 44,0 00000� ♦�►oo�.�lsoos�♦ �o►♦ ioo♦ �►t o�oo �'vv'o*r►'�ao�o�o��o�o O•�o4+W�i�o4v �o�oV•'4••''. ' �� `'►��• >ao40oosos •j4►£oo�4 4'.. 71 ., ,• 4441,0 .. # ♦coos w,oioioi:•ioioi000s000l, �►®;oioio .'5- oi000io`' *000�•4.44! rr1►000♦ • •* 4401. .,...0‘'roAr` 404..-...o��ri.". o�s�o.. T F� +,,• .. 4♦.•A 40 \��oo� 47 ,ei t1),#ao .+Q a �o�o�o•`s AJC .. _e �o� `P t" Ake y 4 .. 1 inch= 150 fe- "r 1-1_1-1_1 I Feet 0 50 100 200 Figure 5-14F. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 5 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area . Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :%i', Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots 0 Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. t - ,- " M a Pte" ...ss 41k* ie Ni\i' , . 1 / 4 . I, 1' tlit/AktiltoN k IA 11,# 4.11' iL e401.11* i , ,'4. r'- -, '''' I: li#110',, C101' , .‘fr; lir ,11/ i. -t ._,Mt il 44o • 4 / / kNslif -° , '1111VP ,1.411); NIL g 41° 400. , la .`. \\'‘I r4 a _ Ai '4y . • I.inch = 150 feet A4 , 0 50 100 i Figure 5-14G. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 6 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :%i', Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') TaxlotsII Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. art f� ;,� „ ' - ..-°,i r • /� 'I, F T „. . 4 01. ' WM' ,,g , ... 470 -Nii - A:0,-• • .4...•• r{ r Ilk YTS ,� - ,: .,.. Pit r `y y. % e �T / __ r f. Figure 5-14H. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 7 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :%i', Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots0 - Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. a � � '...: T �'„�„�,� � NN -A. 01. --: -1, - °-154,-", \ : _ / til .. . _ 4 pf 4t/4 '' ' - . a, $ "\I ^ ' .° 9y , PP a _ �' r a r f� i YTS _ /4 - ,. 4 r • , r .. .fl . ' ',. . dP 1 _ / r•I' ' ‘'�, i 1 1 r 1 1 in. +'- 50 ; IL.: 1 c P I P 50 100 ' 200 IJ i1, !1 1@ !11 1 Figure 5-141. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 8 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area . Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) :%i', Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots111 - Alley (20') Note: The width of the Future Connectivity Alignment Area is equal to the upper end of the right-of-way range listed for the street character type. '• X . \d/ir 0. '' \ ,.. e ' I eye ',. - 4r " � r -I S ' 1 i or I 1 , tit,1 . _ ' - r -- dam` 'p.,.� = Lc P II 1II r �_ h ♦ + o I '- 1i r ♦♦ m •♦ 1 inch= 150 fed4 '+r• •, _ 0 50 1001 200 'i-- z. it ,. �" #�A T EXHIBIT B DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments Proposed amendments are shown as follows: Proposed new text is shown in double-underline. Existing text proposed to be deleted is shown in strike through. 18.370.020 Adjustments A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish two classes of special variances: 1. "Development adjustments"which allow modest variation from required development standards within proscribed limits. Because such adjustments are granted using"clear and objective standards,"these can be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as opposed to the more stringent standards of approval and procedure for variances. 2. "Special adjustments"which are variances from development standards which have their own approval criteria as opposed to the standard approval criteria for variances contained in Section 18.370.020.C. B. Development adjustments. 1. The following development adjustments will be granted by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,using approval criteria contained in Subsection B2 below: a. Front yard setbacks. Up to a 25%reduction of the dimensional standards for the front yard setback required in the base zone. Setback of garages may not be reduced by this provision. b. Interior setbacks. Up to a 20%reduction of the dimensional standards for the side and rear yard setbacks required in the base zone. c. Lot coverage. Up to 5% increase of the maximum lot coverage required in the base zone. 2.Approval criteria. A development adjustment shall be granted if there is a demonstration of compliance with all of the applicable standards: a. A demonstration that the adjustment requested is the least required to achieve the desired effect; b. The adjustment will result in the preservation of trees, if trees are present in the development area; c. The adjustment will not impede adequate emergency access to the site; d. There is not a reasonable alternative to the adjustment which achieves the desired effect. C. Special adjustments. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments PAGE 1 OF 6 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 1. Adjustments to development standards within subdivisions (Chapter 18.430). The Director shall consider the application for adjustment at the same time he/she considers the preliminary plat. An adjustment may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied provided the Director finds: a. There are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property which are unusual and peculiar to the land as compared to other lands similarly situated; b. The adjustment is necessary for the proper design or function of the subdivision; c. The granting of the adjustment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the rights of other owners of property;and d. The adjustment is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right because of an extraordinary hardship which would result from strict compliance with the regulations of this title. 2.Adjustment to minimum residential density requirements(Chapter 18.510). The Director is authorized to grant an adjustment to the minimum residential density requirements in Section 18.510.040,by means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030 as follows: a. For development on an infill site as follows: (1)In the R-25 zone, sites of.75 acre or smaller. (2)In the R-40 zone, sites of.75 acre or smaller. b. For development on sites larger than those contained in 1 above, if the applicant can demonstrate by means of detailed site plan that the site is so constrained that the proportional share of the required minimum density cannot be provided and still meet all of the development standards in the underlying zone. c. To be granted an adjustment in either Subsections a or b above,the applicant must demonstrate that the maximum number of residential units are being provided while complying with all applicable development standards in the underlying zone. There is nothing in this section which precludes an applicant for applying to a variance to these standards, as governed by Section 18.370.010. 3. For adjustments to density requirements in Washington Square Regional Center,the standards of Section 18.630.020.E apply. 4. For Modifications to dimensional and minimum density requirements for developments within the Washington Square Regional Center that include or abut designated Water Resource overlay areas,the standards of Section 18.630.020.F apply. 5. Adjustment to access and egress standards(Chapter 18.705). a. In all zoning districts where access and egress drives cannot be readily designed to conform to Code standards within a particular parcel, access with an adjoining property shall be considered. If access in conjunction with another parcel cannot reasonably be achieved,the Director may grant an adjustment to the access requirements of Chapter 18.705 through a Type II procedure, as governed in Section 18.390.030,using approval criteria contained in Subsection 2b below. b. The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment from the access requirements contained in Chapter 18.705,based on the following criteria: (1)It is not possible to share access; (2) There are no other alternative access points on the street in question or from another street; (3) The access separation requirements cannot be met; DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments PAGE 2 OF 6 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 (4) The request is the minimum adjustment required to provide adequate access; (5) The approved access or access approved with conditions will result in a safe access; and (6) The visual clearance requirements of Chapter 18.795 will be met. 6. Adjustments to landscaping requirements(Chapter 18.745). a. Adjustment to use of existing trees as street trees. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the use of existing trees to meet the street tree requirements in Section 18.745.030 providing there has been no cutting and filling around the tree during construction which may lead to its loss,unless the following can be demonstrated: (1) The ground within the drip-line is altered merely for drainage purposes; and (2)It can be shown that the cut or fill will not damage the roots and will not cause the tree to die. b. Adjustment for street tree requirements. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for the adjustments to the street tree requirements in Section 18.745.030,based on the following approval criteria: (1)If the location of a proposed tree would cause potential problems with existing utility lines; (2)If the tree would cause visual clearance problems; or (3)If there is not adequate space in which to plant street trees. 7. Adjustments to parking standards(Chapter 18.765). a. Reduction from minimum parking requirements. By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,the Director may authorize up to a 20%reduction in the total minimum vehicle parking spaces required in Section 18.765.070.H when an applicant for a development permit can demonstrate in a parking study prepared by a traffic consultant or in parking data from comparable sites that: (1)Use of transit, demand management programs, and/or special characteristics of the customer, client employee or resident population will reduce expected vehicle use and parking space demand for this development, as compared to standards Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE)vehicle trip generation rates and minimum city parking requirements, and (2)A reduction in parking will not have an adverse impact on adjacent uses. b. Reductions in minimum parking requirements in new developments for transit improvements. The Director may authorize up to a 20%reduction in the total minimum vehicle parking spaces required in Section 18.765.070.H by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,when the applicant: (1)Incorporates transit-related facilities such as bus stops and pull-outs,bus shelters,transit-oriented developments and other transit-related development; and (2)Documents operational characteristics indicating the number of transit users, or number of non-auto users for a particular facility. c. Reductions in minimum parking requirements in existing developments for transit improvements. The Director may authorize up to a 10%reduction in the total minimum vehicle parking spaces required in Section 18.765.070.H at a conversion ratio of one space per 100 square feet of transit facility by means of a Type I procedure as governed by Section 18.390.030,when the applicant: (1)Incorporates transit-related facilities such as bus stops and pull-outs,bus shelters,transit-oriented developments and other transit-related development; and DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments PAGE 3 OF 6 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 (2)Meets the following requirements: (a)A transit facility must be located adjacent to a street with transit service. The facility should be located between the building and front property line,within 20 feet of an existing transit stop, or the facility may include a new transit stop if approved by Tri-Met. (b)A transit facility shall include a covered waiting or sitting area. d. Increases in the maximum parking requirements. The Director may approve off-street parking in excess of the maximum allowed parking spaces in Section 18.765.070G by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,when the applicant can demonstrate that all of the following criteria are met: (1) The individual characteristics of the use at that location requires more parking than is generally required for a use of this type and intensity; (2) The need for additional parking cannot be reasonably met through provision of on-street parking or shared parking with adjacent or nearby uses; and (3) The site plan shall indicate how the additional parking can be redeveloped to more intensive transit-supportive use in the future. e. Reduction in required bicycle parking. The Director may approve a reduction of required bicycle parking per Section 18.765.050.E by means of Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040, if the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed use by its nature would be reasonably anticipated to generate a lesser need for bicycle parking. f. Use of alternative parking garage layout. By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,the Director may approve an alternative design of parking garage which differs from the dimensional standards contained in Figure 18.765.2 when it can be shown that 1)the proposed structure meets design guidelines of the Urban Land Institute's (ULI)Dimension of Parking, Current Edition; or 2)a similar structure functions efficiently using proposed modified layout,circulation and dimensions. g. Reduction in length of stacking lane.By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by 18.390.030,the Director may allow a reduction in the amount of vehicle stacking area required in Section 18.765.040.D.2 if such a reduction is deemed appropriate after analysis of the size and location of the development, limited services available and other pertinent factors. 8. Adjustments to sign code(Chapter 18.780). a. By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment to the sign code based on findings that at least one of the following criteria are satisfied: (1) The proposed adjustment to the height limits in the sign code is necessary to make the sign visible from the street because of the topography of the site, and/or a conforming building or sign on an adjacent property would limit the view of a sign erected on the site in conformance with Chapter 18.780, Signs; (2)A second freestanding sign is necessary to adequately identify a second entrance to a business or premises that is oriented towards a different street frontage; (3)Up to an additional 25%of sign area or height may be permitted when it is determined that the increase will not deter from the purpose of Chapter 18.780, Signs. This increase should be judged according to specific needs and circumstances which necessitate additional area to make the sign sufficiently legible. The increase(s) shall not conflict with any other non-dimensional standards or restrictions of this chapter; DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments PAGE 4 OF 6 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 (4) The proposed sign is consistent with the criteria set forth in Section 18.780.130.G; (5) The proposed exception for a second freestanding sign on an interior lot which is zoned commercial or industrial is appropriate because all of the following apply: (a)The combined height of both signs shall not exceed 150% of the sign height normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district;however, neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district; (b)Neither sign will pose a vision clearance problem or will project into the public right-of-way; and (c)Total combined sign area for both signs shall not exceed 150% of what is normally allowed for one freestanding sign in the same zoning district;however,neither shall exceed the height normally allowed in the same zoning district. b. In addition to the criteria in Subsection a above,the Director shall review all of the existing or proposed signage for the development and its relationship to the intent and purpose of Chapter 18.780, Signs. As a condition of approval of the adjustment,the Director may require: (1)Removal or alteration of nonconforming signs to achieve compliance with the standards contained in Chapter 18.780, Signs; (2)Removal or alteration of conforming signs to establish a consistent sign design throughout the development; and (3)Application for sign permits for signs erected without permits or removal of such illegal signs. 9. Adjustments to setbacks to reduce tree removal(Chapter 18.790). By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,the Director may grant a modification from applicable setback requirements of this Code for the purpose of preserving a tree or trees on the site of proposed development. Such modification may reduce the required setback by up to 50%, but shall not be more than is necessary for the preservation of trees on the site. The setback modification described in this section shall supersede any special setback requirements or exceptions set out elsewhere in this title,including but not limited to Chapter 18.730, except Section 18.730.040. 10. Adjustments to wireless communication facilities (Chapter 18.798). a. By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment to the requirement that a wireless communication tower be set back at least the height of the tower from any off-site residence based on findings that at the following criteria are satisfied: (1) The proposed location of the tower complies with the setback requirements for the underlying zone in which the property is located; (2)A structural engineer certifies that the tower is designed to collapse within itself; (3)Because of topography,vegetation,building orientation and/or other factor, a site closer to an off-site residence will equally or better reduce the visual impacts associated with the tower upon the off-site residence. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments PAGE 5 OF 6 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 b. By means of a Type I procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.030,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment to the requirement that a wireless communication tower be located 2,000 feet from another tower in a residential zone or 500 feet from another tower in a non-residential zone based on findings that the following criteria are satisfied: (1) The applicant has fully complied with the collocation protocol as provided in Section 18.798.080; and (2)A registered radio engineer certifies that a more distant location is not technically feasible and/or sites at a more appropriate location are not available; or (3)A location closer than the required separation will reduce visual or other impacts on surrounding uses better than sites beyond the required separation. 11.Adjustments for street improvement requirements (Chapter 18.810). By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment to the street improvement requirements,based on findings that the following criterion is satisfied: Strict application of the standards will result in an unacceptably adverse impact on existing development, on the proposed development, or on natural features such as wetlands,bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes or existing mature trees. In approving an adjustment to the standards, the Director shall determine that the potential adverse impacts exceed the public benefits of strict application of the standards. (Ord. 06-20) 12.Adjustments to Downtown Connectivity Standards (Chapter 18.610.025). By means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a request for an adjustment to the connectivity standardsbased on findings that the following criteria are satisfied: a. Granting the adjustment will equally or better meet downtown design principles outlined in the Transportation System Plan; b. Application of the Downtown Connectivity Standards would preclude all reasonable economic use of the site; c. Any adjustment of the street and pedestrian connectivity improvement designations will, at a minimum,preserve the potential for a future connectivity improvements; and d. Granting the adjustment would not result in an adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands,bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to the TDC Chapter 18.370 Variances and Adjustments PAGE 6 OF 6 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 EXHIBIT C DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Development and Design Standards Proposed amendments are shown as follows: Proposed new text is shown in double-underline. Existing text proposed to be deleted is shown in strike through. Sections: 18.610.010 Purpose and Procedures 18.610.015 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments within the Downtown District 18.610.020 Building and Site Development Standards 18.610.025 Street Connectivity 18.610.030 Building and Site Design Standards 18.610.035 Additional Standards 18.610.040 Special Requirements for Development Bordering Urban Plaza 18.610.045 Exceptions to Standards 18.610.050 Building and Site Design Objectives (to be used with Track 3 Approval Process) 18.610.055 Signs 18.610.060 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements 18.610.010 Purpose and Procedures A. Purpose. The objectives of the Tigard Downtown Development and Design Standards are to implement the Comprehensive Plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan, and Urban Renewal Plan and ensure the quality, attractiveness, and special character of the Downtown. The regulations are intended to: 1. Facilitate the development of an urban village by promoting the development of a higher density, economically viable, and aesthetically pleasing pedestrian-oriented downtown where people can live,work,play and shop for their daily needs without relying on the automobile. The quality and scale of the downtown urban environment shall foster social interaction and community celebration. 2. Encourage the integration of natural features and the open space system into Downtown by promoting development sensitive to natural resource protection and enhancement; addressing the relationship to Fanno Creek Park; and promoting opportunities for the creation of public art and use of sustainable design. 3. Enhance the street level as an inviting place for pedestrians by guiding the design of the building "walls"that frame the right-of-way(the"public realm")to contribute to a safe,high quality pedestrian-oriented streetscape. Building features will be visually interesting and human-scaled, such as storefront windows, detailed façades, art and landscaping. The impact of parking on the DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 1 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 pedestrian system will also be limited. The downtown streetscape shall be developed at a human scale and closely connected to the natural environment through linkages to Fanno Creek open space and design attention to trees and landscapes. 4. Promote Tigard's Downtown as a desirable place to live and do business. Promote development of high-quality high density housing and employment opportunities in the Downtown. 5. Provide a clear and concise guide for developers and builders by employing greater use of graphics to explain community goals and desired urban form to applicants,residents and administrators. B. Conflicting standards. The following standards and land use regulations apply to all development within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District. With the exception of public facility and street requirements, if a design standard found in this section conflicts with another standard in the Development Code,the standards in this section shall govern, even if less restrictive than other areas of the code. C. Applicability. 1. New buildings and redevelopment: All applicable Design Standards apply to new buildings and related site improvements. 2. Expansion, modification and site improvements to existing development: An addition, expansion, enlargement, modification, and/or site improvements associated with such lawfully preexisting uses and structures shall be allowed,provided the application for such proposed project moves toward compliance with the applicable Development Code standards. Only those Downtown Building and Site Design Standards applicable to the proposed expansion,modification or site improvements to the existing development shall be applicable. 3. Design standards do not apply to the following projects: a. Maintenance and repair of a building, structure,or site in a manner that is consistent with previous approvals and/or necessary for safety; b. Projects undertaken to bring an existing development into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act; c. Exterior painting; d. Any exterior project that doesn't require a building permit; e. Interior remodeling; f. Temporary structures/uses (as defined in Chapter 18.785); g. Any project involving a pre-existing single-family residential building or duplex(that is not being or already been converted to a nonresidential use). D. Downtown design review approval process. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 2 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 E. Procedures. F. Downtown design review submittal requirements. G. Approval period. H. Extension. I. Phased development. 1. If the development of a site takes more than one year,the applicant shall submit a phased development time schedule for approval by the Director. In no case shall the total time period for all phases be greater than seven years without reapplying for design review. 2. The criteria for approving a phased development proposal is that all of the following are satisfied: a. The public facilities are constructed in conjunction with or prior to each phase; b. The development and occupancy of any phase is not dependent on the use of temporary public facilities. A temporary public facility is any facility not constructed to the applicable City or district standard; c. The phased development shall not result in requiring the City or other property owners to construct public facilities that were required as part of the approved development proposal; and d. The Director's decision maybe appealed as provided by Section 18.390.040.G.No notice need be given of the Director's decision. J. Bonding and assurances. 1. Performance Bonds for Public Improvements. On all projects where public improvements are required the Director shall require a bond in an amount not greater than 100%or other adequate assurances as a condition of approval of the plan in order to ensure the completed project is in conformance with the approved plan; and 2. Release of Performance Bonds. The bond shall be released when the Director finds the completed project conforms to the approved plan and all conditions of approval are satisfied. 3. Completion of Landscape Installation. Landscaping shall be installed prior to issuance of occupancy permits,unless security equal to the cost of the landscaping as determined by the Director is filed with the City Recorder assuring such installation within six months after occupancy: a. Security may consist of a faithful performance bond payable to the City, cash,certified check or such other assurance of completion approved by the City Attorney; and DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 3 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 b. If the installation of the landscaping is not completed within the six-month period,the security may be used by the City to complete the installation. K. Business tax filing. 18.610.015 Pre-Existing Uses and Developments within the Downtown District A. Applicability.Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 18.760.040(Criteria for Nonconforming Situations), land uses and associated development in the MU-CBD District that were lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of these standards may continue as lawful uses and developments. 1. Land uses and associated development that were in existence at the time of the adoption of the MU-CBD District and Chapter 18.610 may continue on the property. Additions, expansions, or enlargements to such uses or developments, shall be limited to the property area of said use or development lawfully in existence at the time of adoption of this ordinance,January 26,2010. 2. If a pre-existing structure or use is destroyed by fire, earthquake or other act of God, or otherwise abandoned then the use will retain its pre-existing status under this provision so long as it is substantially reestablished within one year of the date of the loss. The new structure would have to conform to the code. B. Standards for projects involving existing single-family and duplex dwellings. 1. Existing single-family buildings and duplexes used for residential purposes are exempt from the standards. 2. For projects involving preexisting housing units used for nonresidential uses the applicable standards are: Section 18.610.020,Building and Site Development Standards, including the applicable sub-area from Map 610.A; Section 18.610.030, Building Design Standards for Nonresidential Buildings and Section 18.610.035,Additional Standards. C. Existing nonconforming industrial structures. Existing nonconforming industrial structures at the following locations may continue to be utilized for I-P Industrial uses after the nonconforming use limit of six months: Map 2S 1 2AA tax lot 4700, Map 2S 1 2AC tax lots 100 and 202,Map 2 1 2AD tax lot 1203,Map 2S 1 2DB tax lot 100, and Map 2S 1 2DA tax lot 300. (Ord. 10-02 § 2) 18.610.020 Building and Site Development Standards A. Sub-areas. B. Development standards. Development standards apply to all new development in the MU-CBD zone, including developments utilizing the Track 3 approval process. Variances or adjustments may be granted if the criteria found in Chapter 18.370 is satisfied. 1. Development Standards Matrix. See Table 18.610.1 and Map 18.610.A. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 4 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Table 18.610.1 MU-CBD Development Standards Matrix 1'2,3 STANDARD SUB-AREAS Main Street 99W/Hall Corridor Scoffins/Commercial Fanno/Burnham (MS) (99H) (SC) (FB) Front setback Minimum 0 ft. 0/5 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. (5 ft.for frontage on 99W) Maximum 10 ft. 25 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Side facing street on corner and through lots Minimum 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. 0 ft. Maximum 10 ft. N/A N/A N/A Sideyard Minimum/maximum N/A N/A N/A N/A Rear setback Minimum 0 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. Maximum N/A N/A N/A N/A Building height Minimum 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. 20 ft. Maximum(stories/feet) 3 stories(45 ft.) 3 stories(45 ft.) 6 stories(80 ft.) 6 stories(80 ft.)7 Ground floor height minimum 15 ft. 15 ft. None None Site coverage maximum 100% 90% 90% 80% Minimum landscaping4 0%5 10% 10% 20% Minimum building frontage 50% 50% 50% 50% Residential density(units per acre) Minimums 25 25 25 15 Maximum 50 50 506 506 1 This table does not apply to existing development.All new buildings in the district must meet these development standards, including projects using the Track 3 approval process. 2 For standards for development surrounding the future public plaza see Section 18.610.040,Special Requirements for Development Bordering Urban Plaza. 3 See also Section 18.610.045,Exceptions to Standards in the MU-CBD zone. 4 In the MU-CBD zone,required landscaping can be provided on roofs sr .ithin th-ri r ht-•f-.. .h-r- th- .►di ant i. required to provide landscaping as part of a street improvement in accordance with Section 18.610.075. 5 Landscaping/screening requirements for parking lots must be met. 6 Station Area Overlay permits a maximum of 80 units per acre(see Map 18.610A). 7 3 stories/45 feet within 200 feet of Fanno Creek Park boundary(see Map 610.A)or within 50 feet of low or medium density residential district. 8 Minimum density applies to residential-only development(not mixed use). 2. Parking Location. ... 3. Rooftop Features/Equipment Screening. ... 4. Other Exterior Mechanical Equipment. ... 18.610.025 Street Connectivity Section to be reserved until completion of Downtown Circulation Plan. (Ord. 10 02 § 2) DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 5 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 A. Purpose Statement. The purpose of this section is to implement the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan which describes a more complete system of streets and pathways to improve multi-modal access to, from and within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District. The standards in this section are intended to execute connectivity improvement projects that will foster creation of smaller block sizes, efficient routes into and within downtown, and new streets to accommodate and encourage downtown development. The standards are also intended to solve some existing connectivity issues, such as access across railroad tracks. B. Applicability. The connectivity standards in this section apply only to those properties with designated streets or alleys as shown on Figures 5-14A through 5-14I of the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan. Development on properties with designated streets or alleys is subject to the connectivity requirements below. C. Required New Street and Alley Connections. Required new street and alley connections shall be provided as follows. 1. New development and major redevelopment. For new development and for major redevelopment valued at more than 60%of its total current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor,the applicant shall comply with subsections(a)and(b),below. (a) Dedicate the required right-of-way. The applicant shall dedicate the amount of right-of- way necessary to construct the required street or alley consistent with the designated street cross-section. i. As an alternative,the City Engineer may approve the dedication of a public easement in lieu of a portion of the public right-of-way in accordance with TDC 18.810.030.C. (b) Construct the required improvements. The applicant shall construct the full street or alley improvements as shown in the designated street cross-section. 2 All other .ro'ects. For sro'ects other than new develo•ment and maor redevelopment,the applicant shall comply with sections(a)and(b)below: (a) Preserve the potential for a future connectivity improvement. No new buildings shall be located within the area identified as future street or alley alignment. Surface parking, landscaping,temporary structures, driveways and similar types of development are allowed within the future alignment. (b) Sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District(LID). The property owner shall sign a non-remonstrance agreement for formation of a future LID to pay for the identified street or alley improvement. D. Required New Pedestrian Pathway. For new development and for major redevelopment valued at more than 60%of its total current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor that is within the area designated for required multi-use pathway,the applicant shall comply with subsection(1)below: 1. Provide multi-use pathway on public easements or right-of-ways through the block in a manner which ensures that connections through the block are provided at least every 330 feet. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 6 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 The required pathway shall provide direct connection through the block and be ADA accessible. E. Adjustments to the connectivity standards are subject to TDC 18.370.020. 18.610.030 Building and Site Design Standards 18.610.035 Additional Standards 18.610.040 Special Requirements for Development Bordering Urban Plaza 18.610.045 Exceptions to Standards A. Exceptions to setback requirements. ... B. Exceptions to parking requirements. ... C. Exceptions for private or shared outdoor area. ... D. Exceptions to landscaping requirements. ... 18.610.050 Building and Site Design Objectives (to be used with Track 3 Approval Process) 18.610.055 Signs 18.610.060 Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 7 OF 7 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 EXHIBIT D DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards Proposed amendments are shown as follows: Proposed new text is shown in double-underline. Existing text proposed to be deleted is shown in strike through. Sections: 18.810.010 Purpose 18.810.020 General Provisions 18.810.030 Streets 18.810.040 Blocks 18.810.050 Easements 18.810.060 Lots 18.810.070 Sidewalks 18.810.080 Public Use Areas 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers 18.810.100 Storm Drainage 18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways 18.810.120 Utilities 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required 18.810.140 Monuments—Replacement Required. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite 18.810.160 Installation Conformation 18.810.170 Plan Check 18.810.180 Notice to City 18.810.190 City Inspection of Improvements 18.810.200 Engineer's Written Certification Required 18.810.210 Completion Requirements 18.810.010 Purpose A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to provide construction standards for the implementation of public and private facilities and utilities such as streets, sewers, and drainage. 18.810.020 General Provisions A. When standards apply. Unless otherwise provided, construction,reconstruction or repair of streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements shall occur in accordance with the standards of this title. No development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards PAGE 1 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 B. Standard specifications. The city engineer shall establish standard specifications consistent with the application of engineering principles. C. Chapter 7.40 applies. The provision of Chapter 7.40 of the Tigard Municipal Code shall apply to this chapter. D. Adjustments. Adjustments to the provisions in this chapter related to street improvements may be granted by means of a Type II procedure, as governed by Section 18.390.040,using approval criteria in Section 18.370.020.C.11 18.370.030.C.9. (Ord. 99-22) E. Except as provided in Section 18.810.030.S, as used in this chapter,the term"streets"shall mean"public streets"unless an adjustment under Section 18.810.020.D is allowed. (Ord. 99-22) 18.810.030 Streets A. Improvements. 1. No development shall occur unless the development has frontage or approved access to a public street. 2. No development shall occur unless streets within the development meet the standards of this chapter. 3. No development shall occur unless the streets adjacent to the development meet the standards of this chapter,provided,however,that a development may be approved if the adjacent street does not meet the standards but half-street improvements meeting the standards of this title are constructed adjacent to the development. 4 Any new street or additional street width planned as a portion of an existing street shall meet the standards of this chapter. 5. If the city could and would otherwise require the applicant to provide street improvements,the city engineer may accept a future improvements guarantee in lieu of street improvements if one or more of the following conditions exist: a. A partial improvement is not feasible due to the inability to achieve proper design standards; b. A partial improvement may create a potential safety hazard to motorists or pedestrians; c. Due to the nature of existing development on adjacent properties it is unlikely that street improvements would be extended in the foreseeable future and the improvement associated with the project under review does not,by itself,provide a significant improvement to street safety or capacity; d. The improvement would be in conflict with an adopted capital improvement plan; e. The improvement is associated with an approved land partition on property zoned residential and the proposed land partition does not create any new streets; or f. Additional planning work is required to define the appropriate design standards for the street and the application is for a project which would contribute only a minor portion of the anticipated future traffic on the street. 6. The standards of this chapter include the standard specifications adopted by the city engineer pursuant DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards PAGE 2 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 to Section 18.810.020.B. 7. The approval authority may approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards would result in an adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands,bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees. The approval authority may also approve adjustments to the standards of this chapter if compliance with the standards would have a substantial adverse impact on existing development or would preclude development on the property where the development is proposed. In approving an adjustment to the standards,the approval authority shall balance the benefit of the adjustment with the impact on the public interest represented by the standards. In evaluating the impact on the public interest,the approval authority shall consider the criteria listed in Section 18.810.030.E.1. An adjustment to the standards may not be granted if the adjustment would risk public safety. B. Creation of rights-of-way for streets and related purposes. Rights-of-way shall be created through the approval of a final subdivision plat or major partition;however,the council may approve the creation of a street by acceptance of a deed,provided that such street is deemed essential by the council for the purpose of general traffic circulation. 1. The council may approve the creation of a street by deed of dedication without full compliance with the regulations applicable to subdivisions or major partitions if any one or more of the following conditions are found by the council to be present: a. Establishment of a street is initiated by the council and is found to be essential for the purpose of general traffic circulation, and partitioning or subdivision of land has an incidental effect rather than being the primary objective in establishing the road or street for public use; or b. The tract in which the road or street is to be dedicated is an isolated ownership of one acre or less and such dedication is recommended by the commission to the council based on a finding that the proposal is not an attempt to evade the provisions of this title governing the control of subdivisions or major partitions. c. The street is located within the Downtown Mixed Use Central Business District and has been identified on Figures 5-14A through 5-14I of the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan as a required connectivity improvement. 2. With each application for approval of a road or street right-of-way not in full compliance with the regulations applicable to the standards,the proposed dedication shall be made a condition of subdivision and major partition approval. a. The applicant shall submit such additional information and justification as may be necessary to enable the commission in its review to determine whether or not a recommendation for approval by the council shall be made. b. The recommendation, if any, shall be based upon a finding that the proposal is not in conflict with the purpose of this title. c. The commission in submitting the proposal with a recommendation to the council may attach conditions which are necessary to preserve the standards of this title. 3. All deeds of dedication shall be in a form prescribed by the city and shall name"the public"as grantee. C. Creation of access easements. ... DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards PAGE 3 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 D. Street location,width and grade. Except as noted below,the location,width and grade of all streets shall conform to an approved street plan and shall be considered in their relation to existing and planned streets, to topographic conditions,to public convenience and safety, and in their appropriate relation to the proposed use of the land to be served by such streets: 1. Street grades shall be approved by the city engineer in accordance with subsection N below; and 2. Where the location of a street is not shown in an approved street plan,the arrangement of streets in a development shall either: a. Provide for the continuation or appropriate projection of existing streets in the surrounding areas, or b. Conform to a plan adopted by the commission, if it is impractical to conform to existing street patterns because of particular topographical or other existing conditions of the land. Such a plan shall be based on the type of land use to be served,the volume of traffic, the capacity of adjoining streets and the need for public convenience and safety. E. Minimum rights-of-way and street widths. Unless otherwise indicated on an approved street plan, or as needed to continue an existing improved street or within the Downtown District, street right-of-way and roadway widths shall not be less than the minimum width described below. Where a range is indicated,the width shall be determined by the decision-making authority based upon anticipated average daily traffic (ADT)on the new street segment. (The City Council may adopt by resolution, design standards for street construction and other public improvements. The design standards will provide guidance for determining improvement requirements within the specified ranges.) These are presented in Table 18.810.1. 1. The decision-making body shall make its decision about desired right-of-way width and pavement width of the various street types within the subdivision or development after consideration of the following: a. The type of road as set forth in the comprehensive plan transportation chapter-functional street classification. b. Anticipated traffic generation. c. On-street parking needs. d. Sidewalk and bikeway requirements. e. Requirements for placement of utilities. f. Street lighting. g. Drainage and slope impacts. h. Street tree location. i. Planting and landscape areas. j. Safety and comfort for motorists,bicyclists, and pedestrians. k. Access needs for emergency vehicles. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards PAGE 4 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Table 18.810.1 Minimum Widths for Street Characteristics and Downtown Street Character Types Right-of- Min. Landscape Paved Number of On-street Strip Width Median Type of Street Way Width Lanes Lane Bike Lane Width Sidewalk Width Parking Width (exclusive of Width Width Width curb) 2-7 6'(New Streets) 8'(Res. &Ind. Zones) Arterial 64'-128' Varies (Refer to 12' N/A 5' 12'(1) TSP) 5'-6'(Existing Streets) 10'(Comm. Zones) 2-5 6' (New Streets)(5) 6'(Res. &Ind. Zones) Collector 58'-96' VariesTSP to 11' 8'(4) 5'-6'(Existing Streets) 8'(Comm. Zones) 5' 12'(n Neighborhood Route 50'-58' 28'-36' 2 10' 8' 5'-6' 5'-6'(2) 5' N/A Local: Industrial/Commercial 50' 36' 2 N/A 5'-6'(2) 5' N/A Local: Residential N/A • Under 1500 ADT 54'/50'(3) 32'/28'(3) 2 8'(both sides) N/A 5'-6'(2) 5' • Under 500 ADT 50'/46'(3) 28'/24'(3) 2 8'(one side) N/A • Under 200 ADT 46'/42'(3) 24'/20'(3) 2 (No Parking) N/A Cul-de-sac bulbs in Industrial and 50'radius 42'radius N/A N/A N/A N/A Commercial Zones Cul-de-sac bulbs in 47'radius 40'radius N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Residential Zones Upper Hall Boulevard(6) 94' 64' 3 11' 8' 6' 10.5' 4' 14' Main Street Green Street TBD(7) _ TBD(7) TBD(7) TBD(7) TBD(') TBD(7) TBD(7) TBD(7) TBD(7) Downtown Mixed Use 1 66'-70' 46' 2 10' 8' 5' 6-8' 4' N/A –Downtown Collector Downtown Mixed Use 2 –Downtown 58'-62' 38' 2 11' 8' N/A 6-8' 4' N/A Neighborhood Downtown Mixed Use 3 62'-74' 38' 2 11' 8' N/A 6-8' 5.5-9.5' N/A –Upper Burnham = _ Downtown Mixed Use 4 68'-72' 48' 2 10' 8' N/A 6-8' 4' 12' —Lower Burnham — —DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to'MC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards PAGE 5 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Downtown—Urban 52'-56' 32' 1 18' 7' N/A 6-8' 4' N/A Residential Alley: Residential 16' 16' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Alley: Business 20' 20' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 'Medians required for five-and seven-lane roadways.They are optional for three-lane roadways. 2 Sidewalk widths for these streets shall be five feet with landscape strip;six feet if against curb(if permitted in accordance with Section 18.810.070.C). 3"Skinny street"roadway widths are permitted where cross section and review criteria are met.Refer to corresponding cross sections(Figures 18.810.3,18.810.4 and 18.810.5)for details and conditions. °Parking is allowed on collectors within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. 5 Bicycle lane requirements on collectors within the Downtown Urban Renewal District shall be determined by the city engineer. 6SW Hall Boulevard is currently an ODOT facility. The 2035 Tigard Transportation System Plan recommends that a corridor plan be completed for the SW Hall Boulevard Corridor The street character standards for Upper Hall Boulevard shall not be considered final until the corridor plan is complete. Main Street Green Street standards are currently being developed through a separate process. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to'MC Chapter 18.810 Street and Utility Improvement Standards PAGE 6 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 18.810.1 Arterials Sample Cross Sections ca "111- • t8-101 5.5' 16'Re 1 12` 12' 6'Bike,5.5' 48-10'i 1 RNV 64'-68' i 2 Lane 64'-68'RAN a, Hir 12'Medierk/ 5' 8_10_5 5'6'Bike 12' Turn Lane 12' 6'&ke 5.5' 8-10', { R/W 76'-80' 3 Lane 76'-8O'RIW ■ � - - _ . . . 12'Median/ 15,8.-10 6' 16'BRte1 12 12' Turn ne 12' 12' 6'Bbke 5.5' 8-10' S' RTW 100-104' 5 Lane 100'404'RNV rs� ra p. 12'Median/ 8-10' , 5.5' ,6'Bike 12' 12' 12' .Turn Lane . 12' 12 F_ 12' Bike 6' 5.5 8-10' RN/124'_128' 7 Lane 124`-1213'RAY (Ord. 02-33) DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 7 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 18.810.2 Collector Sample Cross Sections (1) 54 6-8' 5.5' r6'Bike 1 i' 11' 16'Bke1 5.5' 6-i' F R��, .62' 2 Lane 581.62'RIW m ro 4/ 4F---t fie► i 11 , . _ 12'Median/ ;5 6 5.5';6_'i31ke F1 Turn Lane- 11' 6'BikT5,5' 16$' S RAW 70'-74' 1 3 Lane 70'-74'RIW P'''''i,e . ' ' - ' ~ g .5' 12'Median/I 1 5.5'16'Bike+ 11' 11' {_Turn Lane 11' 11' 1 'Bike 5 1 6-8' R/W 92'-96' I 5 Lane 92'-96'R'W 1 Parking is allowed on collectors within the Downtown Urban Renewal District. Bike lane requirements on these same collecters shall be determined by the city engineer. (Ord. 09-09 § 3 (Exh. B); Ord. 02-33) DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 8 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 18.810.3 Neighborhood Routes Sample Cross Sections 5'_5.5' O 28' 5; r, 5' 5' 5.5' 0 32' Q 5.5' 5, 5.` RNV 50' RN 54' No Parking on One Side With Parking on Both Sides =* - ' r .,_ 5'r 5" 5.5' ,6'Bike i 12' 12 16'Bice 5.5' 1 5' St F Ri'W 58' With Bike Lanes/No Parking (Ord. 02-33) Figure 18.810.4 Local Residential Streets-<1,500 vpd A. Standard(sample) B. Skinny Street Option(criteria) -a• . ma,5---4:r ,__ !,i_ El I P p 5' ,w + 5. 5' 5.5' 32' 5 5 �s '+�' ry wi.n. ,- ' 5 RM 54' , . ca.w> , .s FORMIIMM Dn-street Parking <1500 vpd * If parking on both sides, Criteria: block length not to exceed 600 feet • Traffic flow plan must be submitted and approved. • Not appropriate for streets serving more than 1,000 vpd. • No parking permitted within 30 feet of an intersection. • Appropriate adjacent to single-family I detached development only. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 9 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 (Ord. 02-33) Figure 18.810.5 Local Residential Streets< 500 vpd A. Standard(sample) B. Skinny Street Option(criteria) 5' I v 2 � • ■` x5.5 8 5.5 5 '• _ I I { t"` _s a } PM 50' 7. 1.47 0,5" iVallelnj Trawl lrr Residential Local Street/Cul-de-sac5. stsp .k' One Side On-street Parking <500 vpd 2141.94444( Criteria: • Traffic flow plan must be submitted and approved. • Not appropriate for streets serving more than 500 vpd. • No parking permitted within 30 feet of an intersection. • Appropriate adjacent to single-family detached development only. • Must provide a minimum of one off-street parking space for every 20 feet of restricted street frontage. (Ord. 02-33) Figure 18.810.6 Local Residential Street<200 vpd DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 10 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 A. Standard(sample) B. Skinny Street Option(criteria) fflf55' 6.N 2P'rwweRR Y.5, 111 4' 5.5' 5' M.1,0 ^m5.1.4 5' t �idewal,F 5..:p lFAp gitp,alk s D 55 2 R/W 46' Cul-de-sac/Residential Local Street Kam-0.w <200 vpd (No paFlo rhg) Criteria: • Must provide a minimum of one off-street parking space for every 20 feet of restricted street frontage. • No parking permitted within 30 feet of an intersection. (Ord.02-33) Figure 18.810.7 Upper Hall Boulevard • 1it\14. IS 8 n H I 14 11' 6' 8' 15 1 "y Fi M Note: SW Hall Boulevard is currently an ODOT facility. The 2035 Tigard Transportation System Plan recommends that a corridor plan be completed for the SW Hall Boulevard Corridor The street character standards for Upper Hall Boulevard shall not be considered final until the corridor plan is complete. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 11 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 18.810.8 Downtown Mixed Use 1—Downtown Collector ' Al. ^, ,r . i4iata,311 '19 , .•} ,, ,I. 5 0.1a-lz' e' s' 10' 10' 65-7d'POW Figure 18.810.9 Downtown Mixed Use 2—Downtown Neighborhood I —40 40 ir ,' ' .. ! 4 ti Iii,ili ME. fit, r ` #M1 6,,,..!'0,.7t11 II Ni tit �t, m bred use res,dent al 10-12' 6' 11' 11' S 1P-12' mixed use residential 58-02'ROW DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 12 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 18.810.10 Downtown Mixed Use 3—Upper Burnham til sq , • 13 18 8 11` 11 8' 7218' 62'-74'ROA, Figure 18.810.11 Downtown Mixed Use 4—Lower Burnham 11. 1 10'-12' 8' 147 12' 10' 8' WY-12' 6F-72'1141W DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 13 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 Figure 18.810.12 Downtown—Urban Residential residential 10-12 7 18" T 10-1Y 52-50'P1 5' Figure 18.810.12 Alley: Business E PAM 20'ROW Note: Permeable pavers are optional. F. Future street plan and extension of streets. G. Street spacing and access management. H. Street alignment and connections. 1. Full street connections with spacing of no more than 530 feet between connections is required except where prevented by barriers such as topography,railroads, freeways,pre-existing developments, lease provisions, easements, covenants or other restrictions existing prior to May 1, 1995 which preclude street connections. A full street connection may also be exempted due to DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 14 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 a regulated water feature if regulations would not permit construction. 2. All local,neighborhood routes and collector streets which abut a development site shall be extended within the site to provide through circulation when not precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns or strict adherence to other standards in this code. A street connection or extension is considered precluded when it is not possible to redesign or reconfigure the street pattern to provide required extensions. Land is considered topographically constrained if the slope is greater than 15%for a distance of 250 feet or more. In the case of environmental or topographical constraints,the mere presence of a constraint is not sufficient to show that a street connection is not possible. The applicant must show why the constraint precludes some reasonable street connection. 3. Proposed street or street extensions shall be located to provide direct access to existing or planned transit stops, commercial services, and other neighborhood facilities, such as schools, shopping areas and parks. 4. All developments should provide an internal network of connecting streets that provide short, direct travel routes and minimize travel distances within the development. I. Intersection angles. ... J. Existing rights-of-way. Whenever existing rights-of-way adjacent to or within a tract are of less than standard width, additional rights-of-way shall be provided at the time of subdivision or development. K. Partial street improvements. Partial street improvements resulting in a pavement width of less than 20 feet,while generally not acceptable,may be approved where essential to reasonable development when in conformity with the other requirements of these regulations, and when it will be practical to require the improvement of the other half when the adjoining property developed. L. Culs-de-sacs. M. Street names. ... N. Grades and curves. 0. Curbs, curb cuts,ramps, and driveway approaches. ... P. Streets adjacent to railroad right-of-way. ... Q. Access to arterials and collectors. ... R. Alleys,public or private. 1. Alleys shall be no less than 20 feet in width. In commercial and industrial districts, alleys shall be provided unless other permanent provisions for access to off-street parking and loading facilities are made. 2. While alley intersections and sharp changes in alignment shall be avoided,the corners of necessary alley intersections shall have a radius of not less than 12 feet. DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 15 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 S. Survey monuments. ... T. Private streets. U. Railroad crossings. Where an adjacent development results in a need to install or improve a railroad crossing,the cost for such improvements may be a condition of development approval, or another equitable means of cost distribution shall be determined by the public works director and approved by the commission. V. Street signs. ... W. Mailboxes. ... X. Traffic signals. ... Y. Street light standards. ... Z. Street name signs. ... AA. Street cross-sections. ... BB. Traffic calming. ... CC. Traffic study. ... 18.810.040 Blocks A. Block design. The length,width and shape of blocks shall be designed with due regard to providing adequate building sites for the use contemplated, consideration of needs for convenient access, circulation, control and safety of street traffic and recognition of limitations and opportunities of topography. B. Sizes. 1. The perimeter of blocks formed by streets shall not exceed 2,000 feet measured along the centerline of the streets except: a. Where street location is precluded by natural topography,wetlands, significant habitat areas or bodies of water, or pre-existing development; or b. For blocks adjacent to arterial streets,limited access highways, collectors or railroads. c. For nonresidential blocks in which internal public circulation provides equivalent access. 2. Bicycle and pedestrian connections on public easements or right-of-ways shall be provided when full street connection is exempted by subsection B.1 of this section. Spacing between connections shall be no more than 330 feet, except where precluded by environmental or topographical constraints, existing development patterns, or strict adherence to other standards in the code. (Ord. 06-20; Ord. 02-33) DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 16 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 18.810.050 Easements 18.810.060 Lots 18.810.070 Sidewalks A. Sidewalks. All industrial streets and private streets shall have sidewalks meeting city standards along at least one side of the street.All other streets shall have sidewalks meeting city standards along both sides of the street. A development may be approved if an adjoining street has sidewalks on the side adjoining the development, even if no sidewalk exists on the other side of the street. B. Requirement of developers. 1. As part of any development proposal, or change in use resulting in an additional 1,000 vehicle trips or more per day, an applicant shall be required to identify direct, safe (1.25 x the straight line distance)pedestrian routes within 1/2 mile of their site to all transit facilities and neighborhood activity centers (schools,parks, libraries, etc.). In addition,the developer may be required to participate in the removal of any gaps in the pedestrian system off-site if justified by the development. 2. If there is an existing sidewalk on the same side of the street as the development within 300 feet of a development site in either direction,the sidewalk shall be extended from the site to meet the existing sidewalk, subject to rough proportionality(even if the sidewalk does not serve a neighborhood activity center). C. Planter strip requirements. A planter strip separation of at least five feet between the curb and the sidewalk shall be required in the design of streets, except where the following conditions exist: there is inadequate right-of-way; the curbside sidewalks already exist on predominant portions of the street; it would conflict with the utilities;there are significant natural features(large trees,water features, significant habitat areas, etc.)that would be destroyed if the sidewalk were located as required;Of where there are existing structures in close proximity to the street(15 feet or less); or where the standards in Table 18.810.1 specify otherwise. Additional consideration for exempting the planter strip requirement may be given on a case-by-case basis if a property abuts more than one street frontage. width, and: 1. All sidewalks shall provide a continuous unobstructed path; and 2. The width of curbside sidewalks shall be measured from the back of the curb. E. Maintenance. ... F. Application for permit and inspection. ... G. Council initiation of construction. ... (Ord. 06-20; Ord. 02-33; Ord. 99-22) DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 17 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 18.810.080 Public Use Areas 18.810.090 Sanitary Sewers 18.810.100 Storm Drainage 18.810.110 Bikeways and Pedestrian Pathways A. Bikeway extension. 1. As a standard,bike lanes shall be required along all arterial and collector routes and where identified on the city's adopted bicycle plan in the transportation system plan(TSP). Bike lane requirements along collectors within the Downtown Urban Renewal District shall be determined by the city engineer unless specified in Table 18.810.1. 2. Developments adjoining proposed bikeways identified on the city's adopted pedestrian/bikeway plan shall include provisions for the future extension of such bikeways through the dedication of easements or rights-of-way,provided such dedication is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. 3. Any new street improvement project shall include bicycle lanes as required in this document and on the adopted bicycle plan. B. Cost of construction. Development permits issued for planned unit developments, conditional use permits, subdivisions and other developments which will principally benefit from such bikeways shall be conditioned to include the cost or construction of bikeway improvements in an amount roughly proportional to the impact of the development. C. Minimum width. 1. The minimum width for bikeways within the roadway is five feet per bicycle travel lane. 2. The minimum width for multi-use paths separated from the road and classified as regional or community trails in the Greenway Trail System Master Plan is 10 feet. The width may be reduced to eight feet if there are environmental or other constraints. 3. The minimum width for off-street paths classified as neighborhood trails, according to the Greenway Trail System Master Plan, is three feet. 4. Design standards for bike and pedestrian-ways shall be determined by the city engineer. (Ord. 11-04 §2; Ord. 09-09 § 3; Ord. 02-33; Ord. 99-22) 18.810.120 Utilities 18.810.130 Cash or Bond Required DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 18 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 18.810.140 Monuments—Replacement Required. 18.810.150 Installation Prerequisite 18.810.160 Installation Conformation 18.810.170 Plan Check 18.810.180 Notice to City 18.810.190 City Inspection of Improvements 18.810.200 Engineer's Written Certification Required 18.810.210 Completion Requirements (To be completed.) ■ DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS PROJECT DRAFT Amendments to TDC Chapter 18.610 Tigard Downtown District Dev.&Design Stds PAGE 19 OF 19 CPA 2012-00001/DCA 2012-00002 EXHIBIT E - Kittelson and Associates traffic analysis conducted as part of the development of the Downtown Conceptual Circulation Plan APPENDIX B: TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT / KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES , INC . \ TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / PLANNINGG 610 SW Alder Street,Suite 700,Portland,OR 97205 P 503 228 5230 503.273.8169 MEMORANDUM Date: December 22,2009 Project#: 10170.0 To: Matt Arnold SERA Architects From: Elizabeth Wemple,PE,Jamie Parks and Michael Houston Project: Downtown Tigard Circulation Plan Subject: Horizon Year Transportation Circulation As requested by SERA Architects, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (KAI) has performed a year 2050 estimate of trip generation, distribution and traffic analysis for Tigard, Oregon. This analysis was conducted to support the City of Tigard Downtown Circulation Plan. The study area is roughly bounded by Highway 99W to the northwest, Hall Boulevard to the east, and Fanno Creek to the south and west.The area approximately corresponds to Metro's Town Center designation. METHODOLOGY Year 2050 estimates for the total development areas in downtown Tigard were provided by City staff. Downtown Tigard is expected to experience high residential, retail, and office growth between now and the horizon year of 2050. Table 1 summarizes the expected extent of total development in downtown Tigard in 2050. As shown, over 1 million square feet of retail, 532,000 square feet of office,and roughly 3,260 dwelling units are anticipated for downtown Tigard. Table 1 Year 2050 Total Downtown Build-Out Sub-Area Highway 99W- Main Street- Scoffins Street- Fanno Creek- Station Area Totals Summary Hall Boulevard Center Street Commercial Burnham Overlay Street Street Retail Area (sf) 376,500 366,625 305,250 271,700 none 1,320,075 Office Area (sf) 230,000 52,000 50,000 200,000 none 532,000 Dwelling Units 667 117 958 824 695 3,260 Trip Generation and Mode Reduction Based on the anticipated development in the study area,future person trips were estimated using the Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition. This standard resource was published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE). In the year 2050, it is expected that a significant portion of the travel in and out of downtown Tigard will occur using non-auto modes.The Metro Regional Transportation Plan(RTP)includes DOWNTOWN CIRCULATION PLAN-APPENDIX-3 AUGUST 2010 33 Downtown Tigard Circulation Plan Project#: 10170.0 December 22, 2009 Page 2 a target for the maximum percentage of single-occupant vehicle (SOV) trips for downtown Tigard. The target is between 45 and 55 percent. Similarly, the City of Tigard has a desirable maximum SOV of 40 percent in this part of town. Both are year 2035 targets. For this analysis, we estimated that thirty percent of the person trips in and out of downtown will use non-automobile transportation (i.e., transit, bicycle, or walk) in 2050. This anticipates that in addition to the non- automobile trips, approximately 20 to 30 percent of all trips will occur by carpooling. Table 2 summarizes the estimated trip generation of the expected development in downtown Tigard, taking into consideration the anticipated reduction in vehicle trips. Table 2 Year 2050 Downtown Trip Generation Summary Daily Weekday PM Peak Hour Land Use Code Size Weekday Trips Total In Out Retail Area (sf) 820 1,320,075 sf 58,640 5,510 2,650 2,860 Office Area (sf) 710 532,000 sf 5,855 795 135 660 Dwelling Units 230 3,259 units 18,935 1,695 1,135 560 Subtotal 83,430 8,000 3,920 4,080 30% Non-Auto Mode Reduction (25,030) (2,400) (1,175) (1,225) Total 58,400 5,600 2,745 2,855 As shown in the table, downtown Tigard is expected to generate 58,400 daily trips, where 5,600 will occur during the p.m. peak hour. Of the peak hour trips, 2,745 are anticipated to be entering the downtown while 2,855 are expected to be exiting. The anticipated retail development in downtown is expected to have the largest portion of trips between the three land uses. Trip Distribution To estimate the number of vehicle trips on the proposed downtown Tigard transportation network developed by SERA Architects, the trips shown in Table 2 were assigned to the future roadway network. The trip distribution for each of the arterials in the immediate area was based on estimates developed using Metro's regional travel demand model. Table 3 shows the estimated trip distribution to the arterials. 34 TIGARD,OREGON APPENDIX B: TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT Downtown Tigard Circulation Plan Project#: 10170.0 December 22, 2009 Page 3 Table 3 Downtown Trip Distribution Roadway Direction Total Percent In 140 Hall Boulevard—North 5% Out 145 In 550 Highway 99W—East 20% Out 570 In 550 Hunziker Boulevard 20% Out 570 In 270 Hall Boulevard—South 10% Out 285 In 275 Highway 99W—West 10% Out 285 In 140 Ash Avenue—South 5% Out 145 In 550 Greenburg Road 20% Out 570 In 270 Garden Place 10% Out 285 In 2,745 Total 100% Out 2,855 As shown in the table, the roadways that are expected to carry the highest proportion of downtown trips are Highway 99W to the east, Hunziker Boulevard, and Greenburg Road. Vehicle trips were assigned onto the future roadway network according to the distributions shown in Table 3. In addition, background traffic (i.e. regional traffic without an origin or destination within downtown) was included in the estimate. Background traffic was estimated using demand estimates from Metro's 2035 regional travel model. It was assumed that the areas adjacent to downtown Tigard would be primarily built-out by 2035 and that little growth would occur in these areas between 2035 and 2050. For this reason, no adjustment factor was added to the 2035 background volumes. Figure 1 shows the assigned 2050 peak-hour trips (background plus trips originating/destined for downtown Tigard) on each link of the roadway network. Average daily volumes would be approximately 10 times the peak-hour volumes shown in Figure 1. DOWNTOWN CIRCULATION PLAN-APPENDIX-3 AUGUST 2010 35 y�_ , _� ___ 41,-800 J ! % g�4 GARDEN m ¥ , ®\% * ^ « . 6.« s§° &s ! / / @» . >\% o %J ®� f� a &% C� ! > 4 \ <4 ¢*§ � ! & » . \ g s� & x� > 1IT \ 45' g g . » &s © ( ! '§..' } _,mPEAK HOUR m_\m00% ^ « "ASSOCIATES,INC. 36 rGA RD,ORGO N APPENDIX B: TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT Downtown Tigard Circulation Plan Project#: 10170.0 December 22, 2009 Page 5 ROADWAY CHARACTER SERA Architects provided a street character classification map for the future roadway network. The following roadway characteristics correspond to the character classifications provided by SERA: • Upper Hall Boulevard: Three-lane cross-section, with bike lanes for cyclists. Assumed planning-level capacity is 20,000 vehicles per day. • Downtown Mixed Use 1 — Downtown Collector with median: Two-lane cross-section with a median for turn lanes at intersections, and bike lanes. Assumed planning-level capacity is 15,000 vehicles per day. • Downtown Mixed Use 2 — Downtown Collector: Two-lane cross-section with bike lanes for cyclists. Assumed planning-level capacity is 8,000 vehicles per day. • Downtown Mixed Use 3 — Downtown Local: Two-lane cross-section with no bike lanes. Assumed planning-level capacity is 7,000 vehicles per day. • Downtown Mixed Use 4 — Upper Burnham: Two-lane cross-section with no bike lanes similar to the Downtown Mixed Use 3, but wider sidewalks are provided. Assumed planning-level capacity is 7,000 vehicles per day. • Downtown Mixed Use 5 — Lower Burnham: Two-lane cross-section with a continuous left-turn lane and no bike lanes. Assumed planning-level capacity is 12,000 vehicles per day. • Urban Green Street 1: Two-lane cross-section similar to the Downtown Mixed Use 2, but with permeable pavers for parking. No bike lanes are provided. Assumed planning-level capacity is 7,000 vehicles per day. • Urban Green Street 2: Narrow two-lane cross-section with permeable pavers for parking. Assumed planning-level capacity is 2,000 vehicles per day. • Urban Residential: Narrow two-lane cross-section. Assumed planning-level capacity is 2,000 vehicles per day. • Alley: Narrow roadway, usually with several access points. Alleys are assumed to provide local access only and have no specific planning-level capacity. In addition, bike lanes are recommended if traffic volumes exceed 3,000 vehicles per day on roadways, particularly those with bicycle and multi use pathway connections. Based on the characteristics described above, the volumes shown in Figure 1 were compared to the thresholds for each of the character classifications shown in the proposed downtown street network provided by SERA. The projected volumes and roadway cross-sections were found to match the characteristic of the proposed street network. DOWNTOWN CIRCULATION PLAN-APPENDIX-3 AUGUST 2010 37 Downtown Tigard Circulation Plan Project#: 10170.0 December 22, 2009 Page 6 HALL BOULEVARD/GARDEN PLACE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS The traffic operations at the Hall Boulevard/Garden Place intersection were estimated under year 2050 p.m. peak hour traffic conditions. Turning movements at the intersection were based upon the link volumes shown in Figure 1. The graphic on the next page illustrates the turning volumes and lane configurations assumed at the intersection. 44 to 100 1,050 50 50 50 Hall Boulevard/ 150 Garden Place 200 250 100 200 950 150 The intersection was evaluated using critical movement analysis (CMA), a standard procedure for estimating planning-level intersection operations. The lane configurations shown above result in intersection operations that are estimated to exceed the available capacity by roughly 15 percent in the year 2050. It was found that the primary capacity constraint is the through volumes on Hall Boulevard, and additional lanes on Garden Place, such as exclusive turn lanes, result in only a slight improvement to intersection operations. Additional north and southbound lanes on Hall Boulevard bring the intersection significantly under capacity. However, while the forecasted traffic volumes at the intersection are expected to slightly exceed the available capacity with the lane configurations shown above, it results in the future congestion expected in a downtown setting. CONCLUSION Based on the findings described above, each of the character classifications shown in the proposed downtown street network provided by SERA match closely to the anticipated traffic volumes in downtown Tigard. While the traffic operations at the Hall Boulevard/Garden Place intersection were estimated to exceed the available planning-level capacity in the future year, no additional changes are recommended to the roadway character classification of either roadway. Therefore it is likely that there will be peak period congestion and/or queuing in the vicinity of this intersection. The likelihood is that the congestion will be limited to peak commuting or shopping periods, and that off peak the intersection would operate with limited congestion. We trust this memorandum summarizes the analysis and results for the future traffic circulation in Downtown Tigard. Please don't hesitate to contact us at (503) 228-5230 if you have any questions. 38 TIGARD,OREGON EXHIBIT F: Citizen Comments F.1. Gary and Judy Craghead F.2. Fraternal Order of Eagles F.3 J. Ronald and Cecilia Thompson F.4. Abbas Nikzad F.5. Luella Paddack (e-mail) johann ' s Upholstery Custom Sewing Commercial Sewing Gary A Craghead, Principal Consultant I gary@johannsoline.com 1 503 620 1699 12205 SW Hall Blvd,Tigard OR 97223-6210 I www.johannsonline.com September 25, 2012 TO: Sean Farrelly City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223 RE: Comments for the record regarding the Downtown Connectivity Pian Mr. Farrelly: The following comprise of our official comments on the proposed Downtown Connectivity Plan. As you know, we own property and conduct business at 12205 SW Hall Blvd., within the urban renewal district and in the area this plan addresses. We brought our business to downtown 36 years ago from Multnomah, and we view our commitment to Tigard as a long-term one. We are very supportive of any efforts that will make downtown a place that is easier to do business, prosper, and thrive. Overall, we are pleased with the general direction and the way that this plan has developed. Earlier in the process, we had significant concerns that the plan was being designed for an ideal world where downtown was a blank slate. This was troubling. However, in the last year or so, the city has shown a clear effort to work with ourselves, our neighbors, and other property and business owners downtown to refine this plan. We are impressed at the city's efforts to maximize the new street grid while also keeping impacts to property use and redevelopment at a minimum. That's not just good for us it's good for everyone in the city. A few specific changes now in the plan strike us as good. For one, roads intersecting the Rite Aid/Value Village shopping center, adjacent to us, in the new map are placed in parking lot areas where they could more easily be built, and hopefully spur improvements to the existing structures and possibly create new ones in the existing, underutilized parking lots. We also believe that the creation of this new street from Hall to Scoffins, and then through the Post Office property to Commercial, will be a significant improvement to local circulation. We also applaud the continued inclusion of a new road from an intersection with Scoffins and Ash, along the back of the Hall Boulevard properties, and then to the aforementioned new road. We are keenly aware of the heavy traffic on Hall Boulevard. Although the recent intersection improvements at Hall Boulevard and OR 99-W have improved things somewhat, we think it likely that, at some point in the not to distant future, driveways along Hall will become impractical. A coordinated effort to relocate access for properties along Hall to a combination of Scoffins and this new road would be of great benefit. While this plan does not mean that this will be happening right away, it does lay the groundwork for this future improvement. In summary, we believe that the plan reflects a sensible approach that combines the needs of the community with the practical realities of the needs of both existing business and redevelopment. We applaud the city for pursuing common sense solutions; it is exactly these sorts of win-win scenarios that will make our downtown more successful in the years to come. We strongly recommend that the Planning Commission and the City Council support and adopt the amendments necessary to make this plan an official part of the city's future. Best Regards ),(A).P. ,t4 (c.5XaeL, Gary A. Craghead Judy . Craghead Owner Owner Johann's Johann's Fraternal Order of Eagles PORTLAND AERIE No. 4 8845 SW Commercial St Mailing address P.O. Box 230576 Tigard, OR 97281 503-639-4480 aerie4@gmail.com September 19,2012 Mr. Sean Farrelly Redevelopment Project Manager City of Tigard Community Development 12125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard,OR 97225 Dear Mr. Farrelly, On behalf of the Fraternal Order of Eagles Portland Aerie No. 4(the "'Eagles")located at 8845 SW Commercial Street,Tigard,OR, we are in receipt of your September 10,2012"Request for Comments"on the subject of The City of Tigard's (the "City") Comprehensive Plan Amendment(CPA)2012-00001 and Development Code(DCA) 2012-00002. In 2001 the Eagles relocated from Portland to Tigard's downtown after a four(4)year search for zoned property with ample off street parking and nearby public transportation to sustain its approximate 400 members. Our current location does not burden street alignments, disrupt other merchants or residences and helps anchor the community with our philanthropy. Any disruption in its use shall have catastrophic financial consequence to the Eagles. In review of the aforementioned plan amendment the connectivity improvements suggest a minimum of 13 parking stalls abutting Ash Street and Commercial Street could be lost to street improvements, This is not acceptable. Our membership consists of retired taxpayers many of which are on fixed incomes. Taking any portion of the property will reduce membership and effectively bankrupt the Eagles Aerie#4. Perhaps this sounds extreme but our annual budget, unlike the City, is funded without ODOT, State and/or Local taxpayer monies, does not receive government subsidy,and can not sustain deficit spending. Clearly we have interest in more details on the above subject plan specifically how the City of Tigard or Oregon Department of Transportation plan to create street improvements along Ash Street and Commercial Street without an impact to the Eagles. The Fraternal Order of Eagles is a membership driven, 501-C8 organization in compliance with City Commercial Zoning District Code 18.520.1 wherein Civic(Institutional) Religious, Social, Fraternal Clubs/Lodges are permitted uses. Should you have any questions or comments please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Dean Johnston Aerie No.4 Secretary We are the owners/operators of Manchester Square Apartments. Manchester Square Apartments have frontage along both Scoffins Street and Hall Boulevard. We have objections to the enclosed application, especially with the hash lines across the block contained Manchester Square Apartments, which are labeled "Block subject to bike/ped connectivity requirements." We request that Manchester Square Apartments be exempted from The Downtown Tigard Conceptual Connectivity Plan, Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan and Tigard Downtown Future Vision, especially as pertains to the "Block subject to bike/ped connectivity requirements." We are small business owners with six employees and own (or rather owe to the bank)the above mentioned apartments as well as two other apartment complexes in Beaverton. The various, and increasingly demanding, rules and regulations make it very difficult for us to continue our business. We are getting hit with demands at all levels of government from city, to county,to state, and to federal. All of these rules and regulations take their toll on our ability to manage and provide affordable, quality housing that is desired by our tenants. Specifically,our tenants do not want non-tenants walking or riding through our complex. We have had tenants tell us that they value security and privacy, and they like the way Manchester Square is arranged. These apartments are their homes. They wish to feel secure and only want their neighbors (the other tenants)to feel free to amble through the complex. They do not want their homes to be considered to be an urban village. One of our resident managers goes to great lengths to make certain that people who do not live at the complex(or are not guests of the residents), do not linger or pose any type of threat to our tenants' homes. As it is, our tenants and their guests are able to access the apartment complex by way of Scoffins Street or Hall Boulevard. They have expressed that they have easy access to the Library, City Hall, shopping, and dining. We know that the attached information says that Connectivity Improvements will likely only get built when there is a new development or major redevelopment (e.g., redevelopment valued at more than 60 percent of the total current value). However, it has been our experience that once a plan gets locked in and approved, then the so called "will likely only get built" becomes dictatorial. Which means,that based on our prior experience we do not trust future bureaucrats to honor "likely only". Furthermore, we have unfortunately experienced fires at our complexes. We have no confidence that if the cost of rebuilding damaged apartments exceeds 60%of the value, then we will not have to put bike/ped lanes through our complex. Previously, in the rare instances where we have had to rebuild damaged apartments, in spite of having fire insurance, the mere costs of upgrading to the current building code has cost us tens of thousands of dollars. This is an example of where good and well intentioned government action (i.e. upgrading the building code, which is done regularly), has made it expensive (and burdensome)when operating a business with property that is decades old. We do not want, nor do we wish, to be part of more burdensome plans. Additionally, we see the city making a proposition that it is desirable to create a "walkable urban village" as envisioned by the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan. This is an example of a solution in search of a problem. There is no evidence that Downtown Tigard would be better off by becoming a walkable urban village. It is merely some conjecture that somehow all of the money spent to become a walkable urban village is worth it. We do not want our property to become part of a walkable urban village, nor will we "sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District to help pay for the identified street or alley improvement". Sincerely, geau2,0 (-/--zerh, -2, J. Ronald Thompson Cecilia I. Thompson / � f iii ■ 14 s pow TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DA LE: September 10,2012 FROM: City of Tigard Community Development STAFF CONTACT: Sean Farrelly,Redevelopment Project Manager Phone: (503) 718-2420 Fax: (503) 718-2748 Email: sean@tigard-or.gov Downtown Tigard Connectivity Plan Code Amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2012-00001, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2012-00002 REQUEST: To amend the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan to add background and figures and to amend the Tigard Development Code (Title 18) Chapters 18.370, 18.610 and 18.810. The complete text of the currently proposed amendments can be viewed on the city's website at http://www.tigard-or.goviconnectivity. LOCATION:The boundaries of the Mixed Use- Central Business District zone ZONE: MU-CBD (Mixed Use Central Business District) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Citizen Involvement; 2, Land Use Planning; 9, Economic Development; 11, Public Facilities and Services; 12, Transportation; 13, Energy Conservation; and 15, Special Planning Areas: Downtown; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 11, 12, and 13; METRO's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Title 6; METRO's Regional Transportation Functional Plan Titles 1, 2, and 5. Attached are the Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: September 28. 2012. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon as possible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Community Development, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, OR 97223. PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING ITEMS THAT APPLY: We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. _ Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: Name&Number of Person Commenting:0.—teit5 1\.\\v:._7(1c9,..._ t,._„A,_544_ifDei 4. Sean Farrelly Subject: FW: Connectivity Plan From: Sean Farrelly Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 4:33 PM To: 'Luella Paddack' Subject: RE: Connectivity Plan Luella- If by project, you mean "when will the streets be built?" They will be built mostly when a property owner chooses to redevelop their property. The city could put improving Ash Avenue into its Capital Improvement Plan, but there are no current plans to do that. Thanks, Sean From: Luella Paddack[mailto:lueluepad@frontier.comj Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 4:27 PM To: Sean Farrelly Subject: Re: Connectivity Plan Sean, thanks for your quick reply. The only remaining question I have at this time is what is the implementation timeline to begin this project? Thanks. Luella Paddack On 9/12/12 2:52 PM, "Sean Farrelly" <SeanGtigard-or.gov> wrote: Hi Luella, It was good meeting with you in March. A Collector is a designation for a road that has a low-to-moderate-capacity and serves to move traffic from local streets to arterial roads. The proposed width for this type of road in bowntown Tigard is 65- 70 feet of right of way . Technically Ash Avenue has been designated a Collector quite some time in the city's Transportation System Plan. The code amendments we are proposing will adopt the location of new roads and the development code language. 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 percent of total current value) on an affected property. So the implementation goal hasn't changed. i The code amendments will be discussed at a City Council workshop next Tuesday , Sept. 18 at 6:30 pm. The Planning Commission public hearing will be October 15, at 7:00 at Tigard City Hall. Public comment can be made at this hearing. The City Council have a public hearing to adopt the amendments on December 11. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, Sean From: Luella Paddock [mailto:lueluepad@frontier.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 12:54 PM To: Sean Farrelly Subject: Connectivity Plan Sean, I am the owner of a 4-plex on Ash Avenue - 12455,65,75,85 Ash Ave. I attended the March 15th meeting but was unable to attend the July meeting. With regard to your Request for Comments, I would like to know what the term Collector means. Ash Avenue is designated a Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector). It was discussed in the March meeting that you were looking at 2018 as a goal for adopting the plan. Has the implementation goal timeline changed? Are there any future meetings that I might attend to keep knowledgeable about what is happening and how it might affect my property? Thanks for your help in this regard, Luella Paddack DISCLAIMER: E-mails sent or received by City of Tigard employees are subject to public record laws. If requested, e-mail may be disclosed to another party unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. E-mails are retained by the City of Tigard in compliance with the Oregon Administrative Rules "City General Records Retention Schedule." 2 EXHIBIT G: Agency Comments GA. ODOT (e-mail) G.2. Tualatin Valley Fire &Rescue G.3. Portland&Western Railroad G.4. TriMet (e-mail) Sean Farrelly From: DANIELSON Marah B <Marah.B.DANIELSON@odot.state.orws> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:03 PM To: Sean Farrelly Cc: RAHMAN Lidwien;JOHNSON Andrew * Andy Subject: Tigard Downtown Circulation and Connectivity Plan Hi Sean, I have a few comments regarding the Downtown Circulation Plan TSP Amendments and Code Amendments, 1. The TSP and amendments show that a corridor plan is needed for Hall Blvd to determine the final cross section, While ODOT supports the need for the corridor plan, due to limited resources there is unlikely to be State funding available for the corridor plan. We recommend that if this is a city priority that the city identify a funding source for this planning effort. 2. The Tigard HCT Land Use Plan developed a Downtown Concept Plan. The TSP amendments should reflect the recommendations from the HCT plan and explain how the two efforts are related. Particularly how this should include showing the connections between the old downtown and the expanded downtown that is included in the HCT plan i.e. Tigard Triangle. 3. The TSP amendments focus on downtown street character types and planned street connections. We recommend that the City show connectivity planned for all modes for example including the trail alignments that are planned these should be included on the Connectivity Projects Detail Sheets and it is recommended to have a map showing all the planned connections for all modes on a single map this will help to understand all the connectivity that is planned for. 4. As discussed on the phone earlier this week, we recommend that Figure 5-14 Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet Map 3 include a note explaining that the realignment of Tigard St to connect to Burnham St would be a city responsibility in coordination with a future OR 99W viaduct replacement project that requires ODOT approval. Although I haven't had an opportunity to check with the ODOT Bridge Section, it is unlikely that ODOT would be replacing the viaduct any time in the plan horizon unless there are structural issues that develop. From our conversation it sounded like you will be working on a new detail sheet for this project, please forward that to me for ODOT review and comment. Also, does the city plan to keep the planned trail alignment along Tigard St? Showing the trails on these detail sheets will help understanding the connectivity projects. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Marah Danielson Senior Planner ODOT Region 1 Planning (503)731-8258 fax (503)731-8259 i S www.tvfr.com Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Date; September 26, 2012 To: City of Tigard Re: Request for comments dated September 10, 2012, for the Downtown Tigard Connectivity Plan Code Amendments After reviewing the materials provided to us by the City of Tigard, TVF&R acknowledges the city's efforts to engage property owners in the above-named process and have no objections to the proposal. We recognize the importance of connectivity in the Downtown Tigard area and request that the City continue to partner with TVF&R when the proposed projects move to the design phase. If you have any questions or concerns regarding TVF&R traffic and transportation planning, please contact DFM Karen Mohling at (503)259-1512. Thank you, 41 f (enne , Division Chief Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue Central Integrated Operations Division (503) 649-8577 North Operating Center Command&Business Operations Center South Operating Center Training Center 20665 SW Blanton Street and Central Operating Center 7401 SW Washo Court 12400 SW Tonquin Road Aloha,Oregon 97007-1042 11945 SW 70th Avenue Tualatin,Oregon Sherwood,Oregon 503-649-8577 Tigard,Oregon 97223-9196 97062-8350 97140-9734 503-649-8577 503-649-8577 503-259-1600 09/27/2012 10:51 FAX 503365" 7 PW SALEM l 001 • 6, NJ,/ TIGARD REQUEST FOR COMMENTS DATE: September 10, 2012 FROM: City of Tigard Community Development STAFF CONTACT: Sean Farrelly.Redevelopment Protect Manager Phone: (503) 718-2420 Fax: (503) 718-2748 Email: sean@tigard-or.gov Downtown Tigard Connectivity Plan Code Amendments COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA) 2012-00001, DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (DCA) 2012-00002 REQUEST: To amend the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan to add background and figures and to amend the Tigard Development Code (Title 18) Chapters 18.370, 18.610 and 18.810- The complete text of the currently proposed amendments can be viewed on the city's website at http://www.tigard-or.gov/connectivity. LOCATION:The boundaries of the Mixed Use-Central Business District zone ZONE: MU-CBD (Mixed Use Central Business District) APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: Community Development Code• Chapters 18.380 and 18.390; Comprehensive Plan Goals 1, Citizen Involvement; 2, Land Use Planning; 9, Economic Development; 11, Public Facilities and Services; 12, Transportation; 13, Energy Conservation; and 15, Special Planning Areas: Downtown; Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 9, 11, 12, and 13; METRO's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan Tide 6; METRO's Regional Transportation Functional Plan Titles 1, 2, and 5. Attached are the Applicant's Materials for your review. From information supplied by various departments and agencies and from other information available to our staff, a report and recommendation will be prepared and a decision will be rendered on the proposal in the near future. If you wish to comment on this application, WE NEED YOUR COMMENTS BACK BY: September 28, 2012. You may use the space provided below or attach a separate letter to return your comments. If you are unable to respond by the above date, please phone the staff contact noted above with your comments and confirm your comments in writing as soon asossible. If you have any questions, contact the Tigard Community Development, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard,Tigard, OR 97223 . _ We have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to it. Please contact of our office. Please refer to the enclosed letter or email. Written comments provided below: Ad, [k cadizei ic /A. /.! 4f .1 . . _' 1 / .' /!I �., 4. . ..• 0#.f.. . . - - -I1 . __..r i. _ AL . �. . ., a. . �•, ,it s'-{--ec t'aD Name&Num er of Person Commenting. • Sean Farrelly From: Lehto, Alan <LehtoA@trimet.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 12:48 PM To: Sean Farrelly Cc: Batty, Sean; Recker, Joseph D; Betteridge, Kelly (CRC); Mills, Tom; Kautz, Steve Subject: Downtown Tigard Connectivity Plan Code Amendments Comments Attachments: 20120911230112778.pdf Sean, Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Comp Plan and Development Code Amendments regarding downtown connectivity and street character types. TriMet supports the proposed changes because we believe these will substantially enhance access to and from existing transit and facilitate development that can support the City's desire for future transit improvements. Better walking and biking access to and from transit stops and stations allows more people to access transit; more demand makes improvements to transit more cost-effective, forming the potential for a virtuous cycle. Thank you, Alan Alan Lehto Director of Planning&Policy TriMet 4012 SE 17th Ave Portland,OR 97202 503-962-2136 FAX: 503-962-6451 1 CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done TIGARD Downtown Connectivity Plan Code Amendments CPA 2012-00001 DCA2O12-00002 Planning Commission Public Hearing I October 15, 2012 A _ 6= _ Wit.: r Tali'-}. 9 4 1 . - 0 _,.._,_. Existing 3 Conditions ., ... .„ ,_. ,,_____,.„... ,.... a f , ar Area: ,- Tigard Downtown Urban • / Renewal District (193 acres) r \r''''''''"r Existing conditions : '''' ...,.../ '. \ $.F Limited connections and connectivity N 47awn1ovwn Study Are _..`.. m.,.. idread fmr..r in.m.r.rwrm❑miy,m ria-.Pimp& e ta:1 a Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan }f� , Foundation 1764 441/4 4.111.48k c ) I Documents f '_ir , y'JY RC1 '�y . 1poir-:-\N / '1::'' ',k 'NI.. Tigard Downtown 4,...e.:eseited' - ..,:i>411,', ,., N.\ "' refinement refinerne '`r at the KW 4 d -4" ... 21 I. - h �'}arr � 1 .F. . .,„ .4.: r. - /". )1 I + S , li 411111111- ra �«.t- * �. '5[ IYe'?n'4 13VDri4.:dAGfAA I..111,111 .11%S. 1 �w YIIAYI IAIi YP _ �., - +�r d VVIIF Yal6rlrtl01811.111.10 " " •:wieFiE�q� - ` /Hopp 11 w+,IR' 3 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. Implementation of the Plan • Proposed code requirements to implement 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 • Two elements — new connections and new cross-sections Proposed Amendments: CPA 2012-00001 DCA2012-00002 — 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 Y 1� . {ham " F I r. 4 G lipPri -riII_AL. ,fir • lip ReF f fyI' d TSP Amendments: , - rt A .. Proposed New Streets ,r.—'' .4(C/ ,.''' — "Al*,a . F .t a y .. gu'i • ' 1006 f 3 yi. f {y i l- � Detailed maps showing :litie ,1� Y Ail the future streets are ' t �,, .' a, 1"1J ' proposed to be added to °� L , :5 - the TSP so that it is clear '+ - rry where future streets are • a. expected to go and how �' . 4 much right-of-way •is s needed ..M�/: ply; + a a . • 4 .r,d,r .n LlowrrkaiT�Hew:tho I Ii:r�rMrl ` L 111M1 Rai.,IMII.0 G"54"4"0 741 ---Alley 1200 - "I; i ', a Y' AwcR.R!30.k.1.1111-P�Iapufa!hYY4Ii ,. -Em i Sla s I'1 C> 7311,0!polish . I IM kwxA 7.. In tot inetcrl IL-mm.0.e*v 1+.+i1.. In • i 1'' j 7 Figure 5-14A. Connectivity Projects Index Map TSP Amendments Maps Ind@xL. v) C;*.(C,sri Existing Streets Railroads TTxlots .,..F._,,,,,_,./2-< Cs o a 4., + f( � ... 7 , T eJ `.,v ..e.` ,_.\\Ai \ / • N. v. 7 toi. 8 - � �, o g ye. 4 -73 ...„\\\1.\\ +cid 0 250 500 1,000 Feet I . t I r— { I I i - I 8 Figure 5.14 ., Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 1 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Dbw.a'ntowri Mixed Use 'I (Celle tori r Required bikelpedestnarl connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential 1,52.-56r) Taxlots - - Alley(20') ^Fdrh of Me s=uture wanrlectr.ay Al,grmerr Area 125 equal'to Me opperend al to r9h1-of w,ay -... -_'or the srreer charactertype, i I1I 'IA -.. - i,•' a'„,pli - - I._. ] I N N.,' A , t I. I d /IP) -' I ., tfr I i % ,tis IIIIII '111e5"14 1.—II.1 Si” �t'�� ail .ri J v. .,> , �' ,. I Figure 5-14C. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 2 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) ...:71 Required bikai'hedestriart orinnections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxi ots -- Alley(20,) Me vigdrh el the future Cum lecLivriy Afq.,virnent 4u rs.00.111 iLP the uppe#etki Er!'hhEl.toiga-o?-ivay r.ifhiP Weal fair the.5freer charm:0w owe. ....- . ,/, . , / / •' \/.'''- i \ ' ' , 74 1 :.F' .2/ •• ' .... .,.. - '•: , z 16 , • •:I'. \. ) * ... ..." - 4* • "' "„ '''''4- er / ' . 4. ,..: , ,/ ,, t ..A„ .." . ' '• ii - . ,; •/1" n / '. .1/4. ih ..,." - ' 0 .... 7:1 • 01.. _ .. # - od 4t. / . "" "f I, - 0.- \ ., , 1 44 -' .t. . ## ,4._ " 's,o". lc .1. 0" ' ".., ,...„...../ id / . . 0 \ e,0 0 . ' .Y.' , * 'i• % ,,Y N. ik. •., ., . \ • „ir -... ii.„4 ..../ / 4,•,. .0 11/1111/4 i.0101 11 1641P 7 ._ /X( / . , ; ill. ‘ ..e. • \ 1\44 1 ;gb ' \ ar \‘ — ' ' , ,.. ..,.. , ..„4, , . \\,.. \ '' '- '—' ..6“ .,., 1 ......E. / , .. ... , , IA \ . \ . ,0i ?, . :7 ;- .. „... .,.... \ - \ ; / \ \ r.„INt;$ io Figure 5-140, Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 3 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) EA Required b ke pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Loc*Ij Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots -- Alley(20') Nate: the wrddti c&#tfre F&kure Connectively Ajru errtArea A3 equal to the u,oper end of the win-of-way ra WO?-fr.Sftx1 TrY thW;-,trf-r re..' 3r,'3{.7f/ry}t. c 4 ,'x. p tea xr e A , �' fir- ' , ,. „ �._ Figur ! =:,-14E. Conne-ctivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 4 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectiivrty Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) t:;;.:1 Required kiikelpedestnan connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urban Restdentia1 (52'-56') Taxlipts —— Alley (20') Note. The 'with of the Fittete L'UtifietiVgyAkyvgroerrl Area rs eqtrat to the tappet end of the tight-ol-way mtrgo tostod tot tho stroot charactot typo 'OE 1- _ /: •••,.. \ .".,... \ - 'V-„OP lit'... • 40, • / 'I .V..... 1 ' 0 1 .de *.%.. / .4 -r" IL 7 1 Iltl Nill 'lb A ik 4 /1. /..\- . . • / 1 '. , % / 1/4.11 - 169vlik ./ /I ' •-,,,,-' '''.,/ '..,. , " t t, il ' li r .,, ..% c ,.,..- \ . ..- Jx...::-,. ..,,...;.- , - .,,,,,...,.... ...,..... . ,... ... ., „........... „.......... ,.... . .... . i .„..- ., 'NI - ,.-- '. ,.,,.IF- ,:,-*, '. ' ..... .....‘". -•-•• -..,,i," .-- '':-, , , _ , lip.II. 411.- \ T" .,p/\\ \,..../ t.:.4' 1 ,..., . ..''' ... / / ---• 1 - \ ••‘:.: ..r ./.>"-.T.,__ 1 ,• _ .7.': ;;i: " , • .... \ \ / \ 111110111_ . . .. , ; "ik, . • . •. \ . \ 4 ,/ ' - "04,• \ V- ,:', ,•411,` \ ' • \ ‹..' r4A \ \ ,,\ \ \ ,0 / ...N. -.4/ •\,,,,/ .,.../ 4:114 . ./6 1\,..\:\ or ) ,../ •• 4, ., ...c .. illitir 12 Fkgure 5-14F, Connectivity Projects Dotail Sheet: Map s TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) M Required bikeipedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urtoan Residential (52'-56') Taxlots -- Alley(,2V) icf'e: The loathe at the Future Cormeeragyelfirprnent Aral os equal to the upper d et the r H c-W,r!r r-ange listed ler the sIreet character type_ f::4, I u 144 r II � _. , • \ \ \,,. x \ - 1,- ,.. .4, ' d k .. `4 i. )14 4, r POO,,.44 4 `,-„,,,, .. s, , . .„.:.„, ‘s.4.4; / \ \ ri fi : ' Figure 5-14G. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 6 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Canneclivrty Alignment Area Downtown Mixed U%e 1 (Collector) r5:7:1 Required bike pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Locar} Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots -- Alley 420) Nate rho wcidr of the FrArrp Connectivity Altitirrhohr Area is aqua!'r rhe aper one/of rho right.0r.w,w range krsled lot the street character type_ ' - '" .gyp rt• , e, 4"<" '.... ' ' 4 . . 41111F/ 11 i a i. /'i. 1 / „ , , \ r' r i / / .. ,. , // �� _ ,,, r", s1.; - • �' , 4 ir ear - - 4 4 .. </ lir dlo . ' ., . '' ,,,.'1° / .I, , 2` P 4. 14 Figure 5-14H. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 7 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 iColkector) L.::1 Required bike;pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2{Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52%56"), Taxlots -- Alley (2D') moo. MP with 41 Op Fiduro Cannecimlynignminf Aro is ow...?ro Ow wiper 47,rui of aro fOrt.ilf-way range fisted for the streer character rype. / i„ / ilIK\- . / . le '\ \ a \ \ .../ \ \ . \ . , . . '... . . 41 4 ... . .40 , ilt , . . d vo411.° ' • .1- 40 .a. 1101 , it. It — , \' . . . . ; t eft, , ,r- , . . / 44111 ..., , ..,, '. . . 4 , .. , a:L 1' .rft .:- W 1 7 / -. fii. / .6. • ,i--,- : Ilit4:611111L , . . .• It 11 II t 1 fo adlikilk _IV drilla.'11 ill lij -...-......km-....- .-,-... ' IN , I " I . . . .4.' .4.. 15 Figure 5-141. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 8 TSP Amendments Streez ;W`aracterType Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 {Collector-1 Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown?1rxed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urban Re dentia) (5T-5V) TaxRots -- Alley 120') Nolte The wrr}rfi lit the Ftrnxrr C xvac'crnrryAtMpnrrI: r/L+i!i 04,1al}res The ripper end at the light-ei-way tango Xrsrerrf kor Ole.tr xrr dlparacter Mier. , r \ Ill ! ' till— . ,� i t I � 1 .t ` - [ _ - / ill.' �. rte r. 'h. } Figure 5.2a .r. Downtown Street Character -. Proposed StreetT " y .4 Character Typesal_ s. A <i ,�� f d # lit .. . _.7,k .,.,. :. z ,., ..,. ., „:77... ' _ # r I e sur a y 4. { 4,:, \ 1. { 1 d 4 L 4 i %s N. F Downtown Street Character Types' -Upper Hall Bouleward" • -Main Street,Green Street Downtown Mixed Use 1 ; ]Ilectar) Downtown Mixed Use 2(Ntighborhror ) . , Downtown Meed Use 3 t tipper&Arnhem t Downtown!Awed Use 4tLower Burnhali7;. Urban F1ertlenkiat -Ailey. Busmiess iJ 250 COO 1.000 Feel: I I r I l I I I l 'Ce&ed ties indoor,'p rrppsvd strmvrs Other Streets " .41 ea ure+ere RI c umr'Gy an COOT ism lir. i t'a parr.Iia Memo mar eupeused!time Wsrrienit Zig it,-41 - Railroads a+t.sr+GOD treuiiv1 N Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) • Special street character 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 Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18.810 : New Cross-Sections Current Future • Scoffins Street is a Collector • Scoffins Street is with Downtown Mixed Use 1 Character Type .14, . ,,,.,.._\c.); „,dok # 0, s C%3:''' 1 1— Ci k5' _ ' _ 4 it } Fp7urr AMU/ 4D Culionat invli Ci `,.',NI• 7r 'el in 1 i — 5L '10WIN - 1 - Lim i d imimpl ,c _ sial m P.M'=3 4t 111111111111.111111 19 18.810 Street Character _ A .r µ i y I I 11 6 1 5 15 1 ROW Hall Boulevard - Downto -n — I_Tpper SW Hall Blvd. is currently an ODOT facility. The 2035 Tigard Transportation System Plan recommends that a corridor plan be completed for the SW Hall Blvd. Corridor The street character standards for Upper Hall Boulevard shall not be considered final until the corridor plan is complete. 18.810 Street Character _ . 11 ___ _. t , a „ ', : / ., . .. a I a, �k ). a - - fi aNQ i '16 Ag :mow; ..i „ii,. _ s.1 . _ _ . _ w 0- \\-% t, mr- 16i-12' 8 5 I0' 10 S 8 10 -12 Downtown Mixed Use 1 — Downtown Collector 21 18.810 Street Character ,_ ,, i ___ _ _.. ,,. . r ,i, rf t F rS "' +. 11 y.F .# s ,. .,, . /..s. , ii in ...4 i a - . *ifist. ' i I MN P- .- — criZ r',,,, ,, '''' a 4 1 if \\\V. ihi tiltI. 1. i mixed use reskertit#al 1t?'-12" 8 11'' 11" KY-I2' mixed use residential 58'-62'RUNid Downtown Mixed Use 2 - Downtown Neighborhood 18.810 Street Character , , • , .. , .,• I 6 , , v. _ . _.„.. . ._,......1 12-18 8 11 11 8 12-18' 82.1.1 80W Downtown Mixed Use 3 - Upper Burnham im r »,, m Ili. IF- - tii, . -....,......:'wlec I.....i I. Til .. . 1x-12' 8" 1 1U 1 13' 19 1 8 10-12' Downtown n ''fixed Use 4 — Lower Burnham 18.810 Street Character fi tiia i1lag.4 rE'AE0111 1d'-12' T 16 / Id'-12reskiarnai Si-SEi'AON Downtown - Urban Residential PERNE E vaaeri 20"ROW Downtown - Alley Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18.610 (Tigard Downtown District Development & Design Standards) • New Section 18. 610.025 (Connectivity) • References TSP connectivity maps • Establishes three sets of standards : — New Development and Major Redevelopment — All other projects — Pedestrian Pathways Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 610 New Development and Major Redevelopment — Major Redevelopment = valued at more than 60% of its total current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor • Dedicate the required right-of-way (or dedicate a public easement if approved by City Engineer) • Construct the required improvements • Changes to landscaping requirement in Table 18.610. 1 to allow applicant to count landscaping that was part of a required street improvement Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 610 All Other Projects — Redevelopment = project valued at 60% or less than its total current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor • Preserve the potential for a future connectivity improvement — No new buildings within future alignment — Surface parking, landscaping, temporary structures, driveways and similar types of development are allowed • Sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District ( LID) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 610 Required New Pedestrian Pathway • For new development and major redevelopment within the area - / designated for required multi-use ( ' FI - pathway • Provide multi-use pathway on public -.' ' easements or right-of-ways which " ~ ` j i_ - 1 ensures connections through the block $,a w ' y, A. at least every 330 feet ,,iiiis,, \ ,/-\\ - \\- / • Pathways: -Ns— Direct connection �.•�' — ADA accessible \' • Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 370 Adjustments to Connectivity Standards • Type II procedure • Criteria: — Equally or better meet downtown design principles outlined in the TSP — Applying the standards would preclude all reasonable economic use of the site — Potential for a future connection is preserved — No adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands, bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees Rough Proportionality 18.810.020 General Provisions A. When standards apply. Unless otherwise provided, construction, reconstruction or repair of streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements shall occur in accordance with the standards of this title. No development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. Public Involvement • Project Website • 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 • 2nd Open House Citizen Comments • Five written comments : One supportive, two neutral, two opposed • Eight phone / in person contacts- asked questions about how it would effect them . One made a specific suggestion to delete a proposed connection . Agency Comments • TVF& R and TriMet supportive • ODOT comments response in staff report Council Workshop Feedback • Alley along the park and ride that connects to new street through Public Works (don't connect to Hall ) • For Tigard/Burnham connection, straighten out. Put into a different classification (desired connection if the viaduct is reconstructed ) . • Footnote to allow flexible design standards for the street near Fanno Creek park. Reduced ROW, pervious pavers. • Curve new street that goes through City Hall and Verizon . lir 4:(6, r., lrTa -, ,,,, \ / , k. kis . 14, .,„,. . ##0, 41.. , .4111' th\ /4P:.rit- r '. f►Fr + : " 'e" 44 t "+ e" ) • \ " ' • i jie _ \ " S ,i's. .'. ..., .(c.:.- .. ,..00 . - :, '.:4114141:40.' 0°.4:...4.4:11+4::7404i', !' :,,1 4 r ". r ,,,,,," \ e ... \ , t q - ,„, ' \ r <i" 4,1'41;444.\\ Pi.. +St a rte.,.,' ; i.. 11111 K 11. Yom, 4 rt / ,\ _ Y ,� •y� Y�. ./s " �� k\ \\*4Z:.:001 \Wyk yy ,:s. ,,,\,...L\ ,\:\ VAto. ir,..,zo,?" •-- ` ' * N: 1 , -, r „ f.At AL f "{� "it� s r i ‘4,,,, / * .-',- irr. • \ illto /41110, \ \'',/fr: , . \„yt , ,,, , � . ii, , 1/4 .. , \ \ I ... " r •w • i., , .dr Allik .le 1 der " '4,- 35 `J. 35 Figure 5-140, Connectivity Projects Devil Sheet: Map 3 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) EA Required bikepedestrian connections Downtown Mixes! Use 2(Loc*Ij Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Faxlots -- Alley(20') mow,:The width of the Future Connectively Attgotherg Area Is equal to the u,oper end of Fie 170rt-of-way tame-hofsdfat thst at:#rc. r."10H ry':k• - S +� • i. f } Conceptual connection to be coordinated if significant changes to viaduct are proposed. ,rte` y � p E r it .. r . Z. rL - - <0.- - - .,,,,,, , , .4\ . „,. . • , .< . ;.,. . , , \. . , \ .. - A,: ...._ #....... , .....„ . ,,,...,....- ,... , *,, . . ...„ .. . -„, . _,........ \ . .:„.7.41\ .:„:, \\I„\,:.. .„),.., lir K / o. /y ,, . A L.. - ,, . Le. \ N. .......-..> , ._ M4i'/L\''' , \i„.... . .14, ' 44\• 1 i,. +}A Allow flexible design standards ,j.. • . for the street ' near Fanno .4,71v ; # _ . . Creek park. ,. Reduced ROW, , „ ° pervious pavers. . 4 F' ,--.7 . -.)14. 4 , ‘ ',',' II it , n # H:r R • ' P- • w w.ape t Leh 0' L a . Figure 5-141. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 8 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) Required Dikeipedesttnarr connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urban Re$KEe ia.1 (5T-56") Taxlots Alley(20") Nate The nriIPi ng rhe Future L'unrae emsty Alignrmenr Area kg quid TO the upper end'a to rr9drt-of--my r3ragrrAstcw}far rhxa.Or€rlfr:trar.;ctwtyla. " \ \ II , ", , I y te 'it ' ' . ,e k. or :. .,,...00,10,„ , „. ,, \ .. .. ,t, ,, : _ , \ , , Lir , I r•' . .,.. _, , . i___.0 . , -,... c - it 1 r.k' '". \ ' 1:14 / .,:,(4,0, I , ''' N._ ' - . . ' 1 I . Alimil;. s i I. 3 I I t "1S 3r�I M + ii •'r ft l ;.tlit f.- ._ _ T� ;~ tri .- , 38 Findings : As found in the staff report, the proposed amendments meet the necessary approval criteria from the : • Tigard Development Code • Tigard Comprehensive Plan • Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan • Metro Regional Transportation Functional Plan • Oregon Administrative Rules • Statewide Planning Goals Staff Recommendation : Staff recommends Planning Commission recommend approval of the code amendments to Council CITY OF TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes October 15, 2012 CALL TO ORDER President Walsh called the meeting to order at 7:06 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 Schmidt Commissioner Shavey Absent: Commissioner Ryan; Alt. Commissioner Miller; Alt. Commissioner Armstrong Staff Present: Tom McGuire, Interim Community Development Director; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant; Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager; Marissa Daniels,Associate Planner; Gary Pagenstecher, Associate Planner COMMUNICATIONS This agenda item was moved by President Walsh to the end of the meeting. CONSIDER MINUTES June 4, 2012 Meeting Minutes: President Walsh asked if there were any additions, deletions, or corrections to the June 4 minutes; there being none,Walsh declared the minutes approved as submitted. WORKSHOP — RIVER TERRACE COMMUNITY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN Associate Planner Marissa Daniels gave an update on the public involvement plan for River Terrace. She covered the following three items and then opened it up for discussion: The Planning Commission's role as Tigard's state recognized Committee for Citizen Involvement. Details about the River Terrace Community Plan. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.docx Page 1 of 10 Described the contents of the public involvement plan. She advised the commissioners that Sr. Planner, Darren Wyss,would be back in November to give a comprehensive overview of the project. She noted that there would be Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) meetings and that a Planning Commission member would be invited to participate in that.The committee will act as an advisory body to staff and provide a venue for citizen involvement opportunities in planning for River Terrace. The first message was sent through the "listserv" the previous week. Daniels noted that one of the benefits of following from Washington County is that they passed to Tigard a list of over a 100 contacts for this project. She added that the commissioners were welcome to join that listsery online at the City website and noted that the first kick-off meeting for the project would be held Wednesday, October 24th near the general River Terrace area—at Deer Creek Elementary School. She invited the Commissioners to attend and left postcards at the podium for them to pick up if they wanted more information on that and wanted to attend. Questions from the Commissioners of Daniels What is the role of the River Terrace Community Plan as a whole? You'll review items of the plan as they come through the legislative adoption process. There's a schedule on the draft (Exhibit A). You can see there that different topics will come through at different times to the Commission before the final adoption of the plan. Staff will keep the Commission updated and engaged throughout so that they will be prepared for that process at those different points. Questions of Interim CD Director, Tom McGuire Referring to the current staff issues-where does this project fit in your priorities— with everything else you have going on with planning staff right now?This project is one of the Council's goals for this year and one of their top priorities. We have Darren Wyss as the project manager and he will be moving this forward. In addition, we hired a local land use consultant,John Spencer,who will primarily help to manage the long range projects and assist me. So this project will move forward. Darren will be here in November to update the Commission on the processes and where this is going. At this point, President Walsh took a quick poll of the audience and noted that a majority of the people present were there for the Connectivity Agenda item. He decided to change the agenda order and moved the public hearing on connectivity to the next order of business. President Walsh opened the public hearing: PUBLIC HEARING - CPA2012-00001/DCA2012-00002 TIGARD DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS REQUEST:To amend the City of Tigard 2035 Transportation System Plan to add background and figures and to amend the Tigard Development Code (Title 18) Chapters 18.370, 18.610 and 18.810 to implement new street connections. The complete text of the currently proposed amendments can be viewed on the city's website at http://www.tigard- or.gov/connectivity LOCATION: Downtown District. ZONE: MU-CBD. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.doco Page 2 of 10 STAFF REPORT Sean Farrelly, Redevelopment Project Manager introduced himself and also introduced Cathy Corliss who was there as a consultant with Angelo Planning Group and had worked on developing some of the code language for this amendment. Farrelly went over a PowerPoint presentation regarding the Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (Exhibit B). He turned the presentation regarding the proposed amendments to Chapter 18.610 over to Ms. Corliss. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that this request for a Comp Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendments meets the necessary approval criteria according to the findings found in Section IV of the staff report. Staff recommends approval of CPA2012-00001 and DCA2012-00002. PUBLIC COMMENT TESTIMONY IN FAVOR—Alexander Craghead — 12205 SW Hall Blvd Tigard 97223 Mr. Craghead is the chair of the City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) and present on behalf of the CCAC. He noted they had reviewed this quite thoroughly over several meetings (and stated that that was an understatement). He said tonight's amendments represent an accumulation of over five years of effort on behalf of the CCAC to carve the future transportation systems for downtown Tigard. The CCAC believes this plan achieves connectivity goals and that the right amount of flexibility is built into the plan. He had participated in the outreach of the property owners and heard the various concerns. He said he saw response from staff addressing those concerns while still achieving the goals. In closing, Craghead said the CCAC recommends the Planning Commission approve these amendments. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION Cecilia Thompson—1847 N. 150 E Centerville, UT She and her husband own a 67 unit apartment building in the area. They are concerned about the safety and security of the tenants if they have to have paths going through the area. They do not want to provide pedestrian and bike paths through the property. She said this is private property. If the plan goes through, she believes the property would be worth less. She said she's not heard any complaints from the tenants regarding connectivity and requests that her whole lot be exempt from this. She's against paying for someone else's pipe dream. Russ Little—PO Box 1006 Tualatin, OR 97062 He is one of the property owners in the Rite Aid center. His property currently houses 'Woodcraft." He said he bought the property because he'd decided to stay in Tigard and support the community. He's concerned that dividing his property into three pieces would decrease the value of his property. \LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.doco Page 3 of 10 David Wilson 12375 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard 97223 — Spoke in favor of the Scoffins collector. He said you should actually call it the Hunziker collector because it would be part of Hunziker. He believes it would reduce some of the cross traffic in front of Rite Aid and Woodcrafters. Owen Snyder 15400 SW Alderbrook Drive, Tigard Mr. Snyder stated he owns some properties in the Scoffins realignment in area map #4 where it shows the connector being made with Hunziker. He had the following clarification question: During that realignment,you're abandoning the previous intersection - what is the intended use of the existing street?Farrelly answered him. "No final decision has been made because we haven't "pulled the trigger" on that street - but a possible idea is that when that property is purchased from the owner of that apartment building—we'd essentially have to purchase the entire property and that abandoned ROW could be consolidated with the remaining property to present a parcel big enough to redevelop. So there's no other particular usage intended at this time? Nothing definite has been decided, but a good viable option would be to swap that ROW with that property owner to have a parcel that can be redeveloped. CLOSED PUBLIC TESTIMONY President Walsh then opened the meeting up for questions by the commissioners. One of the commissioners commented that,if it goes through, she would like to see that there will be some sort of help from the City for the owners of businesses to plan for redevelopment. She believes the owners have some legitimate concerns. Cathy Corliss said that all property owners would have to agree on whether the connections through the Rite- Aid block takes place. She thinks there's a way to designate those that are not quite the same as the way we would do in the viaduct. There were some questions regarding the near term redevelopment problems that could be created. The hope was that flexibility is built in of what could be done. Farrelly noted this is a discretionary process and that there is flexibility for line adjustments. There was a question of CCAC Chair Craghead as to whether he believes there is flexibility built into the plan. Craghead said what the CCAC is looking for is clarity because a lot of developers are not going to want to come in and develop if there's not a transportation plan in place —because they'd not know where those roads would be— and that's a problem—not a benefit. In this case, he can see the property owner's concern and he noted there appears to be no concern about having flexibility. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DELIBERATIONS President Walsh asked the commissioners their thoughts on this. Commissioner Doherty noted that this is not a connectivity plan that has just been thrown together. She mentioned that Chair Craghead had noted the five years of planning and discussions that had gone on. She is confident the City would work with the people who I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.docx Page 4 of 10 brought up concerns down the road if, indeed, it gets to the point that the connectivity would affect the apartment building or others. She said "I would support this because it has had a tremendous amount of input. But again... I would want the City to work with people who have issues." Commissioner Shavey believes this vision is a pretty strong picture of what can and may very well happen in downtown and thinks the Commission should make this recommendation to Council. Commissioner Muldoon recommends a change on the Rite-Aid block— simply list the end points and let that connectivity be determined as the redevelopment happens. Commissioner Anderson believes this is a good plan overall. There are no priorities listed on the streets and, if there were, he believes the two pieces that were talked about tonight would be low priority and probably among the last to be implemented. He believes that certainly the ones on Main Street and connecting some of the alleys are obvious and should be written in stone. He thinks putting end points would be good—let the developer work with the City to determine the street lines. Commissioner Rogers is generally happy with this but is a bit concerned about the Woodcraft building. He thinks it affects that particular owner on two sides of their building —it seems like we're picking on one particular landowner. Commissioner Schmidt would hate to burden any property owner with a condition like that that would affect their current value—much less what it would be 20 or 30 years down the road. Commissioner Fitzgerald appreciates the 5 years of work getting to this point. She thinks this could energize Tigard and put it on the path to having a really livable downtown community. She has two exceptions: she would like a piece of language to be readjusted a little differently. She would also like Tom McGuire to be a little more specific on how the code language could be addressed. That code language piece would help the Woodcraft property and Mrs. Thompson's (apartment) property pretty easily without affecting the overall draft. President Walsh likes the plan overall but has near term concerns. Are we creating a burden for the existing landowners? He hopes there is flexibility and thinks there is. He would like to see a softer line across the Rite Aid area and not having as defined a pathway as now and he also has concerns in that large block where the Thompson property is. President Walsh said he would reopen the hearing so he can hear from Tom McGuire and get some guidance on how to do that. PUBLIC HEARING REOPENED President Walsh asked Tom McGuire `7s it possible to amend the language and pass this tonight— move it forward?That's the wish of the group." McGuire said it's going to be a challenge to have the exact language as an amendment tonight. President Walsh suggested that they take a recess from this hearing so McGuire and Cathy Corliss can get together and talk about this while the next public hearing takes place. They would then bring it back to the Commissioners — at which time they would reopen the I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.docx Page 5 of 10 hearing. McGuire and the Commissioners agreed this was a good idea. President Walsh also decided that they would take a six minute break before the next public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED (to be reopened following the next public hearing.) SIX MINUTE RECESS PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROJECTIONS OPENED PUBLIC HEARING — DCA2012-00001 PROJECTIONS INTO REQUIRED YARDS REQUEST: Amend Chapter 18.730.050.D of the Community Development Code to allow, in the R-12 Zone, bay windows and pop outs with floor area to project into required side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c) the width of the approved side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. LOCATION: Citywide. ZONE: R-12. QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING STATEMENTS President Walsh read the required statements and procedural items from the quasi-judicial hearing guide. There were no challenges of the commissioners for bias or conflict of interest. Ex-parte contacts: None. Site visitations: None; No challenges of the jurisdiction of the commission; no conflicts of interest. STAFF REPORT Gary Pagenstecher,Associate Planner,presented the staff report. [The staff report is available one week before the hearing.] STAFF ANALYSIS: As demonstrated in the application and the findings in the staff report, the proposed amendment complies with the applicable state planning goals, City Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, and the city's implementing ordinances. The code amendment anticipates narrow lot subdivisions in the R-12 zone while maintaining the detached character of the majority of Tigard's neighborhoods. According to the 2011 BLI there are 30 lots over 10,000 square feet in size totaling 35.46 acres. The West Bull Mt. Community Plan designates approximately 70 gross acres as medium density residential, which includes the R-7, 12, and 25 zones, some portion of which will likely be zoned R-12 under the River Terrace planning process. The Exceptions to Development Standards chapter already allows projections into required yards. However, the proposed amendment would dramatically expand the potential impact of those projections from minor architectural features to up to 30% of the side elevation. Whereas these impacts may be acceptable to buyers of new homes on narrow lots, the impact to existing residents on adjacent properties may be perceived as more adverse. To limit potential adverse impacts, staff recommends projections be limited to yards interior to the subdivision. I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.doce Page 6 of 10 The purpose of the Exceptions to Development Standards is to provide more flexible setback standards designed to allow for the maximum use of land and to allow for a varied building layout pattern while ensuring there will be adequate open space, light, air and distance between buildings to protect public health and safety. The 2011 Oregon Residential Specialty Code requires a minimum fire separation distance of three feet from the property line. The proposed code amendment would limit projections with floor area into required yards to this minimum. Staff recommends the following amended language (page 6, staff report): 5. In the R-12 Zone, bay windows and pep-outs projections with floor area may project into required interior side and street side yards by one foot provided they do not: a) exceed 12 feet in length, b) contain over 30% of the dwelling unit side elevation square footage, and c) the width of the approved interior side yard is not reduced to less than 3 feet. APPLICANT TESTIMONY — Ryan O'Brien—1862 NE Estate Drive, Hillsboro, OR believes R12 is the zone where it's really needed; however, he said the City of Hillsboro allows it in all zones. It helps the interior of the houses look much better. Also—the elevations of street side corner lots look a lot better with the pop-outs and bay windows. O'Brien mentioned that Mark Dane was planning on being there to testify on behalf of this, but his wife became ill and he couldn't make it. He will submit his testimony of support in writing at a later time. QUESTIONS/COMMENTS Would this add sales value to these designs?$10 or $15 thousand I'd imagine. President Walsh added that he believed the application package was outstanding and that it was very helpful to the commissioners. TESTIMONY IN FAVOR Katie Patterson, 2005 NW 119th, Portland 97029—represents two different builders, Sage Built Homes and Greenwood Homes. Ms. Patterson stated that Sage Built has an ownership at the Everett Terrace Subdivision which is 14 lots on 96th and Greenburg—right across from the Everett Homes Subdivision of Solera, and that Solera did build with these popouts even though they were not technically approved - and all of those houses were approved by the City of Tigard. She stated that she thinks the standard has already been set and that this is something that aesthetically looked fine. Ms. Patterson is in favor in large part because she believes that what looks to be a very small change (1 foot) on the outside of the house, can make a huge difference with regard to livability on the inside. She stated that areas like dining rooms may have a 6 — 8 foot table that can't typically fit a smaller room - so the pop outs can make a big difference in that regard. The interior really makes a difference. TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION - None TESTIMONY CLOSED I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.doce Page 7 of 10 MOTION The following motion was made by Commissioner Muldoon, seconded by Commissioner Shavey. "I move that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for application DCA2012-00001 and adoption of the findings and conditions of approval contained in the staff report and based on the testimony received tonight." The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote; the Commission voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson; Commissioner Doherty; Commissioner Fitzgerald; Commissioner Muldoon; Commissioner Rogers; Commissioner Schmidt; Commissioner Shavey, and President Walsh NAYS: None. ABSTAINERS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Ryan PUBLIC HEARING REOPENED AT 9:37pm Tom McGuire, Sean Farrelly, and Cathy Corliss had been discussing possible solutions to the issues the Commission had wanted them to talk about. Farrelly addressed the Rite-Aid property solution; the solution being a redrawing of the line to be more curved so the property would be affected on one side only. There was lengthy discussion about the other issues which President Walsh summarized at the end as follows: The ADA issue... a no brainer—needs to be addressed as specified by staff. Come up with a different concept for the line in front of Rite-Aid and how it finishes off on the far side around the Woodcraft property. Staff will draft some language and add it so that it would handle any catastrophic event without creating a need for automatically enacting the "over 60%" threshold. Leave the pedestrian/bicycle access alone. Leave as is. The commissioners agreed and President Walsh said "So now we need a motion." At this point, Sean Farrelly reminded the Commission that they would also need to address the things that had come up at the Council workshop that had been outlined in his PowerPoint presentation. Farrelly reminded them of the four suggestions: • An alley along the park and ride that connects to new street through Public Works (don't connect to Hall) • For Tigard/Burnham connection, straighten out. Put into a different classification (desired connection if the viaduct is reconstructed). I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.doce Page 8 of 10 • Footnote to allow flexible design standards for the street near Fanno Creek park. Reduced ROW, pervious pavers. (This would have to be fleshed out at Council—the question would be are you, in concept, okay with that suggestion.) • Curve new street that goes through City Hall and Verizon. Farrelly said—in concept—if the Commission is comfortable with those suggestions — they would be fleshed out at Council. None of the Commissioners had issue with those suggestions so they were ready to make a motion. MOTION The following motion was made by Commissioner Muldoon, seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald: "I move the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council of application CPA2012-00001 & DCA2012-00002 as amended with four amendments: first, where staff will add catastrophic event language addressing fire and similar issues; second, that the line in the designated property [Woodcraft] be adjusted as projected by staff; third, that the ADA language be addressed as specified by staff; and last, that four adjustments be fleshed out with staff with the Council and that would otherwise be approved as contained in the staff report and based on the testimony provided tonight." The motion CARRIED on a recorded vote; the Commission voted as follows: AYES: Commissioner Anderson; Commissioner Doherty; Commissioner Fitzgerald; Commissioner Muldoon; Commissioner Rogers; Commissioner Schmidt; Commissioner Shavey, and President Walsh NAYS: None. ABSTAINERS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Ryan President Walsh asked staff to send an email out to the Commission when the language is drafted. This will go to City Council on December 11 th. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING ON DOWNTOWN CONNECTIVITY PLAN CODE AMENDMENT PROJECT COMMUNICATIONS There was a brief report by Vice President Anderson on his meeting with the Tigard Population and Housing Review committee. The first meeting included a consultant who talked about what our housing is today in Tigard and what we need to do and address. \LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012-00001\tpc 101512 minutes.docx Page 9 of 10 Basically, he said "we're in pretty good shape with zoning and land. We just need to address maybe some lower income housing. We'll talk about this at the next meeting." Commissioner Muldoon had come up with a presentation that he would like to present to Council regarding business clusters and economic development. He asked the Commission to take a look at it. (He'd distributed it to them earlier.) President Walsh said the Planning Commission would need to take a look at it before Commissioner Muldoon presented it— so they could give feedback to him. Muldoon would eventually like to engage council in a workshop format so they can have discussion on it. President Walsh would like to invite Councilor Woodard, as the Planning Commission's Council liaison, to come in to talk to the Commission about economic development and then have a discussion with Council— perhaps at the meeting when Greater Portland Inc. (the consultant who had to cancel at the last minute but would reschedule to another date) would be there. President Walsh asked that whoever attends the joint Council workshop the next evening would bring back information for the Planning Commission as to what had transpired. OTHER BUSINESS Tom McGuire reminded the commissioners that November would be the annual revisiting of development of Council Goals for next year. He reminded the Commissioners to start thinking about that now. It's on the agenda for the November 5th meeting. He asked that they think about what they'd like to recommend to Council for their suggestions for Council Goals for 2013 and then talk about it at the next meeting in November. President Walsh asked Doreen Laughlin if she would be responsible to get a simple matrix out to everybody before the next meeting so they'd have something to think about. He wanted the matrix to list the Council's goals, the Planning Commission's suggested goals, and show what the progress is on them. She agreed to do that. ADJOURNMENT President Walsh adjourned the meeting at 10:10 p.m. �! Y ' r Doreen Laughlin,Planning Co 4a, sion Secretary ATTEST: Acting President Tom Anderson I:\LRPLN\Planning Commission\2012 Packets\101512-Briefing RT-PH DCA2012-00001&PH CPA2012.00001\tpc 101512 minutes.docx Page 10 of 10 DRAFT 10/8/12 community. This includes a series of community open houses throughout the process, as well as a citizen advisory committee and technical advisory committee. In addition to land use, the City Council will need to approve a River Terrace financial plan which will help pay for the construction of required new infrastructure and its operations and maintenance. This may include changes to development charges for parks, storm water management, sanitary sewers, water, and transportation improvements. It will also be important to address whether or not other special assessments will be needed for land use and building permits, as well as utility rates to ultimately recoup the investment the city makes in completing the community plan. Schedule General Timeframe-River Terrace Community Plan 2012 2013 2014 Task 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Public Involvement/TAC/SWG Adopt WBMCP * 0 Goal S Natural Resources Parks Master Plan&SDC Update Water Master Plan Update Sanitary Sewer Plan Update Stormwater Master Plan Update Comp Plan/Zoning Maps and Regulations Transportation System Plan Update Public Facility Plan Update Infrastructure Financing Strategy Community Meeting Stakeholder Working Group Meeting } City Council Hearing IJI Technical Advisory Committee Meeting * Planning Commission Hearing Project Phases + Project Kickoff Council acceptance/adoption of the WBMCP CCI approval of the Public Involvement Plan Get the word out Launch Stakeholder Working Group and Technical Advisory Committee + Launch Tasks Assessment and Collaboration Plan Preparation ❖ Adoption Process CITY OF TIGARD Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done TIGARD Downtown Connectivity Plan Code Amendments CPA 2012-00001 DCA2O12-00002 Planning Commission Public Hearing I October 15, 2012 A _ 6= _ Wit.: r Tali'-}. 9 4 1 . - 0 _,.._,_. Existing 3 Conditions ., ... .„ ,_. ,,_____,.„... ,.... a f , ar Area: ,- Tigard Downtown Urban • / Renewal District (193 acres) r \r''''''''"r Existing conditions : '''' ...,.../ '. \ $.F Limited connections and connectivity N 47awn1ovwn Study Are _..`.. m.,.. idread fmr..r in.m.r.rwrm❑miy,m ria-.Pimp& e ta:1 a Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan }f� , Foundation 1764 441/4 4.111.48k c ) I Documents f '_ir , y'JY RC1 '�y . 1poir-:-\N / '1::'' ',k 'NI.. Tigard Downtown 4,...e.:eseited' - ..,:i>411,', ,., N.\ "' refinement refinerne '`r at the KW 4 d -4" ... 21 I. - h �'}arr � 1 .F. . .,„ .4.: r. - /". )1 I + S , li 411111111- ra �«.t- * �. '5[ IYe'?n'4 13VDri4.:dAGfAA I..111,111 .11%S. 1 �w YIIAYI IAIi YP _ �., - +�r d VVIIF Yal6rlrtl01811.111.10 " " •:wieFiE�q� - ` /Hopp 11 w+,IR' 3 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. Implementation of the Plan • Proposed code requirements to implement 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 • Two elements — new connections and new cross-sections Proposed Amendments: CPA 2012-00001 DCA2012-00002 — 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 Y 1� . {ham " F I r. 4 G lipPri -riII_AL. ,fir • lip ReF f fyI' d TSP Amendments: , - rt A .. Proposed New Streets ,r.—'' .4(C/ ,.''' — "Al*,a . F .t a y .. gu'i • ' 1006 f 3 yi. f {y i l- � Detailed maps showing :litie ,1� Y Ail the future streets are ' t �,, .' a, 1"1J ' proposed to be added to °� L , :5 - the TSP so that it is clear '+ - rry where future streets are • a. expected to go and how �' . 4 much right-of-way •is s needed ..M�/: ply; + a a . • 4 .r,d,r .n LlowrrkaiT�Hew:tho I Ii:r�rMrl ` L 111M1 Rai.,IMII.0 G"54"4"0 741 ---Alley 1200 - "I; i ', a Y' AwcR.R!30.k.1.1111-P�Iapufa!hYY4Ii ,. -Em i Sla s I'1 C> 7311,0!polish . I IM kwxA 7.. In tot inetcrl IL-mm.0.e*v 1+.+i1.. In • i 1'' j 7 Figure 5-14A. Connectivity Projects Index Map TSP Amendments Maps Ind@xL. v) C;*.(C,sri Existing Streets Railroads TTxlots .,..F._,,,,,_,./2-< Cs o a 4., + f( � ... 7 , T eJ `.,v ..e.` ,_.\\Ai \ / • N. v. 7 toi. 8 - � �, o g ye. 4 -73 ...„\\\1.\\ +cid 0 250 500 1,000 Feet I . t I r— { I I i - I 8 Figure 5.14 ., Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 1 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Dbw.a'ntowri Mixed Use 'I (Celle tori r Required bikelpedestnarl connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential 1,52.-56r) Taxlots - - Alley(20') ^Fdrh of Me s=uture wanrlectr.ay Al,grmerr Area 125 equal'to Me opperend al to r9h1-of w,ay -... -_'or the srreer charactertype, i I1I 'IA -.. - i,•' a'„,pli - - I._. ] I N N.,' A , t I. I d /IP) -' I ., tfr I i % ,tis IIIIII '111e5"14 1.—II.1 Si” �t'�� ail .ri J v. .,> , �' ,. I Figure 5-14C. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 2 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) ...:71 Required bikai'hedestriart orinnections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxi ots -- Alley(20,) Me vigdrh el the future Cum lecLivriy Afq.,virnent 4u rs.00.111 iLP the uppe#etki Er!'hhEl.toiga-o?-ivay r.ifhiP Weal fair the.5freer charm:0w owe. ....- . ,/, . , / / •' \/.'''- i \ ' ' , 74 1 :.F' .2/ •• ' .... .,.. - '•: , z 16 , • •:I'. \. ) * ... ..." - 4* • "' "„ '''''4- er / ' . 4. ,..: , ,/ ,, t ..A„ .." . ' '• ii - . ,; •/1" n / '. .1/4. ih ..,." - ' 0 .... 7:1 • 01.. _ .. # - od 4t. / . "" "f I, - 0.- \ ., , 1 44 -' .t. . ## ,4._ " 's,o". lc .1. 0" ' ".., ,...„...../ id / . . 0 \ e,0 0 . ' .Y.' , * 'i• % ,,Y N. ik. •., ., . \ • „ir -... ii.„4 ..../ / 4,•,. .0 11/1111/4 i.0101 11 1641P 7 ._ /X( / . , ; ill. ‘ ..e. • \ 1\44 1 ;gb ' \ ar \‘ — ' ' , ,.. ..,.. , ..„4, , . \\,.. \ '' '- '—' ..6“ .,., 1 ......E. / , .. ... , , IA \ . \ . ,0i ?, . :7 ;- .. „... .,.... \ - \ ; / \ \ r.„INt;$ io Figure 5-140, Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 3 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) EA Required b ke pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Loc*Ij Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots -- Alley(20') Nate: the wrddti c&#tfre F&kure Connectively Ajru errtArea A3 equal to the u,oper end of the win-of-way ra WO?-fr.Sftx1 TrY thW;-,trf-r re..' 3r,'3{.7f/ry}t. c 4 ,'x. p tea xr e A , �' fir- ' , ,. „ �._ Figur ! =:,-14E. Conne-ctivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 4 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectiivrty Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) t:;;.:1 Required kiikelpedestnan connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urban Restdentia1 (52'-56') Taxlipts —— Alley (20') Note. The 'with of the Fittete L'UtifietiVgyAkyvgroerrl Area rs eqtrat to the tappet end of the tight-ol-way mtrgo tostod tot tho stroot charactot typo 'OE 1- _ /: •••,.. \ .".,... \ - 'V-„OP lit'... • 40, • / 'I .V..... 1 ' 0 1 .de *.%.. / .4 -r" IL 7 1 Iltl Nill 'lb A ik 4 /1. /..\- . . • / 1 '. , % / 1/4.11 - 169vlik ./ /I ' •-,,,,-' '''.,/ '..,. , " t t, il ' li r .,, ..% c ,.,..- \ . ..- Jx...::-,. ..,,...;.- , - .,,,,,...,.... ...,..... . ,... ... ., „........... „.......... ,.... . .... . i .„..- ., 'NI - ,.-- '. ,.,,.IF- ,:,-*, '. ' ..... .....‘". -•-•• -..,,i," .-- '':-, , , _ , lip.II. 411.- \ T" .,p/\\ \,..../ t.:.4' 1 ,..., . ..''' ... / / ---• 1 - \ ••‘:.: ..r ./.>"-.T.,__ 1 ,• _ .7.': ;;i: " , • .... \ \ / \ 111110111_ . . .. , ; "ik, . • . •. \ . \ 4 ,/ ' - "04,• \ V- ,:', ,•411,` \ ' • \ ‹..' r4A \ \ ,,\ \ \ ,0 / ...N. -.4/ •\,,,,/ .,.../ 4:114 . ./6 1\,..\:\ or ) ,../ •• 4, ., ...c .. illitir 12 Fkgure 5-14F, Connectivity Projects Dotail Sheet: Map s TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) M Required bikeipedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urtoan Residential (52'-56') Taxlots -- Alley(,2V) icf'e: The loathe at the Future Cormeeragyelfirprnent Aral os equal to the upper d et the r H c-W,r!r r-ange listed ler the sIreet character type_ f::4, I u 144 r II � _. , • \ \ \,,. x \ - 1,- ,.. .4, ' d k .. `4 i. )14 4, r POO,,.44 4 `,-„,,,, .. s, , . .„.:.„, ‘s.4.4; / \ \ ri fi : ' Figure 5-14G. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 6 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Canneclivrty Alignment Area Downtown Mixed U%e 1 (Collector) r5:7:1 Required bike pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2 (Locar} Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Taxlots -- Alley 420) Nate rho wcidr of the FrArrp Connectivity Altitirrhohr Area is aqua!'r rhe aper one/of rho right.0r.w,w range krsled lot the street character type_ ' - '" .gyp rt• , e, 4"<" '.... ' ' 4 . . 41111F/ 11 i a i. /'i. 1 / „ , , \ r' r i / / .. ,. , // �� _ ,,, r", s1.; - • �' , 4 ir ear - - 4 4 .. </ lir dlo . ' ., . '' ,,,.'1° / .I, , 2` P 4. 14 Figure 5-14H. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 7 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 iColkector) L.::1 Required bike;pedestrian connections Downtown Mixed Use 2{Local) Existing Streets Urban Residential (52%56"), Taxlots -- Alley (2D') moo. MP with 41 Op Fiduro Cannecimlynignminf Aro is ow...?ro Ow wiper 47,rui of aro fOrt.ilf-way range fisted for the streer character rype. / i„ / ilIK\- . / . le '\ \ a \ \ .../ \ \ . \ . , . . '... . . 41 4 ... . .40 , ilt , . . d vo411.° ' • .1- 40 .a. 1101 , it. It — , \' . . . . ; t eft, , ,r- , . . / 44111 ..., , ..,, '. . . 4 , .. , a:L 1' .rft .:- W 1 7 / -. fii. / .6. • ,i--,- : Ilit4:611111L , . . .• It 11 II t 1 fo adlikilk _IV drilla.'11 ill lij -...-......km-....- .-,-... ' IN , I " I . . . .4.' .4.. 15 Figure 5-141. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 8 TSP Amendments Streez ;W`aracterType Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 {Collector-1 Required bike/pedestrian connections Downtown?1rxed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urban Re dentia) (5T-5V) TaxRots -- Alley 120') Nolte The wrr}rfi lit the Ftrnxrr C xvac'crnrryAtMpnrrI: r/L+i!i 04,1al}res The ripper end at the light-ei-way tango Xrsrerrf kor Ole.tr xrr dlparacter Mier. , r \ Ill ! ' till— . ,� i t I � 1 .t ` - [ _ - / ill.' �. rte r. 'h. } Figure 5.2a .r. Downtown Street Character -. Proposed StreetT " y .4 Character Typesal_ s. A <i ,�� f d # lit .. . _.7,k .,.,. :. z ,., ..,. ., „:77... ' _ # r I e sur a y 4. { 4,:, \ 1. { 1 d 4 L 4 i %s N. F Downtown Street Character Types' -Upper Hall Bouleward" • -Main Street,Green Street Downtown Mixed Use 1 ; ]Ilectar) Downtown Mixed Use 2(Ntighborhror ) . , Downtown Meed Use 3 t tipper&Arnhem t Downtown!Awed Use 4tLower Burnhali7;. Urban F1ertlenkiat -Ailey. Busmiess iJ 250 COO 1.000 Feel: I I r I l I I I l 'Ce&ed ties indoor,'p rrppsvd strmvrs Other Streets " .41 ea ure+ere RI c umr'Gy an COOT ism lir. i t'a parr.Iia Memo mar eupeused!time Wsrrienit Zig it,-41 - Railroads a+t.sr+GOD treuiiv1 N Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18.810 (Street and Utility Improvement Standards) • Special street character 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 Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18.810 : New Cross-Sections Current Future • Scoffins Street is a Collector • Scoffins Street is with Downtown Mixed Use 1 Character Type .14, . ,,,.,.._\c.); „,dok # 0, s C%3:''' 1 1— Ci k5' _ ' _ 4 it } Fp7urr AMU/ 4D Culionat invli Ci `,.',NI• 7r 'el in 1 i — 5L '10WIN - 1 - Lim i d imimpl ,c _ sial m P.M'=3 4t 111111111111.111111 19 18.810 Street Character _ A .r µ i y I I 11 6 1 5 15 1 ROW Hall Boulevard - Downto -n — I_Tpper SW Hall Blvd. is currently an ODOT facility. The 2035 Tigard Transportation System Plan recommends that a corridor plan be completed for the SW Hall Blvd. Corridor The street character standards for Upper Hall Boulevard shall not be considered final until the corridor plan is complete. 18.810 Street Character _ . 11 ___ _. t , a „ ', : / ., . .. a I a, �k ). a - - fi aNQ i '16 Ag :mow; ..i „ii,. _ s.1 . _ _ . _ w 0- \\-% t, mr- 16i-12' 8 5 I0' 10 S 8 10 -12 Downtown Mixed Use 1 — Downtown Collector 21 18.810 Street Character ,_ ,, i ___ _ _.. ,,. . r ,i, rf t F rS "' +. 11 y.F .# s ,. .,, . /..s. , ii in ...4 i a - . *ifist. ' i I MN P- .- — criZ r',,,, ,, '''' a 4 1 if \\\V. ihi tiltI. 1. i mixed use reskertit#al 1t?'-12" 8 11'' 11" KY-I2' mixed use residential 58'-62'RUNid Downtown Mixed Use 2 - Downtown Neighborhood 18.810 Street Character , , • , .. , .,• I 6 , , v. _ . _.„.. . ._,......1 12-18 8 11 11 8 12-18' 82.1.1 80W Downtown Mixed Use 3 - Upper Burnham im r »,, m Ili. IF- - tii, . -....,......:'wlec I.....i I. Til .. . 1x-12' 8" 1 1U 1 13' 19 1 8 10-12' Downtown n ''fixed Use 4 — Lower Burnham 18.810 Street Character fi tiia i1lag.4 rE'AE0111 1d'-12' T 16 / Id'-12reskiarnai Si-SEi'AON Downtown - Urban Residential PERNE E vaaeri 20"ROW Downtown - Alley Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18.610 (Tigard Downtown District Development & Design Standards) • New Section 18. 610.025 (Connectivity) • References TSP connectivity maps • Establishes three sets of standards : — New Development and Major Redevelopment — All other projects — Pedestrian Pathways Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 610 New Development and Major Redevelopment — Major Redevelopment = valued at more than 60% of its total current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor • Dedicate the required right-of-way (or dedicate a public easement if approved by City Engineer) • Construct the required improvements • Changes to landscaping requirement in Table 18.610. 1 to allow applicant to count landscaping that was part of a required street improvement Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 610 All Other Projects — Redevelopment = project valued at 60% or less than its total current value as assessed by the Washington County assessor • Preserve the potential for a future connectivity improvement — No new buildings within future alignment — Surface parking, landscaping, temporary structures, driveways and similar types of development are allowed • Sign a non-remonstrance to future Local Improvement District ( LID) Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 610 Required New Pedestrian Pathway • For new development and major redevelopment within the area - / designated for required multi-use ( ' FI - pathway • Provide multi-use pathway on public -.' ' easements or right-of-ways which " ~ ` j i_ - 1 ensures connections through the block $,a w ' y, A. at least every 330 feet ,,iiiis,, \ ,/-\\ - \\- / • Pathways: -Ns— Direct connection �.•�' — ADA accessible \' • Proposed Amendments to Chapter 18 . 370 Adjustments to Connectivity Standards • Type II procedure • Criteria: — Equally or better meet downtown design principles outlined in the TSP — Applying the standards would preclude all reasonable economic use of the site — Potential for a future connection is preserved — No adverse impact on natural features such as wetlands, bodies of water, significant habitat areas, steep slopes, or existing mature trees Rough Proportionality 18.810.020 General Provisions A. When standards apply. Unless otherwise provided, construction, reconstruction or repair of streets, sidewalks, curbs and other public improvements shall occur in accordance with the standards of this title. No development may occur and no land use application may be approved unless the public facilities related to development comply with the public facility requirements established in this section and adequate public facilities are available. Applicants may be required to dedicate land and build required public improvements only when the required exaction is directly related to and roughly proportional to the impact of the development. Public Involvement • Project Website • 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 • 2nd Open House Citizen Comments • Five written comments : One supportive, two neutral, two opposed • Eight phone / in person contacts- asked questions about how it would effect them . One made a specific suggestion to delete a proposed connection . Agency Comments • TVF& R and TriMet supportive • ODOT comments response in staff report Council Workshop Feedback • Alley along the park and ride that connects to new street through Public Works (don't connect to Hall ) • For Tigard/Burnham connection, straighten out. Put into a different classification (desired connection if the viaduct is reconstructed ) . • Footnote to allow flexible design standards for the street near Fanno Creek park. Reduced ROW, pervious pavers. • Curve new street that goes through City Hall and Verizon . lir 4:(6, r., lrTa -, ,,,, \ / , k. kis . 14, .,„,. . ##0, 41.. , .4111' th\ /4P:.rit- r '. f►Fr + : " 'e" 44 t "+ e" ) • \ " ' • i jie _ \ " S ,i's. .'. ..., .(c.:.- .. ,..00 . - :, '.:4114141:40.' 0°.4:...4.4:11+4::7404i', !' :,,1 4 r ". r ,,,,,," \ e ... \ , t q - ,„, ' \ r <i" 4,1'41;444.\\ Pi.. +St a rte.,.,' ; i.. 11111 K 11. Yom, 4 rt / ,\ _ Y ,� •y� Y�. ./s " �� k\ \\*4Z:.:001 \Wyk yy ,:s. ,,,\,...L\ ,\:\ VAto. ir,..,zo,?" •-- ` ' * N: 1 , -, r „ f.At AL f "{� "it� s r i ‘4,,,, / * .-',- irr. • \ illto /41110, \ \'',/fr: , . \„yt , ,,, , � . ii, , 1/4 .. , \ \ I ... " r •w • i., , .dr Allik .le 1 der " '4,- 35 `J. 35 Figure 5-140, Connectivity Projects Devil Sheet: Map 3 Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) EA Required bikepedestrian connections Downtown Mixes! Use 2(Loc*Ij Existing Streets Urban Residential (52'-56') Faxlots -- Alley(20') mow,:The width of the Future Connectively Attgotherg Area Is equal to the u,oper end of Fie 170rt-of-way tame-hofsdfat thst at:#rc. r."10H ry':k• - S +� • i. f } Conceptual connection to be coordinated if significant changes to viaduct are proposed. ,rte` y � p E r it .. r . Z. rL - - <0.- - - .,,,,,, , , .4\ . „,. . • , .< . ;.,. . , , \. . , \ .. - A,: ...._ #....... , .....„ . ,,,...,....- ,... , *,, . . ...„ .. . -„, . _,........ \ . .:„.7.41\ .:„:, \\I„\,:.. .„),.., lir K / o. /y ,, . A L.. - ,, . Le. \ N. .......-..> , ._ M4i'/L\''' , \i„.... . .14, ' 44\• 1 i,. +}A Allow flexible design standards ,j.. • . for the street ' near Fanno .4,71v ; # _ . . Creek park. ,. Reduced ROW, , „ ° pervious pavers. . 4 F' ,--.7 . -.)14. 4 , ‘ ',',' II it , n # H:r R • ' P- • w w.ape t Leh 0' L a . Figure 5-141. Connectivity Projects Detail Sheet: Map 8 TSP Amendments Street Character Type Future Connectivity Alignment Area Downtown Mixed Use 1 (Collector) Required Dikeipedesttnarr connections Downtown Mixed Use 2(Local) Existing Streets Urban Re$KEe ia.1 (5T-56") Taxlots Alley(20") Nate The nriIPi ng rhe Future L'unrae emsty Alignrmenr Area kg quid TO the upper end'a to rr9drt-of--my r3ragrrAstcw}far rhxa.Or€rlfr:trar.;ctwtyla. " \ \ II , ", , I y te 'it ' ' . ,e k. or :. .,,...00,10,„ , „. ,, \ .. .. ,t, ,, : _ , \ , , Lir , I r•' . .,.. _, , . i___.0 . , -,... c - it 1 r.k' '". \ ' 1:14 / .,:,(4,0, I , ''' N._ ' - . . ' 1 I . Alimil;. s i I. 3 I I t "1S 3r�I M + ii •'r ft l ;.tlit f.- ._ _ T� ;~ tri .- , 38 Findings : As found in the staff report, the proposed amendments meet the necessary approval criteria from the : • Tigard Development Code • Tigard Comprehensive Plan • Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan • Metro Regional Transportation Functional Plan • Oregon Administrative Rules • Statewide Planning Goals Staff Recommendation : Staff recommends Planning Commission recommend approval of the code amendments to Council